in their own words
 |
|
|
 Subscribe to the WHPC RSS Feed
|
Press Briefing by Tony Snow 2/27/07 (Topic: Helen Thomas)
— Wednesday, February 28, 2007 — Q Okay. Second: Last night, CNN featured the President of the White House Correspondents Association saying of Helen Thomas, "We love her and will take care of her." But CNN also reported that in order to accommodate one more network on row one, Helen, our senior-to-all colleague, is to be relegated to row two when we move back into the White House press room. And my question: Assuming that CNN is accurate, how can you allow this dean of our corps, senior veteran and undeniably colorful character -- (laughter) -- to be back-seated, as has been done to her at presidential press conferences? And what does this say about Bush-Snow treatment of senior citizens who wonder how you and the President would allow networks such ageist favoritism over a veteran? MS. THOMAS: I swear I didn't put him up to -- MR. SNOW: Okay, well let me -- this is about a -- MS. THOMAS: I never could think of his question in a million years. MR. SNOW: This is about a thousand-part question, so let me parse it, Les. Number one, of course, we love Helen. Number two, the White House does not make decisions about where people sit, so you can address that to the Correspondents Association. And number three, regardless of the seating arrangement, you'll still be looking at the back of her head. (Laughter.) Q That's an evasion, Tony. Why do you allow this? Why do you and the President allow this discrimination against a senior citizen who is our senior reporter? MS. THOMAS: I don't need to be defended, thank you very much. MR. SNOW: I'm afraid you need to confront Steve Scully in the hallway. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Helen Thomas
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 12:39 AM  Press Briefing by Tony Snow 2/26/07 (Topic: Iraq) — Tuesday, February 27, 2007 — Q Tony, do you agree with the Vice President's assessment last week that the British pullout in Iraq shows success on the ground? MR. SNOW: Here's what he was talking about: What he said was that in certain parts of the south in Iraq, you have now the ability to transfer primarily security operations to Iraqi forces. The combat footprint of the Brits is the same as it was, they still have the same combat capabilities. But they have been able to move out a number of people who have been involved in stationary guarding activities, and allow the Iraqis to stand up and take responsibility for some of those. That has always been the aim on both sides, is to figure out ways to build greater capability on the part of the Iraqi fighting forces, and to hand it over to them. It is also important to note, as the Prime Minister and others have said, that this does not mean that the Brits are, in fact, slackening in their commitment to contributing to security. As a matter of fact, they talked, among other things, about the ability to remain flexible even in some of those places where the Iraqis are now engaged in guard activities. Q Do you also agree with the Vice President's assessment that the Democratic calls for a pullout in Iraq -- U.S. pullout -- validates the al Qaeda strategy? MR. SNOW: Yes. What he was saying was that the al Qaeda strategy has been to use acts of violence as a way to weaken will in the United States and to move out short of having success. Now I think the question -- really what the Vice President was merely doing was reiterating what's in the National Intelligence Estimate, and also the Baker-Hamilton commission. I would guide you to the section there where it talks about precipitant withdrawal, which is not three to six months, but 12 to 18 months. That was regarded as the kind of thing that would create a power vacuum that would unleash incredible sectarian violence, could lead to much greater bloodshed than we now see in Iraq, would create levels of instability that not only would create opportunity for terrorists, but also for Iran and others, and therefore would be unacceptable. What the Vice President merely was reiterating is the consensus view of the intelligence community and of the Baker-Hamilton commission. Q Do you see a contradiction at all in the fact that when the Brits pull out, it's a success on the ground, that's why they're pulling out; when the Democrats call for U.S. troop pullout, it's, well, the job is not finished, they want to help al Qaeda. MR. SNOW: No. Maybe I didn't explain it clearly enough. The Brits were pulling out a small number of forces precisely because they were able to transition authority to the Iraqis and they had succeeded. This was not withdrawing on a time line; this was not saying, we're going to leave no matter what. The goal of the Brits is to win. And the goal in some of these resolutions is to leave. There is a difference. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Iraq
