[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush (2006, Book II)]
[December 20, 2006]
[Pages 2203-2215]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



The President's News Conference
December 20, 2006

    The President. Thank you all. Good morning. This week, I went to the 
Pentagon for the swearing-in of our Nation's new Secretary of Defense, 
Bob Gates. Secretary Gates is going to bring 
a fresh perspective to the Pentagon, and America is fortunate that he 
has agreed to serve our country once again. I'm looking forward to 
working with him.
    Secretary Gates is going to be an 
important voice in the Iraq strategy review that's underway. As you 
know, I've been consulting closely with our commanders and the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff on the strategy in Iraq and on the broader war on 
terror. One of my top priorities during this war is to ensure that our 
men and women wearing the uniform have everything they need to do their 
job.
    This war on terror is the calling of a new generation; it is the 
calling of our generation. Success is essential to securing a future of 
peace for our children and grandchildren, and securing this peace for 
the future is going to require a sustained commitment from the American 
people and our military.
    We have an obligation to ensure our military is capable of 
sustaining this war over the long haul and performing the many tasks 
that we ask of them. I'm inclined to believe that we need to increase in 
the permanent size of both the United States Army and the United States 
Marines. I've asked Secretary Gates to 
determine how such an increase could take place and report back to me as 
quickly as possible.
    I know many Members of Congress are interested in this issue, and I 
appreciate their input. As we develop the specifics of the proposals 
over the coming weeks, I will not only listen to their views, we will 
work

[[Page 2204]]

with them to see that this becomes a reality.
    Two thousand and six was a difficult year for our troops and the 
Iraqi people. We began the year with optimism after watching nearly 12 
million Iraqis go to the polls to vote for a unity government and a free 
future. The enemies of liberty responded fiercely to this advance of 
freedom. They carried out a deliberate strategy to foment sectarian 
violence between Sunnis and Shi'a. And over the course of the year, they 
had success. Their success hurt our efforts to help the Iraqis rebuild 
their country. It set back reconciliation; it kept Iraq's unity 
Government and our coalition from establishing security and stability 
throughout the country.
    We enter this new year clear-eyed about the challenges in Iraq and 
equally clear about our purpose. Our goal remains a free and democratic 
Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself and is an 
ally in this war on terror.
    I'm not going to make predictions about what 2007 will look like in 
Iraq, except that it's going to require difficult choices and additional 
sacrifices, because the enemy is merciless and violent. I'm going to 
make you this promise: My administration will work with Republicans and 
Democrats to fashion a new way forward that can succeed in Iraq. We'll 
listen to ideas from every quarter. We'll change our strategy and 
tactics to meet the realities on the ground. We'll never lose sight that 
on the receiving end of the decisions I make is a private, a sergeant, a 
young lieutenant, or a diplomat who risks his or her life to help the 
Iraqis realize a dream of a stable country that can defend, govern, and 
sustain itself.
    The advance of liberty has never been easy, and Iraq is proving how 
tough it can be. Yet the safety and security of our citizens requires 
that we do not let up. We can be smarter about how we deploy our 
manpower and resources. We can ask more of our Iraqi partners, and we 
will. One thing we cannot do is give up on the hundreds of millions of 
ordinary moms and dads across the Middle East who want the hope and 
opportunity for their children that the terrorists and extremists seek 
to deny them, and that's a peaceful existence.
    As we work with Congress in the coming year to chart a new course in 
Iraq and strengthen our military to meet the challenges of the 21st 
century, we must also work together to achieve important goals for the 
American people here at home. This work begins with keeping our economy 
growing. As we approach the end of 2006, the American economy continues 
to post strong gains. The most recent jobs report shows that our economy 
created 132,000 more jobs in November alone, and we've now added more 
than 7 million new jobs since August of 2003. The unemployment rate has 
remained low at 4.5 percent. A recent report on retail sales shows a 
strong beginning to the holiday shopping season across the country, and 
I encourage you all to go shopping more.
    Next year marks a new start with a new Congress. In recent weeks, 
I've had good meetings with the incoming leaders of Congress, including 
Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority 
Leader-elect Harry Reid. We agreed that we've got 
important business to do on behalf of the American people and that we've 
got to work together to achieve results. The American people expect us 
to be good stewards of their tax dollars here in Washington. So we must 
work together to reduce the number of earmarks inserted into large 
spending bills and reform the earmark process to make it more 
transparent and more accountable.
    The American people expect us to keep America competitive in the 
world. So we must work to ensure our citizens have the skills they need 
for the jobs of the future and encourage American businesses to invest 
in technology and innovation. The American people expect us to reduce 
our dependence on foreign oil and increase our use of alternative energy 
sources. So we

