[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 42, Number 17 (Monday, May 1, 2006)]
[Pages 769-781]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks on Immigration Reform and a Question-and-Answer Session in 
Irvine, California

April 24, 2006

    The President. Thank you all. Please be seated. Thanks for letting 
me come by. Tom, thanks for the invitation. What I thought I would do is 
share some thoughts with you on some issues that kind of, like, may be 
on the TV screen these days--[laughter]--and then answer some of your 
questions. I'm interested to know what's on your mind.
    First, I've had a fabulous trip to your unbelievably beautiful 
State. It started off in northern California--Cisco; then I went to 
Stanford; then I went to Napa Valley. Then I rode my bicycle on Earth 
Day in Napa Valley. Then I found out the mountains are a little steep in 
Napa Valley. [Laughter] I then went down and spent a fantastic time in 
Palm Springs. What an unbelievably diverse State, and it's a fantastic 
place to end my journey, here in Orange County. I want to thank you for 
giving me a chance to come by and visit with you.
    Laura sends her very best. I, of course, checked in with her this 
morning before I headed over here, to see if she had any additional 
instructions for me for the day. [Laughter] She said, ``Keep it short.'' 
[Laughter] I'm a lucky man to have Laura as a wife. You can imagine what 
it's like to be President--there's some pressure on your family, as you 
can imagine. The good news is, I've got a 45-second commute. [Laughter] 
And the better news is, I've got a wife who is a fantastic First Lady, 
who shares a passion

[[Page 770]]

with me to do the best we can for our country.
    I want to thank Lucy Dunn, as well as thanking Tom for putting this 
event together. I appreciate the members of the Orange County Business 
Council. I want to thank Congressman John Campbell for his service; 
appreciate you. He's the Congressman from this district, by the way. And 
Catherine is with us. thank--Congresswoman Mary Bono is with us today. 
Mary, thank you for being here. I just spent some quality time in her 
district, and I forgot to tell you that I had the privilege of riding my 
mountain bike in the desert as well. The national monument that she 
helped put together to preserve open spaces--she's got a lot of 
humility; she didn't name the national monument after herself. If I were 
to name it, I would say, ``Really Hard Bike Ride Monument.'' [Laughter]
    I want to thank Congressman Ken Calvert for joining us today. Ken, 
it's good to see you; proud of you. Congressman Gary Miller is with us 
today. Congressman, thank you. Mayor Beth Krom of city of Irvine--Madam 
Mayor, thank you for being here. Thanks for serving. There you are, 
Mayor. Thank you; appreciate you coming. Thanks for serving. I had--last 
night, by the way, I had dinner last night with the Mayor of Los Angeles 
and Mayor of Long Beach and Mayor of Anaheim, and some other mayors that 
came.
    Real important for the President to pay attention to people, what's 
on their mind, and that's what I'm here to do today. I want to share 
some things that's on my--first of all, Rick Warren, by the way, is 
here. Where are you, Rick? There you go. I appreciate you. Still got the 
calendar in the desk. [Laughter] Ambassador Argyros, good to see you, 
George. George served our country as the Ambassador to Spain. Thank you.
    I got a lot on my mind these days. I want to share two thoughts with 
you. First, I want to talk about the war on terror. I wish I could 
report to you that the war on terror was over. It's not. There is still 
an enemy that wants to do us harm. And the most important job of the 
President of the United States is to protect the American people from 
that harm. That's--and I think about it all the time.
    As you know, well, I make a lot of decisions, and at the core of my 
decisionmaking when it comes to protecting America is the lessons 
learned from September the 11th, 2001. My job is to use the resources of 
the United States to prevent such an attack from happening again. And 
the first lesson of September the 11th, 2001, is that we face an enemy 
that has no regard for innocent life, an enemy which has hijacked a 
great religion to suit their political needs.
    And therefore, the only way to deal with them is to stay on the 
offense, to pressure them, and to bring them to justice, which is 
precisely what the United States of America is doing and will continue 
to do for the safety of the American people.
    The second lesson is, we must deny these folks safe haven. They need 
to find safe haven from which to plot and plan. We denied them safe 
haven in Afghanistan, and we're denying them safe haven in Iraq.
    One of the important things that a President must do is to take the 
words of the enemy very seriously. And when the enemy speaks--and they 
speak quite often--we listen carefully. We listen to their aims and 
their objectives. These are not a kind of isolated, angry people. These 
are folks bound together by an ideology that is totalitarian in nature. 
They believe that capitalism produces weak societies. They want to 
spread their idea of life throughout the Middle East; they have stated 
so--in word after word. And they believe that with time, they can 
establish a safe haven in Iraq.
    And here's the danger of having an enemy with a safe haven in Iraq: 
Iraq has got wealth. Iraq has--had weapons of mass destruction and has 
the knowledge as to how to produce weapons of mass destruction. And the 
confluence of a terrorist network with weapons of mass destruction is 
the biggest threat the United States of America faces. They have said 
it's just a matter of time.
    And they've got a powerful weapon, by the way--the enemy does. And 
that is the willingness and capacity to kill innocent people. And they 
understand the United States of America is a compassionate nation. They 
view--I'm sure they view this as a weakness of our country; I happen to 
view it as a strength that we value every life, that every

