[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 40, Number 33 (Monday, August 16, 2004)]
[Pages 1502-1516]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
<R04>
Remarks in a Discussion at Northern Virginia Community College in
Annandale, Virginia
August 9, 2004
The President. Thank you for being here.
Audience members. Four more years! Four more years! Four more years!
The President. Thank you all.
Audience members. Four more years! Four more years! Four more years!
The President. Thank you all. Okay. Thank you all for coming. Please
be seated.
Thanks for coming. I appreciate the warm welcome. I want to thank
you all for giving me a chance to come and explain why I want to be your
President for 4 more years.
We've done a lot since I got elected. We, the country, have worked
together. It is--and we've accomplished a lot, and we've been through a
lot. It's been tough times. The only reason to look backward is to best
determine who to lead us forward. So today I'm going to talk about some
ideas as to how to make this country a safer, stronger, and better place
for every citizen, for every single person who lives in this country.
First, I'm sorry that Laura is not here. She's out campaigning. I
tell the people, in front of these enthusiastic and large crowds we've
been having, that, you know, probably the wisest reason to put me back
in there is so that she'll be the First Lady for 4 more years.
I'm running with a good man. I admit it, that Dick Cheney is not the
prettiest face on the ticket. [Laughter] But that's not why I picked
him. I picked him because of his sound judgment, his experience, his
ability to do the job.
I want to thank Dr. Bob Templin for allowing us to use this
important facility. I say ``important;'' it's because the community
college system is an integral part of making sure that this country is a
hopeful country. I'll tell you why. Part of the reasons I'm seeking the
Presidency again is because I understand that if we use our community
college system wisely, people will be trained for the jobs which will
exist. See, in order to keep jobs here in America, we've got to have a
workforce that is capable of filling the jobs of the 21st century. And
one of the crucial links in making sure people have the skills necessary
to fill the jobs that are coming is the community college system. And
Bob understands that. I appreciate you being here, Doc. Thanks for
giving us a chance to come by.
I want to thank my friend Senator George Allen for being here. I
appreciate you coming. I want to thank Frank Wolf and Ed Schrock. I
appreciate Frank's concern and dedication for those who need American
help. He understands what I know, that we have a responsibility in the
world to help those who hunger and those who are afflicted by disease
and those who suffer under tyranny. And I appreciate Frank's deep
concern not only about the citizens of this State and our country but
also the deep concern about those to whom we can deliver help. And we
are. Just remember, when people talk about America, just remember
they're talking about a country which is leading the fight against HIV/
AIDS, not only here at home but on the continent of Africa.
And I appreciate Ed coming over. Thanks for being here, Ed. I
appreciate your leadership as well. The attorney general is with us
today. General, I'm proud you're here. Thanks for coming.
We've got some of our citizens up here because we're going to talk
about a crucial aspect of our vision, which is how to encourage an
ownership society to flourish in America. I'm going to get to that in a
minute.
[[Page 1503]]
Before I do, I want to talk about a couple of other points. One is
that we're making progress in spreading the peace. See, we know that a
free society is going to be a peaceful society. We also know that
freedom is not our country's gift to the world; freedom is the Almighty
God's gift to each person in this world. And that's why--that's why over
the next 4 years, we'll continue to work to spread freedom, for our own
security and for the sake of others.
We've done some hard work over the past 3 years. We must never
forget the lessons of September the 11th. First of all, the enemy that
we face is cruel. Unlike Americans, they don't have a conscience.
They're willing to kill innocent people in order to shake our will and
our resolve. As we work to secure our country, we must never forget the
nature of the people. And those people cannot be negotiated with. You
can't reason with them. You can't sit down and say, ``Look, why won't
you change your ways?'' That's not the way they think. And your
President must clearly understand that. That's why it's important for
us--that's why over the next 4 years, we will engage them in places like
Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere so we do not have to face them here at
home.
Secondly, when this country speaks, it better mean what it says, in
order to make the world a more peaceful place. In other words, when we
say things, we must mean what we say. And when I said that if you harbor
a terrorist, you're just as guilty as the terrorist, I meant exactly
that. And that's why we made the decision--a tough decision, by the way;
nobody wants to commit kids to war. That's what you got to understand.
It's the hardest decision a President can make, and you only do so if
you're convinced it's going to lead to peace.
It's a different kind of war we're in, and therefore, we had to say
clearly to those that were providing safe haven that you're going to be
held accountable as well. Because, remember, Al Qaida was training in
Afghanistan. They had taken over the country. We could not allow that to
continue for our own security and for the sake of the people who lived
underneath the brutal dictatorship of the Taliban. And so thanks to our
United States military and our friends and allies, Afghanistan is now
free. Afghanistan is an ally. Afghanistan is an ally on the war on
terror.
I'll tell you something really interesting--two things I want to
share with you about Afghanistan. I can remember earlier in the spring,
I think it was, people were talking about how maybe people aren't going
to vote. Don't you remember, there was some serious terrorist attacks on
women, in particular, that had got their registration cards and were in
the process. The world was kind of predicting people weren't going to
show up to vote. Turns out, over 8 million--I think the number is 8
million--Afghan citizens have registered to vote, far exceeding
expectations. People want to be free. People want to be free. They want
to live in a free society. They want to be able to exercise their rights
as a human being. It's a universal desire and a universal love.
Secondly, when I was in Cleveland a while back--this is like the
last couple of weeks--I've been traveling a lot, so it's kind of hard
for me to remember exactly where I've been. [Laughter] I went to the
International Children's Game. I helped kick it off. And I was there
speaking to the athletes, and right to my right--I'll never forget it--
was the Afghan girls soccer team. Now, let me tell you what's
interesting about that. They would not have been in the United States--
they wouldn't even have been playing soccer under the Taliban. These
people were so brutal, so dark in their vision that many young girls
didn't have a chance to be educated.
Not only do we have an ally in the war on terror, there is a more
compassionate and decent society growing in Afghanistan, which is in our
interests, and it's in the world's interests.