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 1:00 AM Press Briefing by Tony Fratto 02/23/07 (Topic: Iraq) — Friday, February 23, 2007 — Q Do Vice President Cheney's comments about Nancy Pelosi undermine the President's attempts to work cooperatively with Congress on Iraq? MR. FRATTO: You know, Vice President Cheney didn't make comments about Nancy Pelosi -- Speaker Pelosi. He made comments about the strategy that Speaker Pelosi and Representative Murtha are advocating. And clearly that's within bounds -- your question was, did it -- Q The President wants to say -- he says he's looking for common ground and wants to work cooperatively, but his Vice President has dismissed her proposals out of hand as those that would aid the enemy, effectively. That's not quite the way you go about having a conversation. MR. FRATTO: Look, we've having lots of conversations with members of Congress on lots of areas of common ground. In the area of, specifically with Iraq, if we can find a way to have an understanding that we're trying to reach the same goal, then maybe we can get there. But, look, if the proposal that's being put forth is a pullout of Iraq, and the National Intelligence Estimate says that -- or a pullout of Baghdad, I'm sorry; a pullout of Baghdad -- and the National Intelligence Estimate says that a precipitous pullout of Baghdad would lead to chaos and a humanitarian disaster and threats -- an ongoing threat and the collapse in Iraq, then it's hard to find common ground on that point. We disagree. Our view is that we need to stabilize Baghdad. That's the only way that we're going to bring security to the region, and have a chance to allow this government to have the breathing space to move forward. Q So is this the tone and the message the President wants communicated? MR. FRATTO: No, the tone -- the President has -- I'm not sure if there's -- if a President has spent more time talking about bipartisanship and common ground on -- Q "Talking about it," but the question is engaging in it? MR. FRATTO: And, in fact, engaging in it. We've seen it on lots of issues. We've seen it on the minimum wage bill. We're finding bipartisan solutions there. We're certainly talking about it on education. We're certainly reaching out on health care in a bipartisan way. These are -- on energy -- these are all areas that I think we're going to be able to find common ground on. One issue, Iraq, is going to be a little bit tougher. It's going to be a little bit tougher if -- also, if Democrats don't seek the same goal. Q The President's goal is victory, so you're saying the Democrats' goal is not also victory? MR. FRATTO: No, the goal is -- the goal, with respect to the strategy that we have outlined, is to bring peace and stability to Iraq, to bring security to Iraq so that this government can proceed. Q And the Democrats' goal? MR. FRATTO: Well, I don't see -- you know, when I talked earlier about consequences, what I don't see is any analysis that counters the view of the National Intelligence Estimate that pulling forces out of Baghdad would lead to chaos. Now, if someone out there is saying that that would not lead to chaos -- there is no independent or expert view that conforms to that. But we do have the National Intelligence Estimate. And I know Democrats are fond of, when they see the National Intelligence Estimate, of throwing it back at us, where it's critical of our conduct or conditions on the ground in Iraq. And that's fine, we accept that, but you can't -- it's not a Chinese menu where you can take from column A and column B. You take it in whole. And in whole, it's very clear. It says that it would lead to chaos. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Iraq
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 9:56 PM Press Gaggle by Dana Perino 02/22/07 (Topic: The Oscars) Q Dana, can I follow up on that? Is the President planning to send legislation to the Hill on these energy policies, in particular the alternative fuels? MS. PERINO: That's traditionally not the way that we have done it. We usually work with the Hill. We lay out a set of principles in our proposal. And so I think at this point we're following that same model. But if that changes we'll let you know. Q I'm compelled to ask you this question. Does the President have any Oscar picks, and has he seen any of the films? MS. PERINO: Has he seen what? Q Keep in mind this is coming from ABC. Has the President seen any of the Oscar nominated films, and does he have any picks? MS. PERINO: Well, you know, I have not seen any Oscar nominated films. I don't think, personally, I couldn't even tell you what is actually nominated. But I know he and Mrs. Bush do enjoy watching movies, and I will check into it and see if I can find out. I don't even know what's nominated. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Dana Perino | News Media | Bush Administration | Oscars