[[Page 771]]

person is precious. But they know, and it doesn't take much to realize 
that when you put carnage on our TV screens, it causes us to weep. It 
causes people, rightly, to say whether or not the cause is worth it. 
It's a legitimate question for the American people.
    But it's very important for the American people to understand that 
they're trying to run us out of Iraq for a purpose. And the purpose is 
to be able to have safe haven from which to launch further attacks. And 
I understand it. And we've got a strategy in place to achieve victory.
    Yesterday I went over to Twentynine Palms--I want to tell you 
something about the United States military: These young men and women 
are incredibly dedicated. They are motivated. They understand that we 
must defeat the enemy over there so we do not have to face them here at 
home. Most of them raised their hand to volunteer after September the 
11th. Many of them have said, ``I want to continue to serve our 
country.'' We're lucky to have people like them willing to serve. And 
the United States Government, whether you agree with my policy or not, 
must stand by our troops. When they're in harm's way, they deserve the 
best pay, the best equipment, and the best possible support.
    And I told them, I told them they didn't have to worry about me. I 
believe we're going to win in Iraq. And a victory in Iraq will be a 
major blow to the totalitarian vision of bin Laden and his lieutenants--
a major blow. One, it will be a tactical blow. We'll deny them that 
which they want. But secondly, it will be a major blow because, in the 
long term, the best way to defeat an ideology of hatred is with an 
ideology of hope.
    I base a lot of my foreign policy decisions on some things that I 
think are true: One, I believe there's an Almighty; and secondly, I 
believe one of the great gifts of the Almighty is the desire in 
everybody's soul, regardless of what you look like or where you live, to 
be free. I believe liberty is universal. I believe people want to be 
free. And I know that democracies do not war with each other. And I know 
that the best way to defeat the enemy, the best way to defeat their 
ability to exploit hopelessness and despair is to give people a chance 
to live in a free society.
    You know, the Iraqis went to the polls last December for the third 
time in one year. It seems like a decade ago, doesn't it? It seems like 
it was just an eternity ago that 12 million people defied terrorists, 
threats, and said, ``We want to be free. We're sick and tired of a 
society that had been suppressed by a brutal tyrant. We want to go to 
the polls. We want to be self-governing.'' I wasn't surprised; I was 
pleased, but not surprised. If you believe that liberty exists in the 
soul of each person on the face of the Earth, it shouldn't surprise you 
that, given the chance, people will say, ``We want to be free.'' And now 
the role of the United States is to stand by the courageous Iraqis as 
their democracy develops.
    It's not easy work, by the way, to go from tyranny to democracy. We 
had kind of a round go ourself, if you look back at our history. My 
Secretary of State's relatives were enslaved in the United States even 
though we had a Constitution that said all were--that believed in the 
dignity, or at least proclaimed to believe in the dignity of all. The 
Articles of Confederation wasn't exactly a real smooth start for our 
Government to begin. And what you're watching on your TV screens is a 
new democracy emerging. And I had the privilege of calling the President 
of Iraq, the new Speaker of Iraq, and the Prime Minister-designee of 
Iraq, there at--in the comfort of my hotel room in Palm Desert--Palm 
Springs. And I can't tell you how heartened I was to hear their words.
    First of all, they expressed great appreciation for the American 
people and our troops and the families of our troops. Secondly, to a 
person--this is a Kurd, a Shi'a, and a Sunni I'm talking to--each one of 
them said, ``We want to have a national unity government. We're sick of 
the sectarian violence. We believe if you stand with us, we can achieve 
our objective of becoming a democracy that listens to the people.'' And 
I believe them. And I believe them. And I told them--I said, look, it's 
going to be up to you to make it work, but you can count on the United 
States of America because we believe in liberty and the capacity of 
liberty to change lives and to change the neighborhood for a more 
peaceful tomorrow.

[[Page 772]]