As the American people look at this election, they must take a look
at the candidates and determine who best understands the lessons to be
learned from September the 11th. Another lesson is, is that we must deal
with threats before they fully materialize. In this world of threats to
our homeland, in this world where there are folks who cannot stand our
country and our way of life, we must deal with threats. It used to be we
didn't have to. Now you just can't hope they go away.
[[Page 1504]]
They must be dealt with--hopefully, diplomatically; hopefully, we can
cure things, problems peacefully. That ought to be the first priority of
any President. However, if diplomacy fails, we must be a country that is
willing to take action to defend ourselves.
I want you to remember, Saddam Hussein was a threat; he was a clear
threat. He had used weapons of mass destruction against his own people.
He had terrorist organizations in his country. He was a sworn enemy of
the United States of America. He is a person that invaded countries in
his neighborhood. We all looked at the intelligence. I looked at it.
Members of Congress from both political parties looked at it. My
opponent looked at it. We all came to the same conclusion: Saddam
Hussein was a threat. The United Nations Security Council--the U.N.
Security Council concluded Saddam was a threat and passed a resolution
unanimously which said, ``Disarm, disclose, or face serious
consequences.'' That's what the free world said.
And he deceived the world again. I say ``again'' because that's what
he'd been doing for a decade. And then he deceived the inspectors.
Remember, with that period of time, we said, ``Oh, let the inspections
work.'' We were all for that. We wanted the inspectors to work. But it
was clear that he was deceiving them. So I had a choice to make, and
that is, whether or not to trust a man who had used weapons of mass
destruction, somebody who had used--somebody who had defied the free
world. My choice was, do I forget the lessons of September the 11th, or
do I take actions necessary to defend our country. And given that very
difficult choice, I chose to defend America. I will do so every time.
[Applause] Thank you all.
We didn't find the stockpiles that we thought we would find.
Everybody thought they would be there. We haven't found them yet. But he
did have the capability of making weapons. Knowing what I know today, I
would have made the same decision. We couldn't afford to take the chance
that a sworn enemy of America would share capabilities with an enemy
which hates us. That's a chance we couldn't afford to take.
I'll tell you an interesting story--and by the way, I think the
candidates for President must say yes or no, whether or not they would
have made the same decision.
I tell the story about the seven men that came to see me in the Oval
Office. They had had their right hands cut off by Saddam Hussein because
his currency had devalued and he was looking for a scapegoat. And they
had a X burned in their forehead as well, to brand them as enemies of
the state, I guess; I don't know what the symbol was. But they came to
see me in the Oval Office. Needless to say, it was a powerful moment.
The fellows walked in and were just overwhelmed by the majesty of a
shrine to democracy, and it was--imagine, seeing the President of the
United States. And I was emotional because the contrast between what we
believe and what Saddam Hussein did to his people is just so amazing,
because these people had just come from Houston, Texas, where they had
received new hands because of the generosity of an American citizen
named Marvin Zindler. It was just a clear contrast between the brutality
of a man who whimsically could have somebody's hand cut off and the
great generosity and love of compassion of the American citizens who are
willing to help heal somebody, no matter their religion or where they're
from.
A free Iraq is going to change the world. For those of you with
young kids, I want you to think about a world that is going to be much
more peaceful, a country more secure because, during these difficult
days, we're standing true to our firm belief and our ideals that freedom
equals peace. And it's hard work. It's hard work. It's hard work because
there are people in that--in the Middle East that can't stand the
thought of a free society. It just scares them. And they don't scare us.
They're tough, but we're resolute because we understand the charge of
history, the charge that history has given us. We have a duty. We have a
duty to keep our word. We have told the Iraqi people and the people of
Afghanistan that we're with you. And they're watching carefully. They're
watching carefully to determine whether or not they can take a risk for
freedom, or whether or not America's word doesn't mean anything.
I'm convinced that these are historic times. These are times when
people will look back and say, thank goodness the American people
[[Page 1505]]
stood true to our belief that liberty is a transforming moment in the
history of the world.
A couple of other points. I talk about a stronger and better
America; it means our economy needs to be strong. The economy is
growing, and there's more to do. One of the things we better make sure
is we don't raise the taxes on the people. This is going to be a
campaign issue. I'm going to talk about good education policy to help
train workers. I'll talk about energy policy to make sure we're not--
that we're less dependent on foreign sources of energy. Of course, I'm
going to talk about liability reform, medical liability reform. I'll
talk about tort reform, so our business people can thrive and hire
people.
I mean, the economy is strong. It's getting stronger. And there are
policies we need to put in place to make sure this is the best place in
the world to do business. If you want jobs to stay in America, like I
do, this better be a place where people feel comfortable taking risks
and expanding the job base. So I've spent a lot of time talking about
that in the course of the campaign.
Today we're going to talk about how to encourage an ownership
society in America. Listen, these are changing times. If you really
think about it, they are much different from the times when we came up.
Most of our dads--at least guys my age--dads worked for one company.
Mine did move around a little bit, but--[laughter]. Georges generally
worked for one company. [Laughter]
At any rate, when we think about it, it was a different society back
a couple of decades ago because a person stayed with the same company,
had the health plan from the company, retirement plan from the company.
Now people are moving around. It's a different world. And there is some
uncertainty in that kind of world. You've got moms and dads that are
both working, sometimes out of the house. And the economy is changing,
and therefore, Government policy ought to change with the times. And one
way to bring stability and security into a person's life is to encourage
ownership. See, if you own and control your own health care plan, you
can move from job to job without worrying as to whether or not you're
going to get health coverage for your family. If you own your own home
and building equity in your own home and you're changing from job to
job, it provides great security and relief.
And so we're going to talk about different forms of ownership here.
But the point here is, I want you to understand that over the next 4
years we'll be working to build a culture of ownership in America. We
want more people owning things in this country.