[[Page 2205]]

must step up our research and investment in hydrogen fuel cells, hybrid 
plug-in and battery-powered cars, renewable fuels like ethanol and 
cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel, clean coal technology, and clean 
sources of electricity like nuclear, solar, and wind power.
    Another area where we can work together is the minimum wage. I 
support the proposed $2.10 increase in the minimum wage over a 2-year 
period. I believe we should do it in a way that does not punish the 
millions of small businesses that are creating most of the new jobs in 
our country. So I support pairing it with targeted tax and regulatory 
relief to help these small businesses stay competitive and to help keep 
our economy growing. I look forward to working with Republicans and 
Democrats to help both small-business owners and workers when Congress 
convenes in January.
    To achieve these and other key goals we need to put aside our 
partisan differences and work constructively to address the vital issues 
confronting our Nation. As the new Congress takes office, I don't expect 
Democratic leaders to compromise on their principles, and they don't 
expect me to compromise on mine. But the American people do expect us to 
compromise on legislation that will benefit the country. The message of 
the fall election was clear: Americans want us to work together to make 
progress for our country. And that's what we're going to do in the 
coming year.
    And now I'll be glad to answer some questions. Terry [Terence Hunt, 
Associated Press].

Progress in Iraq

    Q. Mr. President, less than 2 months ago, at the end of one of the 
bloodiest months in the war, you said, ``Absolutely we're winning.'' 
Yesterday you said, ``We're not winning; we're not losing.'' Why did you 
drop your confident assertion about winning?
    The President. My comments--the first comment was done in this 
spirit: I believe that we're going to win. I believe that--and by the 
way, if I didn't think that, I wouldn't have our troops there. That's 
what you got to know; we're going to succeed.
    My comments yesterday reflected the fact that we're not succeeding 
nearly as fast as I wanted when I said it at the time and that 
conditions are tough in Iraq, particularly in Baghdad. And so we're 
conducting a review to make sure that our strategy helps us achieve that 
which I'm pretty confident we can do, and that is have a country which 
can govern itself, sustain itself, and defend itself.
    You know, I--when I speak, like right now, for example--I'm speaking 
to the American people, of course, and I want them to know that I know 
how tough it is, but I also want them to know that I'm going to work 
with the military and the political leaders to develop a plan that will 
help us achieve the objective. I also want our troops to understand that 
we support them, that I believe that tough mission I've asked them to do 
is going to be accomplished, and that they're doing good work and 
necessary work.
    I want the Iraqis to understand that we believe that if they stand 
up--step up and lead--and with our help, we can accomplish the 
objective. And I want the enemy to understand that this is a tough task, 
but they can't run us out of the Middle East, that they can't intimidate 
America. They think they can. They think it's just a matter of time 
before America grows weary and leaves, abandons the people of Iraq, for 
example. And that's not going to happen.
    What is going to happen is we're going to develop a strategy that 
helps the Iraqis achieve the objective that the 12 million people want 
them to achieve, which is a government that can--a country that can 
sustain itself, govern itself, defend itself, a free country that will 
serve as an ally in this war against extremists and radicals.
    Caren [Caren Bohan, Reuters].

[[Page 2206]]

U.S. Military Forces in Iraq

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. If you conclude that a surge in troop 
levels in Iraq is needed, would you overrule your military commanders if 
they felt it was not a good idea?
    The President. That's a dangerous hypothetical question. I'm not 
condemning you; you're allowed to ask anything you want. Let me wait and 
gather all the recommendations from Bob Gates, from our military, from diplomats on the ground--I'm 
interested in the Iraqis' point of view--and then I'll report back to 
you as to whether or not I support a surge or not. Nice try.
    Q. Would you overrule your commanders----
    The President. The opinion of my commanders is very important. They 
are bright, capable, smart people whose opinion matters to me a lot.
    Bret [Bret Baier, FOX News].

War on Terror Strategy/Iraqi Government

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. You have reached out to both Sunni and 
Shi'a political leaders in recent weeks, and now there's word that the 
Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani is supporting a moderate coalition in 
Iraq. Has the U.S. reached out to him? How important is he in the 
equation moving forward? And what do you say to people who say more 
troops in Iraq would increase the sectarian split and not calm things 
down?
    The President. Well, I haven't made up my mind yet about more 
troops. I'm listening to our commanders; I'm listening to the Joint 
Chiefs, of course; I'm listening to people in and out of Government; I'm 
listening to the folks on the Baker-
Hamilton commission about coming up with a 
strategy that helps us achieve our objective. And so as I said to 
Caren--probably a little more harshly than she would have liked--
hypothetical questions, I'm not going to answer them today. I'm not 
going to speculate out loud about what I'm going to tell the Nation, 
when I'm prepared to do so, about the way forward.
    I will tell you we're looking at all options. And one of those 
options, of course, is increasing more troops. But in order to do so, 
there must be a specific mission that can be accomplished with more 
troops. And that's precisely what our commanders have said, as well as 
people who know a lot about military operations. And I agree with them 
that there's got to be a specific mission that can be accomplished with 
the addition of more troops before I agree on that strategy.
    Secondly, whatever we do is going to help the Iraqis step up. It's 
their responsibility to govern their country. It's their responsibility 
to do the hard work necessary to secure Baghdad. And we want to help 
them.
    Thirdly, I appreciate the fact that the Prime Minister and members of the Government are forming what you have 
called a moderate coalition, because it's becoming very apparent to the 
people of Iraq that there are extremists and radicals who are anxious to 
stop the advance of a free society. And therefore, a moderate coalition 
signals to the vast majority of the people of Iraq that we have a unity 
government, that we're willing to reconcile our differences and work 
together and, in so doing, will marginalize those who use violence to 
achieve political objectives.
    And so we support the formation of the unity Government and the 
moderate coalition. And it's important for the leader Sistani to understand that's our position. He is a--he lives 
a secluded life, but he knows that we're interested in defeating 
extremism, and we're interested in helping advance a unity government.
    Kelly [Kelly O'Donnell, NBC News].