    This is a new chapter in our relationship. We had an important 
milestone when the unity government was formed, and now there's a new 
chapter in the relationship, and we're moving forward.
    You know, it's really important for people to be able to connect the 
concept of freedom to our security. And it's hard. It's hard, 
particularly in a day and age when every act of violence is put in your 
living room. And I know that. I fully understand the challenge I face as 
the Commander in Chief to describe to the American people why the 
sacrifice is worth it.
    And perhaps the best way to do so is to share one of my favorite 
lessons of history with you, and that is that my relationship with Prime 
Minister Koizumi of Japan is a special relationship. He's an interesting 
guy. He's a--and he's a friend, and we work to keep the peace. We sit 
down--when we sit down, we talk about the importance of democracy 
developing in Iraq. The Japanese had troops, by the way, in Iraq to help 
this young country. We talked about North Korea. We talk about issues of 
peace. I find it so interesting and so ironic that those are the 
conversations I have with him, especially since 60 years ago, my dad--
and I suspect many of your relatives--fought the Japanese as the enemy.
    And so what happens between 18-year-old George H.W. Bush, Navy 
fighter pilot, signing up to fight the sworn enemy of Japan, and his son 
sitting down to talk about the peace? What happened was, Japan adopted a 
Japanese-style democracy. Democracy can help change the world and lay 
the foundation for peace. And that's what's happening today. These are 
historic times. My job is to lead this Nation to protect you, and my job 
is to lay the foundation of peace for generations to come. And that is 
why I told those marines yesterday that we're going to complete the 
mission.
    I got a lot of other things to talk about. I want to talk about 
immigration. So I saw my friend Brulte, ex-politician, you know? Always 
a friend. He said, ``People are wondering why you would come to Orange 
County to talk about immigration.'' [Laughter] And the answer is because 
that's what a leader does.
    And I want to talk to you, tell you my thoughts about the subject. 
First of all, I understand it is an emotional subject. And it's really 
important that those of us who have microphones and can, you know, 
express ourselves, do so in a respectful way that recognizes we are a 
nation of immigrants, that we have had a grand tradition in this country 
of welcoming people into our society. And ours is a society that is able 
to take the newly arrived, and they become equally American. I believe 
that immigration has helped reinvigorate the soul of America. I know 
that when somebody comes to our country because he or she has a dream 
and is willing to work hard for that dream, it makes America a better 
place.
    Now, first and foremost, the Federal Government has the role to 
enforce our border. The American people are right in saying to the 
Government, enforce the border. Listen, I was an old border Governor. I 
understand it's important to enforce our border, and we are. We got a 
lot of good people down there working hard on the border to keep people 
from coming--and contraband, or whatever--from coming into this country 
illegally. We've increased the number of Border Patrol. And I want to 
thank the Congresswoman and Congressmen here, for being wise about 
providing resources to increase the number of patrol on the border. But 
that's not enough.
    We've got to have modern equipment to be able to help people find 
people that are coming across a very long and difficult border--to 
protect; so we got infrared. Unmanned vehicles are being--aerial 
vehicles are being--UAVs are being deployed. I mean, we're now beginning 
to modernize our border so that the people we've asked to enforce the 
border have got the tools necessary to do so. In parts of the rural 
border, there needs to be berms to prevent people from flying across in 
their SUVs, smuggling people into America. And we're strengthening this 
border. I'll tell you something that's interesting: Since 2001, 6 
million people have been caught illegally trying to get in this country, 
and turned back--6 million people. So people are working down there, and 
they're working hard.

[[Page 773]]

    And I'm going to continue to work with Congress. I know these people 
from Congress are interested in providing the Border Patrol and those 
responsible for enforcing the border the tools necessary to do their 
job, and I thank you for that.
    Secondly, we have got a problem with--we have a problem we're going 
to solve this year, by the way, of catching people from--non-Mexican 
illegal immigrants, and just sending them back into society. There 
wasn't enough detention beds. So you got the people down there working 
hard and 6 million people caught since 2001 and sent home. Well, most of 
the Mexican citizens who were caught trying to illegally come in the 
country just sent back to their country. But if you catch somebody from 
Central America coming back, you just can't send them back for a while, 
so there needs to be a place to detain them. We didn't have enough 
bedspace. And so we had catch-and-release. We're asking people to go 
down there and do their job, and they find somebody from Central America 
sneaking in, and they say, ``Check back in with us in 45 days; come and 
see your immigration guy down there.'' [Laughter] And they weren't 
checking back in after 45 days. [Laughter] They were coming to work, 
see. They wanted to put food on the table for their families, and they 
weren't interested in checking back in.
    And so it meant there was a lot of wasted effort by the Border 
Patrol. We're going to change that. One of the things that Congress has 
done, it's done a good job of providing additional money for bedspace 
and money to make sure that we can send people back home. You got people 
coming up who want to work, see. They're going broke at home; they want 
to put food on the table; they go to unbelievable lengths to come and 
feed their families. We're catching them; we're putting them back in--
we're stopping that. Our job is to enforce this border--6 million people 
have been turned back. And we got a strategy in place to make sure that 
this border is as tight as it possibly can be.
    Secondly, in order to make sure immigration laws work, you got to 
enforce the laws on the books, see. If it's illegal to hire somebody, 
then the Federal Government has got to enforce those laws. We're a 
nation of law. And by the way, you can be a nation of law and a 
compassionate nation at the same time. You don't have to be--[applause].
    Now, the problem we have is, is you got some person out there in 
central Texas needing a worker, and he can't find a worker, an American. 
And so he says, ``Look, is anybody--help me find somebody? I got 
something to do.'' This economy is growing, see--4.7 percent 
unemployment rate nationwide--pretty good numbers. And people are having 
trouble finding work that's--Americans won't do, and that's a fact of 
life. And so he says, ``Why don't you send somebody over to help me.'' 
And they show up, and they put a Social Security card out there, and it 
looks real. You know, our small-business owners are not document 
checkers. These are people trying to get ahead, and it's impossible to--
[applause]. It's impossible to really effect the enforcement of our laws 
if people are able to use forged documents.
    Now, we've increased the amount of manpower there to hold people to 
account for hiring illegals, but it is difficult to hold somebody, an 
employer to account if they're putting false papers on--the truth of the 
matter is, what's happened is, people are trying to come in this 
country, and we got smugglers smuggling them in. And they're putting 
them in the back of 18-wheelers, stuffing human beings in the back of 
trucks, because they're come--people are coming to do jobs Americans 
won't do. They're putting people out in deserts. We've lost a lot of 
people, a lot of decent, hard-working people--trying to come in this 
country in the desert--losing their lives. These smugglers are coyotes; 
they're, kind of, preying on innocent life. And they've got a whole 
document forgery industry going on.
    See, we made it such that an underground industry thrives on human 
beings, people coming to do work that the Americans will not do. And so 
I think that the best way to enforce our border, and the best way, 
besides making sure it's modern and we've got manpower and equipment 
down there--which we do, and it's increasing every week--is to come up 
with a rational plan that recognizes people coming here to work and let 
them do so on a temporary basis. That's why I'm for a temporary-worker 
program that will--

