[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 40, Number 9 (Monday, March 1, 2004)]
[Pages 265-270]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks to the National Governors Association Conference

February 23, 2004

    Well, that's it? Okay. [Laughter] Always love to get a short 
introduction. Hope you all cleaned the room up after last night. 
[Laughter] Laura and I really enjoyed that. Thanks for coming. It was a 
lot of fun. Everybody seemed pretty well behaved. I don't know about 
Coach, but yes, I know, it's hard to take him out.
    I'm glad members of my Cabinet are here. Obviously, the more 
communications we can have about issues that worry you, the easier it is 
for us to solve problems. Governors are problem-solvers, and so is the 
President. Our jobs are to identify problems and deal with them, and the 
best way to do so is in the spirit of cooperation.
    That's sometimes hard in Washington, I readily concede. This is not 
a town that thrives upon cooperation, like most State capitals. But 
we'll continue to work hard to help you, because by helping our 
Governors, we really help our people. That's the job of a President.
    Yesterday in my toast, I said the war on terror goes on, and it 
does. I wish I could report otherwise, but that's not a true assessment 
of the world. We are chasing Al Qaida. We're dealing with rogue nations 
and proliferation, but the war still goes on. And as a fellow Commander 
in Chief, it's important for you to know that. And therefore, it's 
essential that we continue to cooperate on matters of homeland security.
    We'll have a robust budget in front of the Congress, and we expect 
it to be passed. Tom, evidently, has met with you all to talk about ways 
to make sure that the flow of money is expedited from the Federal 
Government to the State Governments to the

[[Page 266]]

local governments. And that's essential. And I appreciate that he has 
convened a conference of Governors and mayors and local responders to 
make sure that we all do our jobs well. That's the purpose of the 
meeting.
    I will tell you, the response to emergency and/or threats has been, 
from my perspective, really good. Governor Easley and Governor Warner of 
Virginia had to suffer through a devastating act of nature. But the 
response between the Federal Government and the State Governments and 
the local governments was more seamless than ever, and I want to thank 
the Governors and their offices of emergency preparedness.
    Ridge is doing a good job, from my perspective. He's taken on a 
tough assignment. I see Governor Rendell is nodding his head. You 
trained him well. But he's taken on a tough assignment, to bring 
together diverse agencies under one roof and have it function smoothly, 
not only here in Washington but in the field. And we'll continue to work 
and make sure that the Office of Homeland Security enables you to do 
your job better.
    There's talk about the PATRIOT Act. Let me just tell you it needs to 
be renewed, and I'll tell you why. Prior to the PATRIOT Act, the CIA and 
the FBI couldn't communicate on matters of intelligence. And yet, we're 
fighting a war against individuals and killers that can hide in our 
communities, hide in dark parts of the world, hide in caves, and we need 
to be able to communicate. It makes no sense not to have the tools 
available to chase these terrorists down. So you'll see me actively 
pursuing renewal of the PATRIOT Act, so not only can we do our job, the 
Federal Government, but people in the State and local level can too--do 
so as well.
    The Joint Terrorism Task Force in your community require 
cooperation--interagency cooperation. It's essential they have the tools 
necessary to find these people and bring them to justice. That is our 
solemn call in this, the beginning of the 21st century. After all, the 
most important job of anybody in office is to protect the people of our 
country, which means we got to stay on the offense when it comes to 
dealing with Al Qaida, and we got to be wise about dealing with threats 
before they become imminent or fully materialize. That's the--to me, 
those are the lessons of September the 11th, 2001. It changed the 
calculation as to how you analyze and deal with threat.
    We are on the hunt for Al Qaida. You just got to know that there's a 
lot of brave people searching them out. And I view the hunt for Al Qaida 
as part of the war on terror. And it requires all assets, intelligence 
assets and military assets, to chase them down and bring them to 
justice. And we're doing pretty good--better than pretty good. If Al 
Qaida were a corporation, middle management has been brought to justice. 
And that's important for you to know. We can take comfort about the 
progress we're making. But we've got a lot more to do, and so we'll just 
stay on the hunt here in--out of Washington, DC.
    As you know, I laid out some doctrine that said, ``If you harbor a 
terrorist, you're just as guilty as the terrorist.'' And it's very 
important for the administration to follow through when they say 
something. It makes diplomacy a little easier when your word means 
something, and in Al Qaida, our word meant something. The Taliban is no 
longer in power. We've still got work there to do, but the country is 
now more free than ever before.
    You ought to see the movie ``Osama.'' It's an interesting movie. It 
talks about what it was like to be a woman in Afghanistan during the 
Taliban era. It will give you a perspective about what it means to be a 
Governor in a nation which is willing to sacrifice not only for its own 
security but for the freedom of others. When you hear talk about being a 
liberator, that movie will bring home what it means to be liberated from 
the clutches of barbarism.
    A lot of my foreign policy is driven by the fact that I truly 
believe that freedom is a gift from the Almighty to every person and 
that America has a responsibility to take a lead in the world, to help 
people be free. And we're making progress in Afghanistan. We really are. 
Just look at the fact that young girls are now going to school for the 
first time in a long period of time.
    Secretary Rumsfeld's wife and Karen Hughes and Margaret Spellings, 
who is my Domestic Policy Advisor--they're on a plane right now heading 
to Afghanistan to continue the progress toward a more free society.