Situation in the Middle East/War on Terror

    Q. Good morning, Mr. President. Your former Secretary of Defense, 
Donald Rumsfeld, advocated for a lighter, more

[[Page 2207]]

agile military force. Have you now concluded that that approach was 
wrong?
    The President. No, I strongly support a lighter, agile Army that can 
move quickly to meet the threats of the 21st century. I also supported 
his force posture review and recommendations to move forces out of 
previous bases that--you know, they were there for the Soviet threat, 
for example, in Europe. So he's 
introduced some substantive changes to the Pentagon, and I support them 
strongly.
    However, that doesn't necessarily preclude increasing end strength 
for the Army and the Marines. And the reason why I'm inclined to believe 
this is a good idea is because I understand that we're going to be in a 
long struggle against radicals and extremists, and we must make sure 
that our military has the capability to stay in the fight for a long 
period of time. I'm not predicting any particular theater, but I am 
predicting that it's going to take a while for the ideology of liberty 
to finally triumph over the ideology of hate.
    I know you know I feel this strongly, but I see this--we're in the 
beginning of a conflict between competing ideologies, a conflict that 
will determine whether or not your children can live in peace. A failure 
in the Middle East, for example, or failure in Iraq or isolationism will 
condemn a generation of young Americans to permanent threat from 
overseas. And therefore, we will succeed in Iraq. And therefore, we will 
help young democracies when we find them--democracies like Lebanon, 
hopefully a Palestinian state living side by side in peace with Israel, 
the young democracy of Iraq.
    It is in our interest that we combine security with a political 
process that frees people, that liberates people, that gives people a 
chance to determine their own futures. I believe most people in the 
Middle East want just that. They want to be in a position where they can 
chart their own futures, and it's in our interest that we help them do 
so.
    Jim [Jim Axelrod, CBS News].

Public Opinion on Iraq

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. In the latest CBS News poll, 50 percent 
of Americans say they favor a beginning of an end to U.S. military 
involvement in Iraq; 43 percent said, ``Keep fighting, but change 
tactics.'' By this and many other measures, there is no clear mandate to 
continue being in Iraq in a military form. I guess my question is, are 
you still willing to follow a path that seems to be in opposition to the 
will of the American people?
    The President. I am willing to follow a path that leads to victory, 
and that's exactly why we're conducting the review we are. Victory in 
Iraq is achievable. It hasn't happened nearly as quickly as I hoped it 
would have. I know it's--the fact that there is still unspeakable 
sectarian violence in Iraq, I know that's troubling to the American 
people. But I also don't believe most Americans want us just to get out 
now. A lot of Americans understand the consequences of retreat. Retreat 
would embolden radicals. It would hurt the credibility of the United 
States. Retreat from Iraq would dash the hopes of millions who want to 
be free. Retreat from Iraq would enable the extremists and radicals to 
more likely be able to have safe haven from which to plot and plan 
further attacks.
    And so it's been a tough period for the American people. They want 
to see success, and our objective is to put a plan in place that 
achieves that success. I'm often asked about public opinion. Of course, 
I want public opinion to support the efforts. I understand that. But, 
Jim, I also understand the consequences of failure. And therefore, I'm 
going to work with the Iraqis and our military and politicians from both 
political parties to achieve success.
    I thought the election said they want to see more bipartisan 
cooperation; they want to see us working together to achieve common 
objectives. And I'm going to continue to reach out to Democrats to do 
just that.

[[Page 2208]]

    Sheryl [Sheryl Gay Stolberg, New York Times].