Let me put it to you bluntly. In a changing world, we want more
people to have control over your own life. And that's a difference--
there's a difference in philosophy, when you think about it. A lot of
the Government policies are, you know, as I like to put it: We'll give
you the orders, and you pay the bills. [Laughter] If you really think
about it, there's a philosophical divide here in this campaign. My
judgment is, Government ought to be empowering people by giving them
more control over their lives. And we'll talk about some practical ways
to do that.
Now, look, one of the things we'll always work to do is to take care
of those people who cannot help themselves. As a matter of fact, a
proper policy of Government is to give people the tools necessary to be
able to realize their own dreams. That's why education is vital. That's
why the No Child Left Behind Act must be strengthened. It's making a big
difference. I'm telling you, when you start asking the question, ``Can
you read and write and add and subtract?''--all of a sudden people start
learning better. There's accountability. It holds people to account.
We've got to end this--it's a mediocre system when you quit on kids
basically because of the color of their skin, you know? We're not going
to do that anymore in America.
In terms of health care, there's some smart things we can do. We've
got to recognize there are people who can't help themselves. That's why
these health centers we've opened up around the country make eminent
sense--so primary care for low-income people can be delivered at these
centers, as opposed to emergency rooms.
There are things we're doing throughout our administration but all
aimed at encouraging people to help themselves and eventually being able
to own something too. And so what I want to talk to you today about
[[Page 1506]]
is some interesting examples of what I'm saying.
We're going to start off with Sharon Rainey. She's sitting right
here. She's an entrepreneur. Isn't that a lovely word? You know,
entrepreneur--we want entrepreneurs. See, the job of Government is not
to create wealth but to create an environment in which the
entrepreneurial spirit is strong and alive and well. And it is under the
Bush administration and will continue to be.
Ready to go? All right. Sharon started her own business. True or
false?
Ms. Rainey. True. [Laughter]
The President. This is a warm-up. I'm not even a lawyer, and here I
am leading the witness. [Laughter]
Ms. Rainey. She needs the leading. [Laughter]
The President. Tell us what you do.
[Ms. Rainey made brief remarks.]
The President. See, let me stop you there. First of all, what
Government cannot do is encourage Sharon to start her own business.
[Laughter] We can't tell her to. I beg your pardon, we can encourage her
to, by good policy; we can't tell her to. See, you can't make her be an
entrepreneur. Secondly, she's got to design the product herself. She's
got to be smart enough to figure out how to meet demand, which she did.
But one thing we can do is not overtax her.
Most new jobs in America are created by small businesses. That's
really important for people to understand. I hope you know that. The tax
relief we passed--the well-timed tax relief we passed, I might add--
recognized the importance of small businesses in our society. See, most
people probably do not understand that, by far, the vast majority of
small businesses are organized like Sharon's business is organized and
pay individual income taxes. They're called Subchapter S's or, in this
case, an LLC or a sole proprietorship. And therefore, when she files her
business tax returns, she pays individual income taxes. And therefore,
when you hear us talking about providing tax relief to individuals, it
ought to be providing tax relief to individuals and to the small-
business sector of America. See, we want taxes low for Sharon so her
business, which has now gone from not-for-profit to for-profit--that's
always a good sign, by the way, if you're a businessperson. [Laughter]
Isn't that right?
Ms. Rainey. Yes, sir.
The President. You can say ``for-profit.'' We want her business to
flourish. She hired a person recently, I understand--or not?
Ms. Rainey. I've hired three people recently. I've now gone up to
six part-time employees.
The President. Let me talk to you about--see, she hired three. And
when the entrepreneurial spirit is strong in the country, the Sharons of
America hire three people here, three people there, and all of a sudden
it starts to amount to something. And it's--that's why the people are
finding work, because the small-business sector of the country is
strong.
I asked Sharon to come because I think it's such a wonderful example
of somebody who created her own business because of her own ingenuity
and her own drive. And now the role of Government is not to--is to make
sure that the environment is such that she can continue to grow. She's
got to figure out the right product, don't get me wrong. There are no
guarantees in the business world. But I can tell you one guarantee: If
we run the prices up on--run the taxes up on Sharon, it's going to be
hard for her to expand.
That's why you've got to be careful about this rhetoric, ``We're
only going to tax the rich.'' You know who the--the rich in America
happen to be the small-business owners. That's what that means. Just
remember, when you're talking about, oh, ``We're just going to run up
the taxes on a certain number of people.'' First of all, real rich
people figure out how to dodge taxes. [Laughter] And the small-business
owners end up paying a lot of the burden of this taxation. Third, I want
to make another point. We shouldn't be taking more than 35 percent of
anybody's money anyway, Federal taxes ought to be--[applause].
Sharon is a small-business owner. We want more people owning their
own small business. There's some incredibly helpful--hopeful signs in
this country. The number of minority small-business owners are
increasing--is increasing. It's--the number is going up, and that's
really important and hopeful.
[[Page 1507]]
The number of women-owned businesses is increasing, and that is, I
think, really positive news for the country. We want people to say,
``This is my business; I own my business,'' just like we want people
saying, ``I own my own home.''
And so, therefore, policies over the next 4 years will be to
encourage others to own their own home, to expand the homeownership in
America. Right now the homeownership rate is the highest ever. We want
more people owning their own home.
And so we've got Kevin with us, Kevin Brault, first-time homeowner.
He's a fellow that walks out for the first time and says, ``Welcome to
my home.'' So what's it like to say, ``Welcome to my home''?
Mr. Brault. It feels great. So I purchased my home, first home, in
November of 2001. And at that time, it was close to 2 months after
September 11th. So I was a little hesitant as to, you know, whether the
economy was going to stay strong, what was going to happen in this area,
because my home is just a couple miles away. So I went forward and
decided to take that step, to create my own ownership and create my own
net worth. And it's been a great decision. Since then, the net worth of
the home has increased over 50 percent. Then with interest rates coming
down last summer, I was able to refinance from 6.5 percent to 5 percent,
thus saving over $300 a month on my mortgage.