[[Page 267]]

    And in Iraq, obviously, I made a tough choice. But my attitude is, 
is that the lessons of September the 11th mean that we must be clear-
eyed and realistic and deal with threats before they fully materialize. 
I looked at the intelligence and came to the conclusion that Saddam was 
a threat. The Congress looked at the same intelligence, and it came to 
the conclusion that Saddam Hussein was a threat. The United Nations 
Security Council looked at the intelligence, and it concluded that 
Saddam Hussein was a threat. My predecessor and his administration 
looked at the same intelligence and concluded that Saddam Hussein was a 
threat, and that's why Congress passed a--resolved to remove Saddam from 
power, that regime change was a--was policy for the Government.
    And there's a reason why not only did the intelligence say that he 
was a threat, his actions said he was a threat. He had used weapons of 
mass destruction on his own people. He hid weapons of mass destruction 
from inspectors. In other words, he wouldn't be open. The United Nations 
Security Council, at my request, took a look at the issue one last time 
and unanimously voted to have Saddam reveal, disclose, and destroy 
weapons of mass destruction and/or weapons of mass destruction programs 
and, if not, face serious consequences.
    September the 11th affected my way of thinking when it came to the 
security of the country. We saw a danger, and so I gave him an 
ultimatum. The world, really, gave him an ultimatum. And he refused. And 
rather than take the word of a madman whose actions had proven unworthy 
of leadership, we acted, and we removed him. And the world is better off 
for it, in my judgment.
    It is essential we succeed in Iraq, just like it's essential we 
succeed in Afghanistan. A free Iraq is an historic opportunity to help 
change the world. And I want to thank the Governors for going to Iraq. I 
want to thank you for taking the risk to go and to say thanks to the 
troops on the ground, whether they be your Guard's troops or reservists 
or whether they be active duty personnel.
    We can debate all day long about whether or not I made the right 
decision, but what is not in question is the bravery and skill of our 
troops. And I want to thank you for your support--support for people who 
are serving a cause greater than themselves, people who are willing to 
sacrifice not only for our own security but people who when, by and 
large, when you talk to them, understand that the long-term consequences 
of a free Iraq will make us more secure.
    Some of the stories from Iraq are amazing stories. Just ask your 
Governors to account for what they saw and heard. It's important for you 
to know that we fully recognize there needs to be certainty in troop 
rotation, that we're asking families and troops to go serve the country, 
and there needs to be a certain timeframe. It's important for you to 
know that our troops will get the best equipment and best possible 
training.
    I went to Fort Polk in Louisiana, and they showed me some of the 
training missions that our Guard units are going through, particularly 
the Guard unit out of Arkansas--Huckabee. And the training is very good. 
It is intense. It is realistic. It is preparing these souls for duty. 
And again, I want to thank you, as Commander in Chief, for understanding 
the mission.
    See, the danger is, is that the Iraqi people think we'll cut and 
run. That's what they're worried about. I think if you ask the 
Governors, they'll tell you they heard that same sentiment. We're not 
going to cut and run. We've got to make it clear we're there to succeed, 
and we will.
    And they're making progress on the ground. I don't think it's all 
that bad that people are arguing about the nature of government. It's a 
pretty good sign. We argue about government all the time here. As a 
matter of fact, later on this year, we'll be having a pretty good 
argument about government. [Laughter] But it's a good sign in Iraq. 
That's part of the process of heading for a society in which minority 
rights are recognized and human dignity is paramount. Again, I'll repeat 
to you, I view this as an historic moment. I truly believe that a free 
Iraq is going to change the world for the better.
    I had a dinner with Koizumi--Prime Minister Koizumi in Tokyo, and we 
were eating Kobe beef, which is quite good, I might add. And we were 
talking about, of all things,