[[Page 774]]

that says to a person, ``Here is a tamper-proof card that says you can 
come and do a job an American won't do, fill a need.'' Tamper-proof 
card, all of a sudden, makes interior enforcement work. In other words, 
we now know who's getting the cards, and we know they can't be tampered 
with. So when somebody--the guy says, ``Show me your tamper-proof card 
before I hire you.'' And if they do, fine. But if they don't, say, ``I'm 
not hiring you. You got to have the card to get work.''
    Secondly, we got a lot of people sneaking across the border to do 
jobs. It is really hard to enforce the border with people sneaking 
across to do jobs. Doesn't it make sense to have a rational, temporary-
worker plan that says, you don't need to sneak across the border; you 
can come on a temporary basis to do a job Americans won't do. So you 
don't have to sneak across--so you don't have to pay money to a coyote 
that stuffs you in the back of a truck; so you don't have to burden our 
borders.
    Look, we want our Border Patrol hunting down gun smugglers and dope 
runners. And it just seems rational to me and logical to me that says, 
okay, fine, you can come and do a job Americans won't do for a temporary 
period of time with a tamper-proof card.
    All of a sudden, we've kind of taken this smuggling industry and 
dismantled it through rational policy. All of a sudden, we recognize 
that we want to treat people with respect. I know this is an emotional 
debate. And I can understand it's emotional. But one thing we cannot 
lose sight of is that we're talking about human beings, decent human 
beings that need to be treated with respect.
    Massive deportation of the people here is unrealistic. It's just not 
going to work. You can hear people out there hollering, it's going to 
work. It's not going to work. It just--it's--and so therefore, what do 
we do with people who are here? And this is one of the really important 
questions Congress is going to have to deal with.
    I thought the Senate had an interesting approach by saying that if 
you've been here for 5 years or less, you're treated one way; and 5 
years or more, you're treated another. It's just an interesting concept 
that people need to think through, about what to do with people that 
have been here for quite a period of time.
    Now, my attitude is this: I think that people ought to be, 
obviously, here to work on a temporary basis. The definition of 
temporary will be decided in the Halls of Congress.
    Secondly, I believe that a person should never be granted automatic 
citizenship. And let me tell you why I believe that--that if you've been 
here, broken the law and have been here working, that it doesn't seem 
fair to me, to say you're automatically a citizen, when somebody who has 
been here legally working is standing in line trying to become a citizen 
as well. In other words, there's the line for people.
    But what I do think makes sense is that a person ought to be allowed 
to get in line. In other words, pay a penalty for being here illegally, 
commit him or herself to learn English, which is part of the American 
system--and get in the back of the line. In other words, there is a line 
of people waiting to become legal through the green card process. And 
it's by nationality. And if you're a citizen here, who has been here 
illegally, you pay a penalty; you learn English; and you get in line, 
but at the back--not the front. And if Congress wants a shorter line for 
this--for a particular nationality, they increase the number of green 
cards. If they want a longer line, they shrink the number of green cards 
per nationality.
    This is an important debate for the American citizens to conduct. 
It's a debate that requires clear, rational thought, and it's really 
important for those of us in positions of responsibility to remember 
that we're a nation of law, a welcoming nation, a nation that honors 
people's traditions no matter where they're from because we've got 
confidence in the capacity of our Nation to make us all Americans, one 
Nation under God.
    And so that's what's on my mind today--got a lot of other things, if 
you're interested. But I got some time for some--I'd like to answer some 
questions if you got any, or hear from you.
    Yes, sir.

President's Analysis of First Term

    Q. Morning, sir. [Inaudible]

[[Page 775]]