The President. That's good, yes. You know, when a homeowner starts
talking about his own home--in this case, he starts talking about, ``My
value has gone up''--[laughter]--that means his worth. That means that
in a changing time, it is helpful to know that your portfolio, your
asset base, that which you own, has got a little more value to it. It
kind of changes your attitude, doesn't it, a little bit. You know
something, it changes it so much, he's getting married. That's good.
Where's Lisa?
Mr. Brault. Right there in the blue shirt.
The President. You've probably got some ideas about how to remodel
the home, don't you?
Mr. Brault. Big time, absolutely.
The President. That's a word we use in this administration a lot,
``big time.'' [Laughter] Anyway, this man got relief from taxes, and I
think it says you saved about $800 in '03, same amount in '04, because
when we provided tax relief, we said, ``If you pay taxes, you get
relief.'' That's not the way sometimes tax relief works in Washington.
Sometimes it's, ``We're going to make sure only certain people get tax
relief.'' If you're going to provide relief, it's only fair that
everybody ought to get relief. That's why we reduced all rates, which
seems to make sense. And old Kevin Brault here got him $800. I like to
put it this way: Once you set priorities at the Federal level, Kevin
Brault can spend his own money better than the Government can. Right,
Kevin?
Mr. Brault. That's right.
The President. I was hoping that would be your answer. [Laughter]
And if the tax relief isn't made permanent, his taxes go up; so do
Sharon's. That's why we're having this debate. So does yours; that's
right. That's why we're having this debate in Washington, DC. You see,
when Congress passed the tax relief, parts of the tax relief plan were
set to expire. If Congress doesn't act, the child credit is going to go
down, which means you're going to--if you've got a child, you're paying
higher taxes. The marriage penalty goes up if Congress doesn't act,
which means if you're married, you're going to pay higher taxes. The 10-
percent bracket goes away, which means if you're benefiting from the 10-
percent bracket, you're paying higher taxes. We don't need to be raising
taxes on the American people right now. The taxes ought to be lower, to
keep the economy growing. Good job, Kevin.
Let me talk to you about savings for retirement. We've got Susie and
Chris Ensign with us today. They're savers. Good policy encourages
people to save. And one of the interesting questions that we'll be
confronted with in Government when the baby boomers begin to--really
begin to retire is how to make sure the Social Security system is strong
so that the Ensigns will be able to see something from Social Security.
This is a very important issue for young workers. Old guys like me don't
need to worry about it because the system is solvent for those who have
retired or are near retirement. What we need to worry about is younger
folks, like the Ensigns. And so we're going to talk a
[[Page 1508]]
little bit about savings. I want them to share with the people who might
be listening how they think about savings, what savings means as a young
couple. And maybe they've got some suggestions on Social Security, how
to strengthen the system, how to make it fulfill the promise--better
fulfill the promise that our Government has made.
Welcome. Thank you all for coming. Which one of you going to lead
off?
Mr. Ensign. My name is Chris, and this is my wife, Susie.
The President. Right.
[Mr. Ensign made brief remarks.]
The President. See, what you're hearing is--that's a very
interesting--see, what Chris just said is part of an attitudinal shift
towards Social Security that is taking place in the country. When I was
coming up, it was pretty well assumed that Social Security would be all
right--until people began to calculate the fact that there's a lot of
baby boomers who are going to be on the system relative to the number of
payers into the system, like Chris. And the fundamental question is, can
we change the system by strengthening it, so that Chris can realize
there's something available for him after he pays for me? That's really
what we're talking about, isn't it?
And what he just said was, he said, look, if you look at the rates
of return on the money in the Social Security trust fund, they are so
abysmally low that it is impossible--virtually impossible from a fiscal
perspective to make the system work without raising taxes on him and his
family to the point where it chokes productivity and progress.
And then what he said was, he said, ``Well, would Government please
consider putting aside some of my own money''--at his choice--in a
personal account, an account that he could manage under obviously strict
guidelines but could get a better rate of return for his money than that
which we're now getting inside the Social Security trust. And by the
way, it would be an account that is his own--or their own, that they
could then pass on to whomever they wanted to pass it on to. I support
the idea of creating a personal saving account for younger workers in
order to make sure the system is solvent.
By the way, tax relief provided this family $2,000 in '03 and '04. I
know it doesn't sound like a lot to people inside the Capital, I guess;
that doesn't sound all that much, maybe. It's a lot to these people, and
it enabled them to take advantage of the increased contribution levels
for the IRAs, right? You went from 2,000 to 3,000 for your IRA. That's
helpful. In other words, these good folks decided to take the tax relief
and add to their savings accounts, which provide security in a changing
world.
And so we need to do two things. We need to help people save with
good policy on current plans, perhaps simplify the process. There's now
a lot of savings opportunities. There are IRAs--this kind of IRA, that
kind of IRA--and good policy will be to simplify it and make the rules
clear so as to encourage more savings so people have got their own nest
egg to help them in a changing world. And then, of course, we talked
about Social Security.
I want to thank you all for coming. Good job. You want to say
anything?
Mrs. Ensign. [Inaudible]
The President. Okay, one other thing we're going to talk about today
is health care. I told you we're expanding community health centers so
that low-income folks can get primary care. That's important. The
Government policies, because of helping States with waiver requests,
have expanded SCHIP--those are--that's health care for low-income
children. That was an important policy.
We changed Medicare for the better. We strengthened Medicare.
Remember, Medicare was a system that said, we'll pay for your hospital
stay, in case you've got a heart problem, but we won't pay for the
medicine necessary to prevent you from going to the hospital in the
first place. That doesn't seem to make much sense, did it? And so we've
begun to modernize the system, make it better for our seniors, starting
with the drug discount card. By the way, if you're a senior, you need to
look into the drug discount cards. They'll help you save money.