[[Page 268]]

North Korea, how best, as friends, to deal with North Korea. It dawned 
on me in the midst of that conversation, what would it have been like if 
we'd blown the peace with Japan. Would I have ever--or any American 
President ever been sitting down with a Prime Minister talking about how 
to deal with the current threat, for the common good?
    During the course of the conversation, I also realized that 50 years 
from now, when we get it right in Iraq, some American President will be 
sitting down with the leader of Iraq, talking about the common good, how 
to maintain the peace, how to create a more hopeful society. This is an 
historic opportunity, and this country will not flinch from the hard 
duty ahead of us.
    At home, obviously, the economy and jobs are on my mind. I know 
they're on yours as well. I'm pleased that the economy is growing; 5.6 
percent unemployment is a good national number. It's not good enough, 
but it's a good number, particularly since what we've been through, 
which has been a recession, an emergency, and corporate scandal and war. 
And yet, the economy is growing, which is a good sign.
    My view of government is to create an environment that is good for 
the entrepreneur, that encourages capital formation, particularly among 
small businesses. The tax relief we passed not only put more money into 
the pockets of individuals, which I believe is good when you're trying 
to come out of a recession, but it also helps small businesses. 
Remember, most small businesses in your States are sole proprietorships 
or Subchapter S corporations. That's a fact, and when you cut income 
taxes, all taxes, not a few but all, you're providing additional capital 
for Subchapter S and sole proprietorships.
    And if you're worried about job growth, it seems like it makes sense 
to give a little fuel to those who create jobs, the small-business 
sector. So I'll vigorously defend the permanency of the tax cuts, not 
only for the sake of the economy but for the sake of the entrepreneurial 
spirit, which is important in your States. It's important that people 
have got incentive to create jobs. Not only is it good for those people 
looking for work, it's good for the soul of the country for people to 
own something. We want us to be an ownership society in America.
    There's more to do. We need an energy bill. We'll try to get one out 
of the Congress here. We need tort reform, it seems like to me. We need 
tort reform for class action; we need tort reform for asbestos. We need 
medical--national medical liability reform in order to help control the 
rising cost of health care, associated health care plans. I hope you 
support these. These are opportunities for small businesses to pool risk 
in order to better control the cost of health. That's where the focus 
ought to be, how best to address the rising cost of health care. And 
this administration will continue to do so for the sake of jobs--less 
regulations, obviously.
    We won't back off our desire to open up markets for U.S. products--
farm products, ranch products, manufacturing products. It's pretty easy 
to trade into America. What's hard is for Americans to trade into other 
countries. And so it's important for the administration to continue to 
focus on trade and the benefits of trade here at home.
    And I mentioned the permanency of the tax cuts. It's very important 
for people who are planning for the future to have--wonder about tax 
relief, whether it will be there. It's essential that there be certainty 
in the Tax Code.
    We also recognize that these are changing times. The economy is 
changing. People go to work in different ways. And therefore, the policy 
ought to reflect that. The policy ought to reflect it through health 
care, where people have got more control over their health care 
decisions. Health savings accounts are one such way to do that.
    The education system is vital. However, as the economy changes, 
people have got to be prepared to work in the changing economy. I'm 
going to vigorously defend No Child Left Behind because I know in my 
heart of hearts it's the absolute right role for the Federal Government 
to provide money but insist upon results, to say for the first time, 
``Would you please show us whether or not the children are learning to 
read and write and add and subtract.'' And if not, there will be special 
help to make sure they do. And if so, there will be ample praise.

[[Page 269]]