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 1:05 AM Press Gaggle by Tony Snow 2/21/07 (Topic: Iraq) — Thursday, February 22, 2007 — Q The Iraq withdrawal plan announced by Tony Blair, do you see that as a negative sign? MR. SNOW: No, it indicates that there's been some progress in Basra. The fact that there has been progress in a couple of areas -- one is training up Iraqis to take over some of the responsibilities that the Brits and the Danes have been handling within Basra has made it possible for Britain to remove some of the forces. On the other hand, it has not changed the combat capability of British forces within the area, and instead, as we understand it -- and I think you have to -- I have not had a full chance to read through the Prime Minister's comments today -- but as we understand it, they are going to have enhanced abilities to continue doing the work of embedding and training and working with the Iraqis, with the army, with the police and also with border guards. So the Brits still have a significant commitment. But the fact that they have made some progress on the ground is going to enable them to move some of the forces out, and that's ultimately the kind of thing that we want to be able to see throughout Iraq. As the President said all along, the idea is to build greater Iraqi capability, and when the time comes, to be able to move folks out. Q Can I follow that, Tony? The plan calls for the British to remove troops as conditions permit. And the initial response from the U.S. was that that's a model to emulate. But that's what some have, in fact, been calling for here, is time lines for removal of troops if conditions permit. So why is that model not okay for U.S. troops? MR. SNOW: No, this is not a time line. And the Prime Minister made it clear it is not a time line. As a matter of fact, what you had is progress first and then the removal. This was not in response to any calendar that had been set by the Parliament or by the Prime Minister. In fact, it had been the result of a judgment. And a lot of what's happening is that in certain facilities in Basra, for instance, guard responsibilities -- what they call fixed security responsibilities -- now are being handed over to the Iraqis. They've trained them up, they're able to do it, be able to transfer some of the authority. So there are still plenty of challenges within Basra, which is why they maintain a sizeable and robust military capability within the province. But to the extent that they're able to transfer responsibilities, as we've seen in other provinces, that's what you want to do. So, again, this is not a case of a specified time line, trying to hit it. But, look, the President has made clear all along, we want to do -- we want to move as rapidly as we can to build capability on the part of the Iraqis so they can, in fact, assume first, primary responsibility, and then eventually, sole responsibility not only for matters of security, but also economic development, political reconciliation and so on. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Iraq
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 12:06 AM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 2/20/07 (Topic: Veteran Affairs) — Tuesday, February 20, 2007 — MR. SNOW: I know what you're trying to do, you're trying to get a tick-tock on what did he learn and how did he respond and who did he call. Q Yes, we're trying to determine if someone here built a fire under someone over there to do something. MR. SNOW: You know, that's assuming that people there are callous about the fate of the people who are serving. Q It isn't -- MR. SNOW: No, I think it is. When you say "light a fire," it's as if, you know, you find out that there's a problem and you don't move quickly to try to correct it. My sense is that there's plenty of fire for trying to get it right. But this is why I'm telling you if you want a more direct answer about this, you do need to talk to the people at the Department of the Army -- Q But, Tony, when you read -- MR. SNOW: -- who are at the ground level involvement here. Q -- an account that says a commanding general, quotes a commanding general as saying, well, gee, we ordered repairs done, but they weren't done -- you'd think they would have known this hadn't been accomplished. MR. SNOW: Well, again, that's why -- you've just made my point, which is you need to get back to them, and I will also get back for you with a tick-tock about what's going on at this end. Q It's not just -- you're describing kind of a cold, detached bureaucratic process. We all know how this works. Something like this, this kind of story gets people's attention. You are now -- MR. SNOW: Well -- Q Wait a minute. You're now in the PR business, you know if something like this happens it's at odds with the commitments you make; the Commander-in-Chief might well stand up at a meeting and say, darn it, let's get to the bottom of this now and let's get answers. And this happened over the weekend, and you're saying you think the White House knew, but you're not sure; you're not sure when the President knew or if he said something to somebody. It just seems like you should have those answers. MR. SNOW: Okay, but you also -- fine, I'll try to get them for you. But when you talk about cold detachment, I don't think saying that if it needs -- Q You're calling it an "action item"? MR. SNOW: Well, yes, because what