Next year we're going to have preventative screenings for the first
time in Medicare. Seniors signing up for Medicare will be able to have a
checkup, which seems to make
[[Page 1509]]
sense for the Government. If you're interested in trying to save money
through rational policy, you ought to be checking people early, before
it's too late. That's what we're going to start doing in Medicare. And
then in '06, seniors will have a prescription drug benefit attached to
Medicare, and they'll have the choice necessary to make--to design a
program to suit their needs. This is good policy. You might remember the
issue of Medicare. Year after year after year, politicians talked about
it. This administration got it done.
Most people get their insurance through their business. And small
businesses are having trouble paying for health care. That's the problem
we've got in the country today. A lot of it has to do with frivolous and
junk lawsuits that are running up the cost of health care. By the way,
you can't be pro-small-business and pro-trial-lawyer at the same time.
You can't be pro-doctor and pro-patient and pro-trial-lawyer at the same
time. You have to choose. My opponent made his choice, and he put him on
the ticket. [Laughter] I made my choice. I'm going to work with Congress
for liability reform and for tort reform.
Health savings accounts are a new option for Americans to be able to
say, ``I own my own health savings account,'' and the doctor-patient
relationship is central to the decisionmaking process. That's the core
of our philosophy. I want--we've got Roger Wells. Rog is a vet who has
looked into and utilized a health savings account. I've asked him to
come to explain how they work. Health savings accounts are new. Anything
new in society, when it comes to health, requires a certain amount of
education.
Now, if you're a small-business owner like Sharon is, I want you to
listen to these accounts, because part of the problem we have in our
society is the cost of health care is too high. These accounts will help
reduce the cost of health care for small businesses as well as for
individuals.
Roger, you have got a health savings account. Tell us about it.
[Dr. Wells made brief remarks.]
The President. Let me tell you what he just said, see if I can try
it. I appreciate it. He buys a catastrophic plan that says the insurance
company will pay for anything over $5,000 of health care coverage. So
he's got the comfort of knowing that if something goes terribly wrong,
he's taken care of by the insurance company. He then contributes, tax-
free, into his own account, $5,000. So in other words, he doesn't have
to contribute anything; he can come out of his pocket. But,
nevertheless, there's a tax incentive to do so--so that from zero to
$5,000, he takes care of it.
Now, this is a small-business owner. She can, for her employees, buy
a catastrophic plan with a lower deductible and help the employee with
the money for the incidentals, for the ongoing daily medical expenses.
But anyway, in Roger's case, he puts the $5,000 in tax-free; his
money earns interest tax-free; and if he needs the money to pay medical
expenses in the year, up to $5,000, it comes out tax-free. Now, if he
continues to make good choices--he's from New Hampshire--if he continues
walking those mountains of New Hampshire so that he's healthy, and he
only spends 1,000 of the 5,000, that 4,000 is his. He can put another
5,000 in next year if he chooses. He can use some of the 4,000 to buy
the catastrophic plan. Anyway, my point to you is, is that he gets to
decide, as opposed to a program where somebody else is making the health
care decisions, an insurance bureaucrat, for example, is making the
decisions. And so Roger is now in total charge on a tax-free basis.
These plans will change small businesses. And so small-business
owners need to take a look at health savings accounts. It's a way to
provide good health coverage for employees at a much lower cost basis
than you're probably having to provide now. So I want to thank you for
sharing that with us. Go ahead.
Dr. Wells. Can I say that there is one big problem with this
program?
The President. Sure.
Dr. Wells. It didn't start 10 years ago.
The President. That's right. Are you a big animal or a little
animal?
Dr. Wells. I do horses only.
The President. Horses only?
Dr. Wells. Horses only.
[[Page 1510]]
The President. I was going to say, Barney has got him a headache
and--[laughter]--you know who Barney is, don't you? [Laughter]
I hope you found this discussion interesting. I certainly did. What
we're talking about here is we want people--when you hear me talk about
ownership society, that's what I'm talking about, how to help people
control their own lives. If you really think about what we're talking
about, we're talking about policies that say to the American people,
``You're in control of your life, not the Government. The Government is
not dictating how you do things; you are.''
And I want to thank you all for sharing these with us. I've got time
to answer a couple of questions, if you might have some. I'm not--it
kind of gives me a chance to warm up for press conferences. [Laughter]
I do want to say something about the Faith-Based Initiative that I
talk a lot about. I understand the strength of this country is the
hearts and souls of our citizens. Over the next 4 years, I will continue
to rally what I call the armies of compassion, because I believe that
society can change, one heart and one soul and one conscience at a time,
when people who have got love in their hearts put their arm around
somebody in need and says, ``How can I help you, brother or sister? What
can I do to help save your life?''
Listen, there are wonderful Government programs, and they will
continue to exist so long as they're producing good results. But one of
the things we've got to recognize in this country is that coming out of
our churches and synagogues and mosques are programs all designed to
help save lives. And our society should not fear allowing faith-based
programs to competitively bid for social service grants, if we're
focused on changing the country.
I'm running again and asking for your help because I've got a plan
to make the country safer. I know what we need to do. We've got a plan
to make the country stronger, and we've got a plan to make the country
better for every citizen. I'm not talking about a handful; I'm talking
about everyone, in every corner of America.
I'll tell you what, let me answer some questions. I'll be glad to
answer a couple of questions, and then I've got to head back downtown to
get some work done.
Yes, ma'am.
Education
Q. Yes, education. I'm a fourth grade teacher.
The President. First, let me stop you. Thank you for teaching.
Q. You're welcome. What can you do for our children in public
education, private education, that will make a difference in America
today?
The President. Here's what we're going to do. We're going to
continue to challenge the soft bigotry of low expectations, is what
we're going to do. And by that, I mean--let me tell you what that means.
That means if you set the bar low, you're going to get lousy results. It
starts with recognizing that every child can learn to read and write and
add and subtract and that we must not allow systems to develop that just
shuffle kids through. That's what's happening; let's be frank about it.
We had systems--school systems around this country that evidently didn't
think certain kids could learn, so they just moved them on, you know?