    You design the accountability. I know Rod talked to you about 
flexibility and how we get to the numbers, which is good. Accountability 
isn't meant to punish anybody. Accountability systems are meant to help 
determine whether curriculum are working, whether or not the strategy is 
working and whether or not people are being just shuffled through from 
grade to grade without concern as to whether or not they can read or 
write. That's what this is all about, and I look forward to working with 
you to make sure the system works well. And I just can assure you this 
is--there will be a vigorous defense of what I think is the one of the 
most constructive reforms in education policy at the Federal Government 
ever.
    We have put out some policies to encourage reading and math, a 
program for high school students who are falling behind, additional 
money for advanced placement for low-income schools, increasing--larger 
Pell grants for students who prepare for college by taking more rigorous 
courses. And of course, I've always felt that the community college 
system provides a great opportunity for job training. Elaine will talk 
about that to you. Community colleges are available, affordable; they're 
flexible. We don't need to be training 500 hairdressers for 50 jobs 
which exist. The system ought to be designed toward meeting the demand 
of your employers, and a good community college system will make it much 
easier for Governors and mayors to attract jobs to your communities. And 
I know a lot of you have used your community college system wisely.
    Governor Napolitano--I was in Arizona, went to the Mesa Community 
College System. It's a fine community college system. One of the 
interesting stories there, a lady who worked for 15 years as a graphic 
design artist, and she went to the community college system to help get 
the skills necessary to become a viable employee in the high-tech world. 
And her starting pay--I believe it's called Cable One--was higher than 
her 15th year as a graphic artist, because she took time, with 
Government help--I think a Pell grant in her case--to become reeducated. 
So we've got money in our budget to help invigorate the community 
college system.
    Another issue that I think we need to work on--I know we need to 
work on is welfare. They need to reauthorize welfare. I hope the 
Congress will reauthorize welfare. Welfare reform had worked. You need 
to have certainty as you plan your--on how to help people become less 
dependent on government, and we need a welfare reform bill. And we'll 
push it, here in Washington.
    And finally, the Faith-Based Initiative--I want to talk a little bit 
about that. My attitude is, if a program works, let's use it. If a 
program can help save somebody's life, it seems like to me that program 
ought to be allowed to access monies aimed at helping people help 
themselves. And yet, that's not the way it was here in Washington. 
Faith-based programs were discriminated against. There was a process 
argument, and Governors are results-oriented people, and so am I. And it 
seems like to me, you ought have the flexibility, and people at your 
grassroots level ought to have the flexibility to access taxpayers' 
money if they're able to meet common objectives. Now--and so--well, I 
couldn't get the bill out of the Congress, so I just signed an Executive 
order which opened up Federal grant money to faith-based groups on a 
competitive basis.
    We're also making sure that our bureaucracies don't say to faith-
based groups, ``You can't be a faith-based group.'' If faith is part of 
being an effective program, it doesn't make sense to say to somebody, 
you can't practice your faith. And so we recognize, here in Washington, 
faith-based programs are a two-way street--one, there's a Federal 
interface, and two, that sometimes can be frightening to people of 
faith. And by the way, I'm talking about all faiths. This isn't just a 
single faith. It's Christian, Jewish, Muslim faiths, all of which exist 
because they've heard the universal admonition to love a neighbor like 
you'd like to be loved yourself.
    And so I want to applaud those of you who have set up faith-based 
offices and encourage you, if you haven't, to do so. There is a lot of 
Federal money available to effective providers of social services. One 
such program is going to be the $100-million drug treatment programs, 
where now vouchers can be issued to people where they can choose where 
they go, whether it be kind of a clinical

[[Page 270]]

program or a program designed to help change somebody's heart. By the 
way, if your heart gets changed, it's a lot easier to quit drinking. I 
know. And so it's--so this is an opportunity that I think is a viable 
opportunity for Governors and States to really help people. And that's 
why we're in office, isn't it, is to do the best--[applause].
    So regardless of your party, I hope you have this sense of optimism 
I do. You see the people in your States--we are lucky to be leaders in 
such a fabulous country, we really are--good, honest, decent, honorable 
people. We've overcome a lot. There's more to do. There's a lot we can 
do together. So thanks for coming by the White House.
    That's my pledge. This is going to be a year in which a lot of 
people are probably going to think nothing can done, right, because 
we're all out campaigning. Well, that's not my attitude. I fully 
understand it's going to be the year of the sharp elbow and the quick 
tongue. But my pledge to you is, we'll continue to work with you. You've 
got what you--you've got to do what you've got to do in your home 
States, in terms of politics. But surely we can shuffle that aside 
sometimes and focus on our people, do what you were elected to do and 
what I was elected to do to make this country hopeful.
    So thanks for coming by. I'll be glad to answer a couple of 
questions.
    You're out of here.

Note: The President spoke at 10:20 a.m. in the State Dining Room at the 
White House. In his remarks, he referred to Secretary of Homeland 
Security Tom Ridge; Gov. Michael F. Easley of North Carolina; Gov. Mark 
R. Warner of Virginia; Joyce Rumsfeld, wife of Secretary of Defense 
Donald H. Rumsfeld; Karen Hughes, former Counselor to the President; 
Margaret Spellings, Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy; 
former President Saddam Hussein of Iraq; Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas; 
Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan; Secretary of Labor Elaine L. 
Chao; and Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona. The Office of the Press 
Secretary also released a Spanish language transcript of these remarks.