    The President. Pretty good. I think I'm doing all right, yes. 
[Laughter]
    Q. I understand you get a lot of tough questions, and you're very 
candid person, so assuming that you agree with the fact that no one's 
perfect----
    The President. I agree with that.
    Q. Good.
    The President. Especially me. [Laughter]
    Q. I'd like to get your candid response to your perspective from the 
outside looking in, and now the inside looking out. Before you became 
President, obviously, you had some perceptions based on your family 
history, being Governor, what it would be like to be President of the 
U.S. Now that you are President and you've had a chance to go through 
the experience and you're in your second term, candidly, if you had it 
to do over, would there be anything that you'd do differently?
    The President. I appreciate it. The fundamental question--the 
threshold question is, would I run in the first place? That's really the 
first question that one would ask. Now that I'm here, seeing what it's 
like, would I do it again? And the answer is, absolutely.
    I have enjoyed this experience in a way that's hard for me to 
describe to you. Listen, there have been some rough moments. But it is 
an incredible honor to serve our country.
    The second threshold question is, would I commit troops to protect 
the American people? It's really a fundamental question. Knowing what I 
know today, would I have done anything differently with our troops?
    First, you got to know that the hardest decision for a President is 
to put anybody in harm's way--because I fully understand the 
consequences of making such a decision. I was at church yesterday in 
Twentynine Palms. In the pew that I was sitting in was a mother and 
stepfather grieving for a guy who lost his life, and I knew that I would 
have to deal with this as best as I possibly can.
    I also wanted to let you know that it's before you commit troops 
that you must do everything you can to solve the problem diplomatically. 
And I can look you in the eye and tell you, I feel I've tried to solve 
the problem diplomatically to the max, and would have committed troops 
both in Afghanistan and Iraq knowing what I know today.
    Obviously, as we look back--and every war plan is perfect until it 
meets the enemy. It's fine on paper until you actually start putting it 
into practice. And there is a--decisions like preparing an Iraqi Army 
for a--external threat. Well, it turns out, there may have been an 
external threat, but it's nothing compared to the internal threat. We 
got in and started trying to build some big reconstruction projects 
right off the bat. And it didn't make any sense because it was easy 
for--they were--became convenient targets for the enemy. And so we 
started to decentralize our reconstruction--this kind of--I'm getting 
down to the minutia. But there are some tactics that--when I look back--
that we could have done differently.
    The fundamental question on the Iraq theater, though, is, did we put 
enough troops in there in the first place? That's the debate in 
Washington. I'm sure you've heard about it. It's a--here let me just 
tell you what happened. I called Tommy Franks in with Don Rumsfeld and 
said, ``Tommy, if we're going in, you design the plan, and you got what 
you need.'' I said--I remember the era when politicians were trying to 
run wars, people trying to fine-tune this or fine-tune that. One of the 
lessons of Vietnam, it seemed like to me--still does--is that you 
can't--people tried to make decisions on behalf of the military, which I 
think is a terrible precedent to make if you're the Commander in Chief. 
By the way, you can't run a war, you can't make decisions based upon 
polls and focus groups, either.
    And so I told Tommy, I said, ``You know you got what you need.'' And 
then it's my--then the fundamental question is, when I'm looking him in 
the eye, do I think he's comfortable telling the Commander in Chief 
what's real and isn't real? So I spent a lot of time with Tommy, and the 
first time I'm with him I'm trying to figure out whether or not he has 
got the ability to walk in the Oval Office--which can be kind of an 
intimidating place--and say, ``Here's what I think, Mr. President.''
    I was comforted by the fact that Tommy and I were raised in the same 
part of the world. He went to Midland Lee High School

[[Page 776]]

with Laura, by the way. I felt like that there was kind of a kinship to 
begin with, and I'm confident, sir, that Tommy told me exactly what was 
on his mind. I believe that. And so, therefore, the troop level that he 
suggested was the troop level necessary to do the job. And I support it 
strongly.
    And I fully understand people are going to think back and, could you 
have done something different, or not different? And that's fair, and 
it's worthwhile. And we still have Members of Congress who are coming 
in--and they should--are coming in and say, ``Mr. President, have you 
thought about this, or are you going to do that?'' And we're constantly 
adjusting on the ground to meet an enemy which changes. But on the big 
decisions of sending the troops in, I'd have done it again.
    Thank you. Great question.
    Yes, sir.

Vision for the Future

    Q. Good morning--I'm 14 years old, and I was wondering what America 
is going to be like in 10 years. [Laughter]
    The President. Here's what America needs to be like--maybe 20--
[laughter]--10 to 20. You need to be driving an automobile with hydrogen 
as the main source of power. And at the very least, with a hybrid--a 
plug-in battery of a hybrid vehicle that will you get--let you get the 
first 40 miles without using gasoline. In other words, between 10 to 20 
years from now, we got to get off Middle Eastern oil. It's a problem.
    You'll be able to see a technology, a technology that will be able--
enable you to converse with somebody on long distance, and it seems like 
the person is right there in the room with you. I saw that at Cisco. 
It's an amazing technology that will mean that education changes to the 
better. You can hire a--you've got a--if you got yourself a State like 
we got in Texas, that's rural, you can get a chemistry professor from 
one of the urban centers and put them on the screen, and it's like the 
professor is right in the room, teaching. There's a way to husband 
resources.
    You'll have the capacity to interface with people around the world 
in a real-time basis. You'll be able to talk more clearly. Information 
will become even more powerful than it is today. And the fundamental 
question is, what do we do with that information? You'll be confronted 
with very difficult choices when it comes to science. The first choice 
we all have to deal with right off the bat is whether or not it's okay 
to destroy life to save life. In other words, as technology progresses, 
as this country of ours is more technologically advanced, you're going 
to be confronted with serious ethical choices. It's just--there will be 
a clash between morality and science that will present some really 
difficult decisions for people.
    You'll be able to have a leader that can go and sit down with a duly 
elected leader of a major Middle Eastern country, saying, ``How can we 
keep the peace together?'' I believe you'll see there's a democracy 
movement moving across the Middle East over the next 10 years. Much of 
it's going to be led by women who don't want to be a second-class 
citizen in any society. I think you'll see a relationship between the 
United States and other great powers that will enable us to work 
together to be able to provide a stable platform.
    What I hope you don't see is a nation that loses its nerve and 
becomes isolationist and protectionist. That's one of my concerns, so I 
put it in the State of the Union. It was such a concern that, instead of 
going with the--here are the 29 things we're going to do either for you 
or to you, it was--[laughter]--I talked about isolation and 
protectionism. It's very important for this Nation to be a confident 
nation and to remain a leader of the world. You cannot win the war on 
terror if you kind of pull back and say, let somebody else deal with it.
    You can't do your duty as a nation that should subscribe to the 
theory that to whom much is given, much is required--and that duty is to 
help deal with HIV/AIDS, for example, on the continent of Africa. We 
have a duty to help feed the hungry, in my judgment.
    What I hope you don't see is a nation that loses its confidence in 
the capacity to trade with countries like China. Hu Jintao was--came to 
visit, and we had a wonderful visit with him. But I know there are some 
Americans who wonder whether or not it's worth