I'm telling you is that it is something that falls under the providence of the Department of the Army. Therefore, if you want the detailed answers about who knew what, when and how it's been handled, you do need to ask them, because they're going to have the information, David. I can tell you that the President feels passionately about them, and you should have no doubt about it -- you've been at enough events where when he looks these people in the eye there is a commitment, a strong, profound emotional commitment to the people who serve this country. And it is one where the President is committed to doing right by the men and women who serve. There should be no doubt about that. Q But, Tony -- MR. SNOW: Wait, wait. In that case, what I'm telling you is let's sort through the facts. I know that what you want is for me to tell you more than I know right now. So you keep at it -- Q But it would not be unreasonable for you or the President, through you, to express some kind of outrage over what has happened up there. MR. SNOW: Well, it's also a matter of trying to figure out precisely what has happened. You have news stories, it is important to investigate. As you know, the most important thing is to fix a problem, correct? And there is absolute determination to fix the problem. The President is somebody, again, whose passion for these forces should never, ever be a topic of doubt on the part of the forces or the American people. Q Right, but Tony, when you say he looks in the eyes of the families -- but what if the bureaucrats on the ground are not actually following through on the commitment you say he has? Doesn't he have a duty to follow through and say, what -- MR. SNOW: That's why I'm asking you to direct your questions to the people who are in direct line of responsibility for this, who are going to have more information on this than I do right now. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Veteran Affairs
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 11:47 PM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 2/16/07 (Topic: Iraq) — Friday, February 16, 2007 — Q I just want to follow a little bit on the discussion about messages being sent with this debate. I was talking to a Democratic staffer today who said that Republicans and the White House have been skillful in maneuvering the conversation to supporting the troops, which actually presents a false choice, because -- or it obscures the more important underpinning, which is, Democrats are saying bring the troops home now, or short-term, the next four to six months, and that the White House -- the President's sense is, no, send more troops as a way to win, that it's no longer about victory, that there's actually two different discussions going on. MR. SNOW: So you're saying Democrats are -- that supporters of the resolution don't believe in victory? Q No, that they say that -- yes, that that is -- that you're at the wrong end of public opinion. MR. SNOW: Oh, I see. So they think that the public thinks -- I just -- I'm a little confused -- Q I will clarify this. MR. SNOW: Please do. Q The Democrats' point is that victory is no longer what's being talked about, it needs to be -- the question is, can we bring the troops home. MR. SNOW: No, no I -- Q The American people are not as concerned about victory in Iraq as they are about bringing the troops home; that's a more pressing issue. MR. SNOW: Ask the following poll question -- first, ask your Democratic source: Do you believe if the United States leaves Iraq there will be a power vacuum, and do you believe into that power vacuum al Qaeda will try to take over Anbar and it will involve adventurism from abroad, whether it be from Iran, or elsewhere. If you do have that, and they have access to billions of dollars a year in oil revenue, and they have the ability to intimidate neighbors in the Gulf states, does that make us more or less secure? And, if that is the case, is it worth withdrawing before you have victory? The President is very clear about this. The stakes of losing and the stakes of leaving before you have secured victory are simply unacceptable. And if you ask the American public if they were willing to accept that, they would say, no. Q The source says that that -- the American public actually has seen what's going on as a Civil War, and says that that places the White House at the wrong end of public opinion. MR. SNOW: The President understands public opinion and public impatience. The President also sees intelligence every day, and he has to assess what the long-term costs are going to be. It is significant to me that you have a Democratic source who now says it's all about getting out, and not about success. If that's the case, that is -- it's going to be interesting to see if that continues to be the way Democrats want to frame this up, because it will make for a very important and interesting debate. The fact is, success is absolutely necessary. And I've heard a lot of Democrats say this. Democrats understand that to create a vacuum in Iraq would be to invite dangers that