The Presidency/U.S. Military Casualties in Iraq

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, Lyndon Johnson famously 
didn't sleep during the Vietnam war, questioning his own decisions. You 
have always seemed very confident of your decisions, but I can't help 
but wonder if this has been a time of painful realization for you, as 
you yourself have acknowledged that some of the policies you hoped would 
succeed have not. And I wonder if you can talk to us about that.
    The President. Yes, thanks.
    Q. Has it been a painful time?
    The President. The most painful aspect of my Presidency has been 
knowing that good men and women have died in combat. I read about it 
every night. My heart breaks for a mother or father, or husband or wife, 
or son and daughter; it just does. And so when you ask about pain, 
that's pain. I reach out to a lot of the families. I spend time with 
them. I am always inspired by their spirit. Most people have asked me to 
do one thing, and that is to make sure that their child didn't die in 
vain--and I agree with that--that the sacrifice has been worth it.
    We'll accomplish our objective; we've got to constantly adjust our 
tactics to do so. We've got to insist that the Iraqis take more 
responsibility more quickly in order to do so.
    But I--look, my heart breaks for them; it just does, on a regular 
basis.
    Q. But beyond that, sir, do you question your own decisions?
    The President. No, I haven't questioned whether or not it was right 
to take Saddam Hussein out, nor have I 
questioned the necessity for the American people--I mean, I've 
questioned it; I've come to the conclusion it's the right decision. But 
I also know it's the right decision for America to stay engaged and to 
take the lead and to deal with these radicals and extremists and to help 
support young democracies. It's the calling of our time, Sheryl. And I 
firmly believe it is necessary.
    And I believe the next President, whoever the person is, will have 
the same charge, the same obligations to deal with terrorists, so they 
don't hurt us, and to help young democracies survive the threats of 
radicalism and extremism. It's in our Nation's interest to do so. But 
the most painful aspect of the Presidency is the fact that I know my 
decisions have caused young men and women to lose their lives.
    McKinnon [John McKinnon, Wall Street Journal].

National Economy/Legislative Agenda

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. You mentioned a need earlier to make 
sure that U.S. workers are skilled, that U.S. businesses keep investing 
in technology. You also mentioned that you want targeted tax and 
regulatory relief for small businesses in the coming year. Can you 
describe those ideas a little more? And also, can we really afford new 
tax breaks at this point, given the cost of the war on terrorism?
    The President. John, the first question all of us here in Washington 
ask is, how do we make sure this economy continues to grow? A vibrant 
economy is going to be necessary to fund not only war but a lot of other 
aspects of our Government. We have shown over the past 6 years that low 
taxes have helped this economy recover from some pretty significant 
shocks. After all, the unemployment rate is 4.5 percent and 7 million 
more Americans have been--have found jobs since August of 2003. And we 
cut the deficit in half a couple of years in advance of what we thought 
would happen.
    The question that Congress is going to have to face, and I'm going 
to have to continue to face is, how do we make sure we put policy in 
place to encourage economic growth in the short term, and how

[[Page 2209]]

do we keep America competitive in the long term?
    Part of the competitive initiative, which I have been working with 
Congress on, recognizes that education of young--of the young is going 
to be crucial for remaining competitive. And that's why the 
reauthorization of No Child Left Behind is going to be an important part 
of the legislative agenda going forward in 2007.
    I also spoke about energy in my opening remarks. In my judgment, 
we're going to have to get off oil as much as possible to remain a 
competitive economy, and I'm looking forward to working with Congress to 
do just that. I'm optimistic about some of the reports I've heard about 
new battery technologies that will be coming to the market that will 
enable people who--people to drive the first 20 miles, for example, on 
electricity--that will be the initial phase--and then up to 40 miles on 
battery technologies. That will be positive, particularly if you live in 
a big city. A lot of people don't drive more than 20 miles or 40 miles a 
day. And therefore, those urban dwellers who aren't driving that much 
won't be using any gasoline on a daily basis, and that will be helpful 
to the country.
    I'm pleased with the fact that we've gone from about a billion 
gallons of ethanol to over 5 billion gallons of ethanol in a very quick 
period of time. It's mainly derived from corn here in the United States. 
But there's been great progress, and we need to continue to spend money 
on cellulosic ethanol. That means that new technologies that--will 
enable us to use wood chips, for example, or switchgrass as the fuel 
stocks for the development of new types of fuels that will enable 
American drivers to diversify away from gasoline.
    I spent a lot of time talking about nuclear power, and I appreciate 
the Congress's support on the comprehensive energy bill that I signed. 
But nuclear power is going to be an essential source, in my judgment, of 
future electricity for the United States and places like China and 
India. Nuclear power is renewable, and nuclear power does not emit one 
greenhouse gas. And it makes a lot of sense for us to share technologies 
that will enable people to feel confident that the nuclear powerplants 
that are being built are safe, as well as technologies that will 
eventually come to fore that will enable us to reduce the wastes, the 
toxicity of the waste, and the amount of the waste.
    I'm going to continue to invest in clean coal technologies. We've 
got an abundance of coal here in America, and we need to be able to tell 
the American people we're going to be able to use that coal to generate 
electricity in environmentally friendly ways.
    My only point to you is we've got a comprehensive plan to achieve 
the objective that most Americans support, which is less dependency upon 
oil.
    I think it's going to be very important, John, to keep this economy 
growing--short term and long term--by promoting free trade. It's in our 
interest that nations treat our markets, our goods and services the way 
we treat theirs. And it's in our interest that administrations continue 
to promote more opening up markets. We've had a lot of discussions here 
in this administration on the Doha round of WTO negotiations. And I'm 
very strongly in favor of seeing if we can't reach an accord with our 
trading partners and other countries around the world to promote--to get 
this round completed so that free trade is universal in its application.
    Free trade is going to be good for producers of U.S. product and 
services, but free trade is also going to be the most powerful engine 
for development around the world. It's going to help poor nations become 
wealthier nations. It's going to enable countries to be able to find 
markets for their goods and services so that they can better grow their 
economies and create prosperity for their people.
    So we've got a robust agenda moving forward with the Congress, and 
I'm looking