And guess what happened? When they came out at the end, they couldn't
read. And everybody went, ``Oops, what went wrong?''
So we've changed that in Washington. We've increased Federal
funding. Title I money is up by 52 percent since I became the President.
Elementary and secondary school programs are up by 49 percent. Those are
healthy increases in spending. But--well, there's more than just
spending when it comes to schools. Now we're asking the question, show
us. See, for the first time the Federal Government is saying to school
districts, we expect to see results. We want our kids reading by--at
grade level by the third grade. There's nothing wrong with asking that.
It seems like a legitimate request.
And in this program, the No Child Left Behind law, it says that if
you are not reading by grade level by the third grade, there's extra
help. See, what we know--and the Congressman and the Senator understand
this very well--is that we know accountability
[[Page 1511]]
systems can be used to change lives, as opposed--you don't use the
accountability system to punish people. You use the accountability
system to determine where you need extra help. It's a way to determine
whether or not the curriculum is working.
Listen, some of the reading programs around the country don't work.
They've got--they use the wrong methodology. And we need to know that,
don't we? If we expect every child to be learning at grade level, we
need to know. And so first thing we've done is, we've changed the whole
attitude toward public schools. It's an optimistic attitude. It says, we
know every child can read and we expect every child to read, and
therefore, why don't you show us? And if not, there will be extra help.
We need to, by the way, bring that attitude to our preschool
programs. I believe that--I know there's curriculum available for
preschoolers that provide them the basics for reading. And I think our
Head Start programs ought to be encouraged to adopt very simple
curricula, but based upon the science of reading. My friend Reid Lyons
at the NIH is a pro, an expert. He understands how kids learn to read.
And therefore, it seems to make sense, since we're spending Federal
dollars on Head Start, if as part of the core curriculum of Head Start
be to lay the foundation for little kids reading. We need intensive
reading programs. You got me started here, and I'm going to keep going.
I've laid out intensive reading programs for kids in junior high and
high school. We need to intervene now, before it's too late. We can no
longer say, ``Gosh, let's hope for the best,'' because we're now living
in a world where if you can't think, it's going to be hard to be a
productive worker in the workplace. And so, therefore, this economy is
changing; education must change with it.
By the way, we've added a million kids over my administration who've
received Pell grants to go to college. That's an achievement; I want to
thank the Congress for working with us on that. It says, basically, when
you're coming out of high school with the ability to go to college and
you're poor, we're going to help you go. See, part of making sure that
kids work hard in high school is that they realize there's help coming
out of high school in order to be able to continue to realize their
dreams.
No, we're making great progress on education. There's more to do,
and that's why I want to continue being the President.
Any other questions here? Yes, ma'am.
Small and Minority Business/Tax Policy
Q. Hi. I'm a woman businessowner, along with my husband. And I'd
like to know what encouragement you have for minority business
development at a Federal and local level for contracting. Thank you.
The President. Yes. No, I appreciate that. First of all, the SBA is
geared up to help small minority businesses. We've increased the number
of loans out of SBA by 40 percent, all aimed at spreading the
entrepreneurial spirit.
Secondly, the best thing that can happen--I can't speak for local
government. You're going to have to call the mayor or the Governor or
something like that, anyway. [Laughter] But I can talk about Federal
contracting. And the best thing--I think Federal contracting ought to be
used to enhance entrepreneurship and small businesses. And therefore,
we've got to make sure that Federal contracts are broken down to small--
smaller contracts so small businesses have a chance to participate.
By the way, good tax policy--I can't emphasize enough the need to
have good tax policy. If you're a small business and your small business
is beginning to grow, and the Government runs the taxes up on you, it's
going to make it harder to survive, pure and simple. And that's why it's
very important for us in this campaign--for people listening to this
campaign to remember that when you got about $2.2 trillion of new money
promised to spend, you've got to figure out how to pay for it. Yes, I
know how he's going to pay for it: You're going to pay for it. But we're
not going to let him. That's why we're going to win the campaign.
Yes.
Iran/North Korea/Cooperation in Foreign Policy
Q. I'm concerned about the nuclear threat coming out of Iran.
The President. Yes.
[[Page 1512]]
Q. I was just wondering if you could comment on that.
The President. Well, I appreciate that. He's concerned about Iran,
as am I. That's why early in my administration I talked about Iran in
vivid terms. First of all, you've got to understand that every situation
requires a different response when it comes to foreign policy, and so we
tailor our responses based upon the reality of the moment. And first is
to make it clear to the world that Iran must abandon her nuclear
ambitions. That's part of the role of the United States, and to work
with others to send that same message. The IAEA is the agency
principally responsible for the Iranian nuclear program. We're working
closely with them. We're making sure that we ask the hard questions to
the IAEA so they ask the hard questions to the Iranians. We got the
Iranians to sign what's called--not we, the world got the Iranians to
decide--to sign what's called an additional protocol, which will allow
for site inspections that normally would not have been allowed under
IAEA. In other words, the groundwork, the ability to inspect as best as
possible, is in place.
Secondly, the tactics of our--as you know, we don't have
relationships with Iran. I mean, that's--ever since the late '70s we
have no contacts with them, and we've totally sanctioned them. In other
words, there's no sanctions--you can't--we're out of sanctions. And so
we've relied upon others to send the message for us. And the foreign
ministers of Germany, France, and Great Britain have gone in as a group
to send a message on behalf of the free world that Iran must comply with
the demands of the free world. And that's where we sit right now. And my
attitude is we've got to continue to keep pressure on the Government and
help others keep pressure on the Government, so there's kind of a
universal condemnation of illegal weapons activities.
As well, the United States does have an opportunity to speak clearly
to those who love freedom inside of Iran, and we are. There is a
significant diaspora, here in the United States, of Iranian Americans
who long for their homeland to be liberated and free. We're working with
them to send messages to their loved ones and their relatives through
different methodology. And one method--and very overt, I might add--
we've got radio broadcasts, a new radio broadcast system going into
Iran--say, ``Listen, we hear your voice. We know you want to be free,
and we stand with you in your desire to be free.''