are simply unacceptable to the American public. Let me add further -- when you're talking about bringing forces in -- but it is an interesting switch. So what you're saying is, it's no longer support the troops, it's just get them out. Q The question is, does the debate about supporting the troops obscure the real debate that Americans want to have, which is, increase the number there, or start to bring them home? MR. SNOW: You know what, we'd love to bring them home. We'd love to bring them home. We'd love to -- no, let me continue. But what you have is somebody framing a debate as if the rest of the world didn't exist -- as if Iran didn't exist, as if al Qaeda didn't exist, as if the terror network didn't exist, as if the oil fields did not exist, as if this could not set -- as if Israel didn't exist, as if Hamas, Hezbollah did not exist. Q His point was that, yes, they understand all that. MR. SNOW: No, the source -- no, the source's point is to ignore all that and not -- Q Well, actually, I had the conversation with the source, so the source's point was -- the source's point was, yes, they're aware, Americans are aware of all of that; they're looking at it and saying, you know what, we still want to bring the troops home. MR. SNOW: You know what, the President -- the President understands that to operate under those circumstances is to invite bloodshed on a level that is absolutely appalling, not only in Iraq, but possibly in the United States of America. And if this offends your source, okay. Your source, I'm sure, means well, but the President also is absolutely determined to keep this country safe and do what's best for Americans. That is his job. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Iraq
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 3:58 PM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 2/15/07 (Topic: Murtha) Q Tony, Congressman Murtha says he would like to attach certain conditions to the supplemental. He says troops will need to be certified as fully combat ready, training, equipment, before they can go back to Iraq; deployments can't be extended beyond one year; troops have to have at least one year at home between deployments; and the stop-loss program would be prohibited. What is your -- MR. SNOW: You're reading it off your Blackberry because it's just come out, and we, frankly, are doing the same thing. We're not reading it off our Blackberries, but we're trying to assess what Congressman Murtha has had to say. The one thing that we can assure the American people is that people who go into combat are going to be ready. And we are committed to the effectiveness and the safety of our forces. But I think rather than -- this is really pretty fresh. I think he went and gave the speech about an hour ago. So if you'll give us a day's forbearance to get it, because I don't feel comfortable commenting about the details. I got a very quick summary of the comments just as we were coming over, and I don't even have time to -- Q Can I ask about what you think the motives are? Do you think these are -- MR. SNOW: No, I don't want to assign motives. I mean, the President has said that we accept the patriotism of everybody who's involved in this debate. We think it's essential to make sure that we give the troops what they need to succeed. He also noted that if people were to cut off support and funding for the troops, it would mark the first time in American history that you had a Congress that supported a commanding general and then turned around and denied him what he had said explicitly was necessary to succeed. Q Is this a way of doing that, do you think? MR. SNOW: Again, ask Congressman Murtha. When it comes to motives, what he hopes to achieve, I think he's a more effective spokesman. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Jack Murtha
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 1:02 AM Press Conference by the President 2/14/07 (Topic: politico.com) — Wednesday, February 14, 2007 — Michael. Michael, who do you work for? (Laughter.) Q Mr. President, I work for Politico.com. THE PRESIDENT: Pardon me? Politico.com? Q Yes, sir. Today. (Laughter.) THE PRESIDENT: You want a moment to explain to the American people exactly what -- (laughter.) Q Mr. President, thank you for the question. (Laughter.) THE PRESIDENT: Quit being so evasive. Q You should read it. THE PRESIDENT: Is it good? You like it? Q David Gregory -- THE PRESIDENT: David Gregory likes it. I can see the making of a testimonial. (Laughter.) White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | News Media | Bush Administration | Politico.com
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 1:08 AM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 2/13/07 (Topic: John Edwards Blogger) — Tuesday, February 13, 2007 — Q I'll yield to anybody else. I have never heard you or any of your 10 predecessors -- whom I have covered at that podium -- use the obscene words for feces, fornication, semen, anus, and vagina, all of which words were used publicly by Melissa McEwan, who is still on the John Edwards presidential campaign staff because he refused to fire her. And my question, first: Surely the President would never put up with such public obscenity like former Senator Edwards is doing, would he? MR. SNOW: Well, I don't know about that, but the President expects his aides to behave in a seemly manner. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | John Edwards