[[Page 777]]

the effort to try to outcompete with China. They look at the statistics, 
and they worry about whether or not it is possible to compete with 
China. I say, you bet it's possible to compete with China. And not only 
can we compete with China, if we have a level playing field, we'll do 
just fine.
    And so what I'm telling you is, I hope you have a nation that at 
home, is one that is able to balance technology and ethical concerns, a 
nation, by the way--I hope those taxes remain low, see. One of the 
things you got to make sure--you got to have that proper balance between 
what Government really needs and money in your pocket.
    And anyway--great question, by the way, for a 14-year-old guy. I'm 
not so sure if I were 14, I'd have been able to get that question out. I 
might have been a little nervous. [Laughter]
    Let's see--yes, ma'am.

Community Health Centers

    Q. First of all, I want to thank you for coming to Orange County. I 
don't know who said it wasn't a good idea, but I think it's a great 
idea. And we love you, so thank you for being here. I very much support 
your immigration plan. I think it's a good framework. But the one 
question I have--last year my daughter fell and broke her hip--she's 12. 
And it was 5 hours in the emergency room at the hospital before she 
could see a doctor. And a lot of people in the ER were there because it 
was their primary medical facility----
    The President. Correct.
    Q. So in your plan, how do you plan to address health care and 
schools and so forth that are really impacted?
    The President. Community health centers. We--this administration, 
working with the Congress, has funded the expansion of what's called 
community health centers. Community health centers are places for the 
poor and the indigent to get primary care so to do exactly what--to 
address the problem that you described, which is primary care in 
emergency rooms are costly. They are--it's not a cost-effective 
treatment--I guess it is once you get the treatment, but it's not cost-
effective overall and, therefore, the advent of community health 
centers.
    And I don't know if you've got them here in Orange County; I hope 
you do. I bet you do. You don't have any? Well, get to working, 
Congressman. [Laughter] But that's the best way, really, to be able to 
address the issue, whether it be for an immigrant who is here or anybody 
else that cannot afford health care. The best place to get primary care 
is not the emergency rooms. And so we've got a comprehensive strategy. 
And we're expanding them all across the country, and I'm surprised you 
don't have one here. I bet you do, and you just don't know it. And 
therefore, what needs to happen is, there needs to be a campaign to 
explain what's available for people so that they don't go to the 
emergency rooms.
    Yes, sir.

Cuba

    Q. Mr. President, I emigrated from Cuba when I was about 9 years 
old--legally, I might add.
    The President. Pedro Pan? Were you Pedro Pan?
    Q. No.
    The President. No? Okay.
    Q. But anyway, besides marrying a wonderful woman and having two 
great sons, coming to this great land is the best thing that has ever 
happened to me, and I appreciate your comments on immigration. And my 
question to you, Mr. President, is that I would like to go to Cuba, to 
travel, to see--I want to go see my front door that was bullet-riddled 
when they were fighting Batista's guys. And I can't go there legally. 
And I don't understand, how can we trade with Vietnam--we lost over 
50,000 Americans there--how can we trade with Communist China, we can't 
even go to Cuba? And I think that if the borders were opened up with 
Cuba and American enterprise got to go down there, I think Castro would 
fall like a rock off a cliff. And my question to you, sir, is why can't 
we open----
    The President. Okay, here's why----
    Q. Yes.
    The President. Here's why: Fidel Castro has got the capacity to 
arbitrage your dollars to the advantage of his administration. You pay 
in dollars; he pays in Cuban money and collects the difference. So you 
go to a hotel

[[Page 778]]

in Havana. The money goes to the hotel, which has kind of got a deal 
with the Government in order to be there in the first place, and the 
workers get paid in a currency that's worthless compared to the U.S. 
dollar. And he makes the balance. And so, in all due respect, I have 
taken the position that trade with the country enables a tyrant to stay 
in power, as opposed to the opposite. If it's honest disagreement of 
opinion--I fully recognize--but that's why I made the decision I made. 
And anyway, my preacher, by the way, at St. John the Divine Church, is a 
guy who came from Cuba at about the same age you did. You look a little 
younger than he is--but, nevertheless, that's why. That's why.
    Yes, sir.

Immigration Reform

    Q. As you said, you make a lot of important decisions on a day-by-
day basis. I'm interested in the personal, as well as political, aspects 
of your counsel. Do you know any illegal-status individuals coming from 
Midland, Texas? What do they feel? And how do they counsel you on this? 
And also, politically, it's an intensely State-specific issue. Are the 
States most affected by illegal immigration speaking in a collective 
voice?
    The President. Really good question. No, I don't believe I know 
anybody who is in Texas illegally. Had I hired somebody who had been 
here illegally, I guarantee you'd have read about it. [Laughter]
    Isn't that right, Elisabeth [Elisabeth Bumiller, New York Times]?
    The interesting thing about this issue is--I want to be respectful 
in correcting you about the nature of the immigration debate--it is more 
widespread than you think. It really is. It's a--there's a lot of States 
who have been affected and maybe impacted in a much more different way 
than California and Texas has been. Texas and California are--have had a 
history of Latino presence. It's been a part of our heritage. And 
there's a--but there are many communities in the United States that for 
the first time are getting to become acquainted with the Latino 
heritage. And that probably impacts people even more significantly than 
parts of California and Texas; it really does. And so there is a 
universal concern about the issue. And what's really important about 
this issue is to try to set aside all the emotion and think about how to 
solve the problem in a rational, calm way.
    But, no, it's--people--obviously, if you're from--I was talking to a 
Congressman from--I don't want to--they'll start trying to find the guy, 
so I'm not going to give him any hints, but--[laughter]. It's a guy. 
Anyway, but he said, ``My town was, like, a small number of minorities, 
and now it's 50 percent Latino, and we don't know what to do.'' And this 
is a new phenomenon. This isn't something that's been around for 
decades. This is a brandnew phenomenon. And so there is a national 
concern about this issue; it really is. And, obviously, it takes--it 
reflects the nature of the local community, gets--flares up one way or 
another around the country. But it's--there's a lot of people talking 
about it. And it's--we've got to get something done. I want a 
comprehensive bill. I don't want a--[applause].
    Yes, sir, back there in the end-zone.