I will tell you, a free Iraq is going to send a clear message to
people in Iran as well, that free societies are possible. That's why I
say this is an historic moment in our history, and it really is. When
you think about it, a free country in the midst of the Middle East will
send a very clear signal that freedom is possible. In other words, there
are reformers and people who want to be free watching carefully as to
whether or not this country, which is the beacon of freedom, is strong
enough not to wilt when the pressure gets significant.
I tell this story a lot--I'll share it with you--about my friend
Prime Minister Koizumi of Japan. And we were having Kobe beef one day
and--it's quite good, I might add, and--[laughter]--this was in Tokyo.
And you know what? We were talking about another subject that I'm sure
is a concern of yours as well, and that's North Korea. And it was an
amazing conversation, when you think about it, wasn't it, that I was
talking to my friend, 55 years or so after World War II had ended, about
how to keep the peace in a troubled part of the world. We made the
decision--I made the decision that, on North Korea, that the kind of
bilateral negotiations weren't working. If you might recall, my
predecessor thought he had an arrangement with the North Koreans that
they did not honor. And it's a lesson that it's important to remember.
So I made the decision to bring other nations in to help send the
same message to North Korea. It's a more effective way of doing things
if there's more than one voice willing to say the same thing. That's why
China is very much involved in the process now, which is helpful. And
Japan is too. And so Prime Minister Koizumi and I were talking about how
to make sure the six-party talks sent the same message to Kim Chong-il,
which is, get rid of your nuclear weapons program and there will be--in
a verifiable way that gives us all confidence that he has done
[[Page 1513]]
so, and then perhaps there's a way to help them economically.
And during the course of the conversation, I became very thankful
because my predecessors believed that Japan could self-govern. If you
read some of the editorials and some of the writings right after World
War II, there was a lot of doubt as to whether or not a country like
Japan could self-govern, could be a democracy. But there were people
here who had great faith in the transformation power--the transformative
power of liberty and stood their ground. And there I was talking to a
duly elected official of Japan about peace.
Someday, an American President is going to be talking to elected
officials, an elected official from Iraq, talking about how to keep the
peace. Free societies are peaceful societies. And free societies join
this fantastic alliance of those of us who long for peace deep in our
heart, an alliance of countries willing to work on the tough issues like
Iran and North Korea, all aimed at bringing these difficult solutions to
a peaceful conclusion.
And anyway, it's a long answer to an important question, but
nevertheless, it's one--[applause]--let me finish; one other thing. It
says that good foreign policy works with other countries, and we will.
Remember now, one of the dangers of this world is the proliferation of
weapons and technologies. And there's over 60 nations involved with the
Proliferation Security Initiative, an initiative that we helped put
together during my administration. Some 40 nations are involved in
Afghanistan. Nearly 30 nations are involved in Iraq. We've got good,
strong alliances of people working together. I'm never going to turn
over our national security needs to leaders of other countries, however.
Yes, sir. You look like a man with a question.
Q. I drive a school bus, so I don't need your microphone. [Laughter]
The President. Okay, good.
Judicial Nominees
Q. [Inaudible]--concerned about the judicial nominees. I watch it
every day on
C-SPAN. I'd like to know what--[inaudible].
The President. I appreciate that. Listen, his question is about the
judicial nominees and the fact that they're roadblocked in the United
States Senate by procedures that--have they ever been used before,
George, the filibuster on judicial nominees? Never been used? According
to Allen, they've never been used before. [Laughter] Not to this
extent--he qualified it. [Laughter]
But it's a problem, because I think my nominees deserve an up-or-
down vote on the floor of the United States Senate. So I guess, you
know, they're playing politics. I appreciate your question, because
they're playing politics. That's all that is. And I'm picking good
people from all walks of life. I named a man to be on the DC District
Court, Miguel Estrada, first-generation American citizen, a brilliant
man. What a story. He comes over from--comes up from Honduras, learns
the language, works hard, got a family that loved him. He's now named
for the circuit court and gets turned down. They wouldn't even give him
a vote. And that's just pure politics.
You know what the answer to your question is? We've got to elect
more Senators who aren't going to play politics with my nominees. I'm
going to keep talking about it too. They may think they're going to wear
me down; they're not. I'm going to keep talking about it. I'm going to
keep telling the people of this country they've got a clear choice when
it comes to President. They want people on the court who will strictly
interpret the law, they ought to put me back in. If they want somebody
who is going to put judges that will try to write the law from the
bench, they got the wrong man in George W. I'm not changing, either.
All right, last question. You've got one? Go ahead, and yell her
out. Oh, then he better take the mike, then. Yes, put it up there. Say
that again so everybody can hear it.
Support for Volunteer Fire Departments/Trade Policy
Q. I'm from Southside, Virginia, and I've helped the volunteer fire
departments a number of years. We've had times raising money. And since
you've been in, the Federal money that you appropriated to us, we
appreciate it a lot.
[[Page 1514]]
The President. You bet, thanks. First of all, he and I share a
couple of things in common. We're both voting for me. [Laughter] And we
both support volunteer fire departments. I'm a proud supporter of the
Crawford Volunteer Fire Department. And you're--what's your volunteer
fire department?
Q. Chase City.
The President. There you go. Chase City, Virginia.
Let me talk about rural life real quick. One of the things--are
there any farmers here? Yes, there you go. The farm economy is strong.
You know why? One, good policy; good tax policy; and secondly--and
thirdly, because we're opening up markets. If you're good at something
like growing things, like people in Virginia are, they ought to be
selling their product overseas in different markets around the world.
Let me tell you real quick about trade policy. There's a lot of talk
about it, and the temptation for the other side is to say, ``We'll--I'll
handle it by becoming economic isolationists.'' That's no good, to kind
of wall ourselves off from the rest of the world. That's pessimistic.