[[Page 2210]]

forward to working with them. And there are a lot of places where we can 
find common ground on these important issues.
    Elaine [Elaine Quijano, Cable News Network].

CIA Employee Identity Disclosure Investigation

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. This week, we learned that Scooter 
Libby----
    The President. A little louder, please. Excuse me--getting old. 
[Laughter]
    Q. I understand, Mr. President.
    The President. No, you don't understand. [Laughter]
    Q. You're right; I don't.
    This week, sir, we learned that Scooter Libby's defense team plans 
to call Vice President Cheney to testify in the ongoing CIA leak case. I 
wonder, sir, what is your reaction to that? Is that something you'll 
resist?
    The President. I read it in the newspaper today, and it's an 
interesting piece of news. And that's all I'm going to comment about an 
ongoing case. I thought it was interesting.
    Ann [Ann Compton, ABC News].

Mary Cheney

    Q. Thank you, sir. Mary is having a baby. And you have said that you 
think Mary Cheney will be a loving soul to a child. Are there any 
changes in the law that you would support that would give same-sex 
couples greater access to things such as legal rights, hospital visits, 
insurance, that would make a difference, even though you've said it's 
your preference--you believe that it's preferable to have one man-one 
woman----
    The President. I've always said that we ought to review law to make 
sure that people are treated fairly.
    On Mary Cheney, this is a personal matter for the Vice 
President and his family. I strongly support 
their privacy on the issue, although there's nothing private when you 
happen to be the President or the Vice President; I recognize that. And 
I know Mary, and I like her. And I know she's going to be a fine, loving 
mother.
    Baker [Peter Baker, Washington Post], I'm not going to call on you 
again. You, like, got too much coverage yesterday, you know? [Laughter] 
Created a sense of anxiety amongst--no, no, you handled yourself well, 
though.
    Don [Don Gonyea, National Public Radio].

Iran/Syria

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. A question about the Iraq Study Group 
Report. One of the things that it recommends is greater dialog, direct 
talks with Syria and Iran. James Baker himself, Secretary of State under 
your father, says that it's a lot like it was during the cold war when 
we talked to the Soviet Union. He says it's important to talk to your 
adversaries. Is he wrong?
    The President. Let me start with Iran. We made it perfectly clear to 
them what it takes to come to the table, and that is a suspension of 
their enrichment program. If they verifiably suspend--that they've 
stopped enrichment, we will come to the table with our EU-3 partners and 
Russia and discuss a way forward for them. Don, it should be evident to 
the Iranians, if this is what they want to do.
    I heard the Foreign Minister--I read 
the Foreign Minister say the other day that, ``Yes, we'll sit down with 
America, after they leave Iraq.'' If they want to sit down with us, for 
the good of the Iranian people, they ought to verifiably suspend their 
program. We've made that clear to them. It is obvious to them how to 
move forward.
    The Iranian people can do better than becoming--than be an isolated 
nation. This is a proud nation with a fantastic history and tradition. 
And yet they've got a leader who 
constantly sends messages to the world that Iran is out of step with the 
majority of thinkers, that Iran is willing to become isolated, to the 
detriment of the people.

[[Page 2211]]