Education

    Q. Mr. President--for us to compete globally, we need to get better 
in math and science. What do you see as the role of the Federal 
Government in that regard?
    The President. Yes, thanks. First, the role of the Federal 
Government is to make sure that we get it right at the early grades. And 
that's why I worked hard for and was extremely proud to sign the No 
Child Left Behind Act. And the No Child Left Behind Act starts with 
these basic premises: One, children can learn, and we ought to expect 
them to learn. And I know that sounds simple. But that's not the way it 
was in certain school districts. You look like a vet, and you know full 
well that in certain school districts--just move them through, man. What 
mattered was the age, not what--the level of knowledge.
    Secondly, that accountability can be used effectively, particularly 
if it's designed at the local level. In other words, you can use an 
accountability system to determine whether a curriculum is working, or 
you can use an accountability system to determine how your school 
district is doing relative to the school

[[Page 779]]

district next door to you. You can use an accountability system to 
determine whether or not we're closing an achievement gap that needs to 
be closed if America is going to be a promising place for all people--
not just some, but all people.
    And so I worked with both Republicans and Democrats--it actually can 
happen sometimes in Washington that we're able to work together--and 
passed the No Child Left Behind Act, which said, in return for Federal 
money--in increasing amounts, by the way--on particularly Title I money, 
we expect you just to show us. We expect you to measure. You notice I 
didn't say, we expect you to administer the test we designed. I'm a 
local-control-of-schools person, and I knew that if a Federal test were 
designed, it could force people to behave according to the tests. In 
other words, you can cause people to lose their independence if you're 
the test designer. And so I said, California, design your own test, and 
measure three through eight and post the results for everybody to see so 
that concerned citizens, when they saw failure, would have something to 
say to the--to you, ``Change, or thank you for doing what you're 
doing.''
    And as a result of measuring, I can report to you that math scores 
and science scores for fourth graders and reading scores--math and 
reading scores for fourth graders and eighth graders is on the rise, 
particularly amongst African American and Latino students.
    Things are changing. It's amazing what happens when you say, there's 
accountability in the system. The problem is, as you know full well, but 
others may not, is that when a child gets to high school, our math and 
science skills, relative to other countries in the world, is abysmal. 
And it's not right. And we're not going to be able to compete 
successfully for the jobs of the 21st century. So here's the strategy: 
Apply the same rigor in math that we've applied in reading.
    And here's what happens in early grades in reading: If you don't 
pass the test, there is supplemental service money to enable a child to 
get up to speed. In other words, we diagnose the problem, and we're 
actually providing money to solve the problem, and it's paying off. They 
ought to apply the same rigor to eighth grade math and ninth grade 
math--measure, find deficiencies, and provide extra money for school 
districts to make sure children get back up to speed.
    Secondly, it is very important for there to be role models in 
classrooms that basically says, science and math are cool. They weren't 
too cool when I was going to school, you know. And therefore, one of the 
things we can do is have adjunct professors in classrooms. I went to a 
school with Margaret Spellings, who is the Secretary of Education, in 
Maryland the other day, and there were two NASA scientists there. And 
part of their job was not only to work at the NASA facility close by but 
to go into classrooms, to say to children, math and science are really 
important for you.
    Thirdly, AP works--Advanced Placement. I bet you've got some good AP 
teachers. The Advanced Placement program is the way to set high 
standards for our children. And so, therefore, the Federal Government 
ought to help train 70,000 AP teachers in classrooms. That says, we 
believe in setting high standards; we ought not to accept a system that 
doesn't continue to raise the bar and measure and to hold people to 
account.
    Finally, there's--we've got an additional 1 million students on Pell 
grants. These are grants to help people who can afford--can't afford 
college, go to college. And they're very important--it's a very 
important tool to help people realize dreams. But I think we ought to 
enhance the Pell grants for those who take rigorous academics in high 
school for years one and two. And if you maintain a 3.0 grade-point-
average and take science, math, or critical languages in third and 
fourth year of college, you ought to get an additional $4,000 on top of 
your Pell grant.
    There is a strategy; the strategy of the Federal Government is a 
part of the strategy. The local school district is an integral part of 
the strategy. Thanks for being a superintendent, appreciate it.
    Yes, sir.