And that will make it harder for small businesses to thrive and people
to find good-paying jobs. Here's what--here's the reality of trade. Most
Presidents believe that we should open up U.S. markets for foreign
goods. You know why? Because it's good for consumers. The more
opportunities consumers have to choose, the better price they'll get at
better quality. That's the way the marketplace works. And that's the
policy today, and opening up our markets has been beneficial to U.S.
consumers.
And so the fundamental question is, can we get other countries to
treat us the way we treat them? That's trade policy. And the answer is,
absolutely, we will.
One way you do so is through agreements--is you negotiate free trade
agreements. And we've done so for the benefit of U.S. farmers and
manufacturers and entrepreneurs and, eventually, workers, because if
you're selling product, for example, in Australia--we just got a new
deal with Australia--if you're selling products in Australia, you're
going to be working in order to make the product that the Australians
are buying.
And the second thing to do is to enforce laws. That's why we've gone
after China a couple of times, to say to China, ``You must, if you're
going to trade with us, be fair about how you treat our people and our
products.''
Now, you had a question? What is it? Both of you combine your
question; then I've got to go back to work. Okay, you've got two.
Taiwan
Q. Yes, I am Taiwanese American, and I am concerned about China has
more than 500 missiles against Taiwan. How do you be able to keep the
key area of peace for Taiwan and the world?
The President. Yes, we just make it clear to both sides that our
policy hasn't changed--``one China'' policy based upon the three
communiques, and neither side shall unilaterally change the
circumstances by which a peaceful resolution will be achieved. And
that's just where we'll keep working both sides to see if we can't see
that that very important issue be resolved peacefully. It's essential
that both sides understand my position as clearly stated, and I've
stated it publicly just like I just did, and I will continue to state
it. And I'm convinced this issue can be solved peacefully. It's just
going to take some time to do so. And we'll continue to work to see to
it that it does.
Where is the lady that wanted to ask a question? Do you have the
same question he did or another one? Another one. Okay, this is the last
question.
Government Fiscal Accountability/Federal Deficit
Q. Mine is sort of different. I am more concerned about the
Government waste. How do you propose to control either domestic waste
within the spending, accountability for spending?
The President. Yes.
Q. And also, especially foreign aid. I tend to develop compassion
fatigue when it comes to foreign aid when I hear about the U.N. Oil for
Food Programme fraud. That's a very big concern----
The President. Yes.
[[Page 1515]]
Q. ----because I pay taxes, and I expect it to be spent wisely.
The President. I appreciate that. That's a good question. I was
hoping somebody would ask that question. [Laughter] Let me talk about
budgeting and spending, and then I'll talk about accountability when it
comes to spending.
Let me--I'll start with that. I just came from a meeting with Clay
Johnson. He's my close friend that--he was my college roommate,
actually--who is the ``M'' in OMB, Office of Management and Budget. And
his job as the ``M'' in OMB is to say to agencies, we expect there to be
results-oriented systems throughout your agencies. And we've actually
got a scorecard, a management scorecard, of how well agencies are doing
with, for example, responding to taxpayers through e-mail, how well
they're doing to make sure their programs are actually delivering
results. And so we're working hard to see to it that these giant
bureaucracies become results-oriented. There are all kinds of ways to
measure, and we've got a good measurement system in place to do so.
There is a--look, my job is to submit budgets that will bring
confidence to the marketplaces, as well as to the taxpayers. And that
means setting priorities and meeting those priorities without overtaxing
the American people. And we have done that. I want you to know that--let
me put in the context of the deficit.
Yes, we've got a deficit, for three reasons. One, there was a
recession. And a recession costs the Treasury money unless there's a
corresponding cut in spending. And there wasn't.
Two, there is a deficit because I made the decision to go after the
enemy, and we were going to spend whatever money was necessary to defend
ourselves. And the Congress supported me, by and large. Some in the
Senate didn't support the $87 billion. [Laughter]
Audience members. Boo-o-o!
The President. But most of them did, guys like George Allen, who
said if you're going to put people in harm's way, they deserve the right
pay and right equipment.
Thirdly, part of the reason we have this deficit is because I
believed in order to get the economy moving forward, there should be tax
relief. And it's working; the tax relief is working. It's going to be
one of the interesting arguments in the campaign. I will make the case
that it is working, and that you don't need to run up taxes.
Now, when I first came into office, nonhomeland, nondefense
discretionary spending increased at 15 percent. This year, the budget
we've requested from the House and the Senate is--nondefense,
nonhomeland spending, discretionary spending, is increasing at less than
1 percent. And so the step one--step one is to set priorities and hold
Congress to working with those priorities. And Congress has been very
good. Speaker Hastert and Leader Frist have worked very closely with the
administration to achieve good top-line budget numbers. So I can say to
you that the deficit will be cut in half over the next 5 years, and
we've just got to keep working that way.
And so there's two--I kind of took two points from your questions.
One was, the overall budget numbers, how does it relate--are we able to
contain spending to the point where we can say to the people that this
deficit is beginning to decrease? Now remember, the deficit, again, was
caused by recession. We're coming out of that--we're out of it.
Secondly, it was caused by the war. We're still in the war. And,
thirdly, the tax relief helped us generate more revenues.
And by the way, in the midseason--midsession review--I don't know if
you saw this, George, or not, but the projected deficit of last February
has already been decreased fairly significantly because the economy is
getting stronger. And when the economy strengthens, more revenues come
into--[applause].
I've got to go back--listen, I've got to get back to the White House
and make sure we're spending money wisely. But I want to thank you for
your question. I want to thank you all for coming today. I want to thank
you for support. May God bless you, and may God continue to bless our
country.
Note: The President spoke at 10:05 a.m. in the Ernst Community Cultural
Center Gymnasium. In his remarks, he referred to Robert G. Templin, Jr.,
president, Northern Virginia Community College; Virginia Attorney
General Jerry W. Kilgore;
[[Page 1516]]
and G. Reid Lyon, Chief, Child Development and Behavior Branch, National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of
Health.