    I mean, I was amazed that, once again, there was this conference 
about the Holocaust that heralded a really backward view of the history 
of the world. And all that said to me was, is that the leader in 
Iran is willing to say things that 
really hurts his country and further isolates the Iranian people.
    We're working hard to get a Security Council resolution. I spoke to 
Secretary Rice about the Iranian Security 
Council resolution this morning. And the message will be that you--
``you,'' Iran--are further isolated from the world.
    My message to the Iranian people is: You can do better than to have 
somebody try to rewrite history. You can 
do better than somebody who hasn't strengthened your economy. And you 
can do better than having somebody who's trying to develop a nuclear 
weapon that the world believes you shouldn't have. There's a better way 
forward.
    Syria, the message is the same. We have met with Syria since I have 
been the President of the United States. We have talked to them about 
what is necessary for them to have a better relationship with the United 
States, and they're not unreasonable requests. We've suggested to them 
that they no longer allow Saddamists to send money and arms across their 
border into Iraq to fuel the violence--some of the violence that we see. 
We've talked to them about--they've got to leave the democrat Lebanon 
alone.
    I might say--let me step back for a second--I'm very proud of Prime 
Minister Siniora. He's shown a lot of tenacity 
and toughness in the face of enormous pressure from Syria as well as 
Hizballah, which is funded by Iran.
    But we made it clear to them, Don, on how to move forward. We've had 
visits with the Syrians in the past. Congressmen and Senators visit 
Syria. What I would suggest, that if they're interested in better 
relations with the United States, that they take some concrete, positive 
steps that promote peace as opposed to instability.
    Knoller [Mark Knoller, CBS Radio].

Leak Investigations

    Q. Thank you, sir. Mr. President, did you or your Chief of Staff 
order an investigation of the leak of the Hadley memo before your 
meeting with Prime Minister al-Maliki? And if the leak wasn't 
authorized, do you suspect someone in your administration is trying to 
undermine your Iraq policy or sabotage your meeting with Prime Minister 
al-Maliki a few weeks back?
    The President. I'm trying to think back if I ordered an 
investigation. I don't recall ordering an investigation. I do recall 
expressing some angst about ongoing leaks. You all work hard to find 
information and, of course, put it out for public consumption, and I 
understand that. But I don't appreciate those who leak classified 
documents. And it's an ongoing problem here, it really is, not just for 
this administration, but it will be for any administration that is 
trying to put policy in place that affects the future of the country.
    And we've had a lot of leaks, Mark, as you know, some of them out of 
the--I don't know where they're from, and therefore, I'm not going to 
speculate. It turns out, you never can find the leaker. It's an 
advantage you have in doing your job. We can moan about it, but it's 
hard to find those inside the Government that are willing to give, in 
this case, Hadley's document to 
newspapers.
    You know, there may be an ongoing investigation of this; I just 
don't know. If there is, if I knew about it, it's not fresh in my mind. 
But I do think that at some point in time, it would be helpful if we can 
find somebody inside our Government who is leaking materials, clearly 
against the law, that they be held to account. Perhaps the best way to 
make sure people don't leak classified documents is that there be a 
consequence for doing so.

[[Page 2212]]

    Jim [Jim Gerstenzang, Los Angeles Times].

Iraq/War on Terror Strategy

    Q. Mr. President, if we could return to the reflexive vein we were 
in a little while ago----
    The President. The what? Excuse me.
    Q. Reflexive--reflective.
    The President. Reflective stage.
    Q. Part of the process of looking at the way forward could 
reasonably include considering how we got to where we are. Has that been 
part of your process? And what lessons--after 5 years now of war, what 
lessons will you take into the final 2 years of your Presidency?
    The President. Yes, look, absolutely, Jim, that it is important for 
us to be successful going forward is to analyze that which went wrong. 
And clearly, one aspect of this war that has not gone right is the 
sectarian violence inside Baghdad, a violent reaction by both Sunni and 
Shi'a to each other that has caused a lot of loss of life as well as 
some movements in neighborhoods inside of Baghdad. It is a troubling, 
very troubling, aspect of trying to help this Iraqi Government succeed. 
And therefore, a major consideration of our planners is how to deal with 
that and how to help--more importantly, how to help the Iraqis deal with 
sectarian violence.
    There are a couple of theaters inside of Iraq, war theaters. One, of 
course, is Baghdad, itself, where the sectarian violence is brutal. And 
we've got to help them. We've got to help the Maliki Government stop it and crack it and prevent it from 
spreading, in order to be successful.
    I fully understand--let me finish. Secondly, is the battle against 
the Sunnis, Sunni extremists--some of them Saddamists, some of them are 
Al Qaida--but all of them aiming to try to drive the United States out 
of Iraq before the job is done. And we're making good progress against 
them. It's hard fighting. It's been hard work, but our special ops 
teams, along with Iraqis, are on the hunt and bringing people to 
justice.
    There's issues in the south of Iraq, mainly Shi'a-on-Shi'a tensions. 
But primarily, the toughest fight for this new Government is inside of 
Baghdad. Most of the deaths, most of the violence is within a 30-mile 
radius of Baghdad, as well as in Anbar Province. In other words, a lot 
of the country is moving along positively. But it's this part of the 
fight that is getting our attention. And frankly, we have--it has been 
that aspect of the battle, toward a government which can defend and 
govern itself and be an ally in the war on terror that--where we have 
not made as much progress as we'd have hoped to have made.
    Listen, last year started off as an exciting year with the 12 
million voters. And the attack on the Samarra mosque was Zarqawi's 
successful attempt to foment this sectarian violence. And it's mean. It 
is deadly, and we've got to help the Iraqis deal with it.
    Success in Iraq will be success--there will be a combination of 
military success, political success, and reconstruction. And they've got 
to go hand in hand. That's why I think it's important that the moderate 
coalition is standing up. In other words, it's the beginning of a 
political process that I hope will marginalize the radicals and 
extremists who are trying to stop the advance of a free Iraq. That's why 
the oil law is going to be a very important piece of legislation.
    In other words, when this Government begins to send messages that we 
will put law in place that help unify the country, it's going to make 
the security situation easier to deal with. On the other hand, without 
better, stronger security measures, it's going to be hard to get the 
political process to move forward. And so it's--we've got a parallel 
strategy. So when you hear me talking about the military--I know there's 
a lot of discussion about troops, and there should be--but we've got to 
keep in mind we've also got to make sure we