Highway Infrastructure/Levees in California

    Q. I'm a civil engineer, and we recently put out a report card for 
the Nation's infrastructure and--by the American Society of

[[Page 780]]

Civil Engineers. It was abysmal, is a word that you've used. And we're 
really concerned that our Nation is coming to a crisis on its 
infrastructure. And yet we seem to have problems with the Federal 
Government coming up with the funds that we need for the various parts 
of our transportation and our water resources.
    The President. Well, I appreciate that very much. We passed a pretty 
good sized highway bill--like really big. And it's a 6-year bill, and so 
it's--we've got 5 more years to run on it. But it was a pretty 
interesting struggle about how much to spend and how much not to spend. 
And I think if you look at the history of that highway bill, pretty much 
the bill I signed was more than some thought was necessary.
    I did talk to your Governor about an important subject, and that's 
the levees. And I appreciated his time the other day when I was in--up 
there in Cisco Systems. And we talked about the levees, and I said, we 
want to help. He's committed, by the way, to the--to rebuilding the 
infrastructure of California. It's a good, strong commitment. And it's 
what Governors do; they lead. But he said, ``Look, we need to work 
together on this,'' and what he wanted--what they--his office suggested 
is that we allow the State of California to use the Corps of Engineers 
to pay the Federal share of levee rebuilding when the water goes down, 
and then through the budget process, reimburse the State of California. 
I agreed to that.
    In other words, he--the Governor is concerned about being able to 
get started enough on levee--quick enough on levee repairs so we don't 
waste time. And part of the concern is there's a sharing arrangement 
between the Federal Government and the State government. And so I said, 
advance the State share--advance the Federal share through State money, 
and we'll reimburse you. That's an important beginning. In other words, 
the funding match is not an excuse. And secondly, he needs regulatory 
relief from Federal law and State law in order to be able to take 
advantage of the dry season to get the levees done. And so we're working 
with him on that.
    And--but, no, I appreciate your concern. It's a--infrastructure is 
always a difficult issue. It's a Federal responsibility and a State and 
local responsibility. And I, frankly, feel like we've upheld our 
responsibility at the Federal level with the highway bill. There are 
other infrastructures we got to get built. We need a broadband highway 
all across America if we're going to end up being a competitive nation. 
I talked about the ability to be able to converse in real-time--speedy 
and very fast ways. But that requires us to make sure that broadband is 
effectively distributed all across the country--not just in big cities 
but out in rural America as well. And we're working hard to--on right-
of-way issues and other issues to get broadband extensively spread 
throughout the country.
    Yes, sir.

Immigration Reform

    Q. Mr. President, I want to thank you for being here in Orange 
County. In your first term you came to Santa Ana, if you recall----
    The President. Yes.
    Q. ----we met with you at the Bowers Museum--it was a wonderful chat 
we've had with several of the leadership. Your honor, I--I'm calling you 
``your honor'' already--[laughter]--anyway, we believe, as you know, the 
Latino community is America.
    The President. Por cierto.
    Q. Por cierto, exactamente. And we believe that the effort that 
you're putting forth as a comprehensive legislation is what we need in 
this country. We believe that the economy is going to be great. We 
believe that the issue that has been raised about the possible changes 
and possible funding for many infrastructures as well as emergency 
services will be there, because we're going to make these people to pay 
taxes, just like you and I. So we thank you for that.
    We just want to ask you a question. What is it that we need to do, 
and you need to do, to make sure Congress will pass this comprehensive 
immigration bill?
    The President. Well, that's starting right here. You know, they've 
been on vacation and now starting to work the issue. And one way to work 
it: Stand right here in front of these cameras in California, talking 
about it in a candid way. And I'm going to do my

[[Page 781]]

part to continue to call this Nation to responsible dialog and remind 
the United States Congress, we need to get a comprehensive bill passed.

    The state of play right now is, the Senate reached an important 
compromise, I thought, and it was--they had a chance to get a bill; it 
just got caught up in, in my judgment, needless politics. One of the 
problems we face in Washington is we've got too much needless politics. 
We got people who aren't willing to--they want to play--they want to 
make the other person look bad, as opposed to make the country look 
good. And I'm going to continue to call people, whether it be on Social 
Security reform or immigration reform, to think about the country first 
and put our political parties aside. And I'm confident, if we can do 
that, we'll come up with a rational plan that will make the country 
proud.

    I'd like to stay here all day, but I got to go to Vegas. [Laughter] 
Something about what goes on there, stays there--or something like that. 
God bless you. Thanks for letting me come.

Note: The President spoke at 9:14 a.m. at the Hyatt Regency Irvine. In 
his remarks, he referred to Thomas Phelps, chairman of the board, and 
Lucetta Dunn, president, chief executive officer, and secretary, Orange 
County Business Council; Catherine Campbell, wife of Representative John 
Campbell; Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa of Los Angeles, CA; Mayor 
Beverly O'Neill of Long Beach, CA; Mayor Curt Pringle of Anaheim, CA; 
Rick Warren, pastor, Saddleback Church, Lake Forest, CA; Usama bin 
Laden, leader of the Al Qaida terrorist organization; President Jalal 
Talabani, Speaker of Parliament Mahmoud al-Mashhadani, and Prime 
Minister-designate Jawad al-Maliki of Iraq; former California State 
Senator James L. Brulte; Gen. Tommy R. Franks, USA, (Ret.), former 
combatant commander, U.S. Central Command; President Hu Jintao of China; 
President Fidel Castro of Cuba; and Gov. Arnold A. Schwarzenegger of 
California. The Office of the Press Secretary also released a Spanish 
language transcript of these remarks.