[[Page 2213]]

have a parallel political process and a reconstruction process going 
together concurrently with a new military strategy.
    I thought it was an interesting statement that Prime Minister 
Maliki made the other day about generals, 
former generals in the Saddam army, that they 
could come back in or receive a pension. In other words, he's beginning 
to reach out in terms of a reconciliation plan that I think is going to 
be important.
    I had interesting discussions the other day with Provincial 
Reconstruction Team members in Iraq. These are really brave souls who 
work for the State Department that are in these different Provinces 
helping these provincial governments rebuild and to see a political way 
forward. And one of the things that--most of these people were in the 
Sunni territory, that I had talked to, and most of them were very 
anxious for me to help them and help the Iraqi Government put 
reconciliation plans in place. There's a lot of people trying to make a 
choice as to whether or not they want to support a government or whether 
or not their interest may lay in extremism. And they understand that a 
political process that is positive, that sends a signal, ``We want to be 
a unified country,'' will help these folks make a rational choice.
    And so it's a multifaceted plan. And absolutely, we're looking at 
where things went wrong, where expectations were dashed, and where 
things hadn't gone the way we wanted them to have gone.
    Let's see here, Julie [Julie Hirschfeld, Baltimore Sun].

Legislative Agenda/Immigration Reform

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. You said this week that your microphone 
has never been louder on some of the key domestic priorities you've 
talked about, particularly Social Security and immigration. Your use of 
the Presidential microphone hasn't yielded the results that you wanted. 
So I'm wondering--the Democratic Congress, at this point, Republicans no 
longer controlling things on Capitol Hill--why you think your microphone 
is any louder, and how you plan to use it differently to get the results 
that you're looking for?
    The President. Yes, microphone being loud means--is that I'm able to 
help focus people's attentions on important issues. That's what I was 
referring to. In other words, the President is in a position to speak 
about priorities. Whether or not we can get those priorities done is 
going to take bipartisan cooperation, which I believe was one of the 
lessons of the campaigns.
    I will tell you, I felt like we had a pretty successful couple of 
years when it comes to legislation. After all, we reformed Medicare; we 
put tax policy in place that encouraged economic growth and vitality; we 
passed trade initiatives; passed a comprehensive energy bill. I'm 
signing an important piece of legislation today that continues a 
comprehensive approach to energy exploration, plus extenders on R&D, for 
example, tax credits. It's been a pretty substantial legislative record 
if you carefully scrutinize it.
    However, that doesn't mean necessarily that we are able to achieve 
the same kind of results without a different kind of approach. After 
all, you're right; the Democrats now control the House and the Senate. 
And therefore, I will continue to work with their leadership--and our 
own leaders, our own Members--to see if we can't find common ground on 
key issues like Social Security or immigration.
    I strongly believe that we can and must get a comprehensive 
immigration plan on my desk this year. It's important for us because, in 
order to enforce our border, in order for those Border Patrol agents who 
we've increased down there and given them more equipment and better 
border security, they've got to have help and a plan that says, ``If 
you're coming into America to do a job, you can come legally for a 
temporary basis to do so.''
    I don't know if you've paid attention to the enforcement measures 
that were taken

[[Page 2214]]

recently where in some of these packing plants they found people working 
that had been here illegally, but all of them had documents that said 
they were here legally. They were using forged documents, which just 
reminded me that the system we have in place has caused people to rely 
upon smugglers and forgers in order to do work Americans aren't doing.
    In other words, it is a system that is all aimed to bypass no matter 
what measures we take to protect this country. It is a system that, 
frankly, leads to inhumane treatment of people. And therefore, the best 
way to deal with an issue that Americans agree on--that is, that we 
ought to enforce our borders in a humane way--is we've got to have a 
comprehensive bill.
    And I have made a proposal. I have spoken about this to the Nation 
from the Oval Office. I continue to believe that the microphone is 
necessary to call people to action. And I want to work with both 
Republicans and Democrats to get a comprehensive bill to my desk. It's 
in our interest that we do this.
    In terms of energy, there's another area where I know we can work 
together. There is a consensus that we need to move forward with 
continued research on alternative forms of energy. I've just described 
them in my opening comments, and be glad to go over them again if you'd 
like, because they're positive. It's a positive development. We're 
making progress, and there's more to be done.
    So I'm looking forward to working with them. There's a lot of 
attitude here that says, ``Well, you lost the Congress; therefore, 
you're not going to get anything done.'' Quite the contrary; I have an 
interest to get things done. And the Democrat leaders have an interest 
to get something done to show that they're worthy of their leadership 
roles. And it is that common ground that I'm confident we can get--we 
can make positive progress, without either of us compromising principle.
    And I know they don't--I know they're not going to change their 
principles, and I'm not going to change mine. But nevertheless, that 
doesn't mean we can't find common ground to get good legislation done. 
That's what the American people want. The truth of the matter is, the 
American people are sick of the partisanship and name-calling.
    I will do my part to elevate the tone, and I'm looking forward to 
working with them. It's going to be an interesting new challenge. I'm 
used to it, as Herman [Ken Herman, Cox News] can testify. I was the 
Governor of Texas with Democrat leadership in the house and the senate, 
and we were able to get a lot of constructive things done for the State 
of Texas. And I believe it's going to be possible here--to do so here in 
the country.
    Michael [Michael Allen, Time].

President's Legacy

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. Merry Christmas.
    The President. Thank you. Yes.
    Q. I've just two questions related to the amazing fact that a 
quarter of your Presidency lies ahead. First, I keep reading that you'll 
be remembered only for Iraq, and I wonder what other areas you believe 
you're building, a record of transformation you hope will last the ages. 
And second, a followup on Julie's question, what is your plan for either 
changing your role or keeping control of the agenda at a time when 
Democrats have both Houses on the Hill, and when the '08 candidates are 
doing their thing?
    The President. Well, one is to set priorities. That's what I've just 
done, setting a priority. My message is: We can work together. And here 
are some key areas where we've got to work together, reauthorization of 
No Child Left Behind, minimum wage. I hope we're able to work together 
on free trade agreements. We can work together

[[Page 2215]]

on Social Security reform and Medicare reform, entitlement reform. We 
need to work together on energy, immigration, earmarks.
    The leadership has expressed their disdain for earmarks; I support 
their disdain for earmarks. I don't like a process where it's not 
transparent, where people are able to slip this into a bill without any 
hearing or without any recognition of who put it in there and why they 
put it in there. It's just not good for the system, and it's not good 
for building confidence of the American people in our process or in the 
Congress.
    The first part of the--oh, last 2 years. I'm going to work hard, 
Michael. I'm going to sprint to the finish, and we can get a lot done. 
And you're talking about legacy. Here--I know--look, everybody is trying 
to write the history of this administration even before it's over. I'm 
reading about George Washington still. My attitude is, if they're still 
analyzing number 1, 43 ought not to worry about it and just do what he 
thinks is right and make the tough choices necessary.
    We're in the beginning stages of an ideological struggle, Michael. 
It's going to last a while. And I want to make sure this country is 
engaged in a positive and constructive way to secure the future for our 
children. And it's going to be a tough battle.
    I also believe the Medicare reform--the first meaningful, 
significant health care reform that's been passed in a while--is making 
a huge difference for our seniors. No Child Left Behind has been a 
significant education accomplishment, and we've got to reauthorize it. 
We have proven that you can keep taxes low, achieve other objectives, 
and cut the deficit. The entrepreneurial spirit is high in this country, 
and one way to keep it high is to keep--let people keep more of their 
own money.
    So there's been a lot of accomplishment. But the true history of any 
administration is not going to be written until long after the person is 
gone. It's just impossible for short-term history to accurately reflect 
what has taken place. Most historians, you know, probably had a 
political preference, and so their view isn't exactly objective--most 
short-term historians. And it's going to take a while for people to 
analyze mine or any other of my predecessors until down the road when 
they're able to take--watch the long march of history and determine 
whether or not the decisions made during the 8 years I was President 
have affected history in a positive way.
    I wish you all a happy holiday. Thank you for your attendance. Have 
fun. Enjoy yourself. For those lucky enough to go to Crawford, perhaps 
I'll see you down there.
    Thank you.

Note: The President's news conference began at 10 a.m. in the Indian 
Treaty Room of the Dwight D. Eisenhower Executive Office Building. In 
his remarks, he referred to James A. Baker III and Lee H. Hamilton, 
cochairs, Iraq Study Group; Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and former 
President Saddam Hussein of Iraq; Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Iraqi 
Shiite Leader; Minister of Foreign Affairs Manuchehr Motaki and 
President Mahmud Ahmadi-nejad of Iran; and Prime Minister Fuad Siniora 
of Lebanon. A reporter referred to I. Lewis Libby, former Chief of Staff 
to the Vice President.