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 12:56 AM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 2/12/07 (Topic: Baseball) — Monday, February 12, 2007 — Q As a former leader of baseball, what was the President's reaction to the death on February 9th of the greatest pitcher who ever lived? MR. SNOW: And that would be? Q Eddie Feigner, the King and his Court. MR. SNOW: He actually may have been, Eddie Feigner having thrown, what, 280 perfect games? Having struck out more than 12,000 people? Having had a fastball in excess of 104 m.p.h.? Q (Laughter.) MR. SNOW: -- from time to time? Did you ever watch the King and his Court? (Laughter.) I don't know, but I think he's under-rated. I will speak completely independently. Q Did you brief -- MR. SNOW: No, I'm a sports nut. Eddie Feigner -- Q Softball we're talking about? MR. SNOW: Yes, we're talking about softball, Eddie Feigner, softball. Q He struck out five in a row, of the top baseball player. MR. SNOW: Of six. He faced six. Q There were some reports it was 113 m.p.h. MR. SNOW: I think it's time for WorldNetDaily to do more of its famous investigations. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Baseball
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 12:51 AM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 2/8/07 (Topic: Iraq) — Friday, February 09, 2007 — Q Well, would you concede that the White House has an interest in the outcome of this debate, particularly in that it may hold the President's policy up to further criticism? MR. SNOW: We understand -- I'm sorry, would I concede? Q Yes. MR. SNOW: No. Lousy verb. I think -- Q It was deliberate. MR. SNOW: I know. That's why I pointed it out. I know you choose it carefully. (Laughter.) This is great, he keeps the poker face longer than anybody on the front row. (Laughter.) In any event, actually, what's interesting is members, I think, are stepping back and they're thinking, okay, what message do we want to send, and how do we contribute in the long run to success of the mission in Iraq. We think it's going to be a healthy debate. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Iraq
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 1:13 AM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 2/07/07 (Topic: Budget) — Thursday, February 08, 2007 — Q Tony, I'm curious about this Centennial Parks Initiative. This is a time of very tight budget constraints; even programs like Children's Health Insurance got only the smallest of increases. I'm wondering what brought on this sort of sudden bout of conservationism and a big increase for parks. MR. SNOW: Sheryl, you haven't been watching. You're talking about a $1-billion federal increase with a $1-billion matching grant. By the way, your characterization of CHIPS, the budget right now is $5 billion. It's going to be increased by -- we're putting $4.8 billion into it over the next five years. That is not an insubstantial increase. As a matter of fact, it's a significant one. Furthermore, there is a real focus right now on making sure that you're dealing with poor Americans. Q -- talking about the parks -- MR. SNOW: No, the first thing we've got to do is to talk about the assumption of the question, because it was an argumentative assumption that I think is worth at least trying to pick apart, as well. The President has been committed to conservationism since the beginning of this administration. Last year, for instance, we set aside the largest natural wildlife reserve on the face of the Earth. This is not new. Just as many people have been saying, wow, isn't the President -- isn't it nice that the President has finally agreed that global warming has manmade components, only to find out, because we've been telling you, that he first started talking about it in June of 2001. There's been a lot of misreporting, or perhaps it just hasn't -- perhaps folks have not taken notice of the fact that this is an administration that's been keenly committed, both to environmentalism and conservationism from the start. This is important -- this is also a plan to work on the national parks over a 10-year period. So what we're talking about is $1 billion over 10 years for the centennial of the U.S. Park Service, which will -- it seems to me that that's a pretty reasonable down payment. Q Well, you raise that point about reporting on the President's environmental record. People are starting to say, is George Bush waking up to the environment? MR. SNOW: Well, the fact is -- actually, the question is, are reporters waking up to his five-year record? The answer is, the long national slumber may be approaching an end. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Budget
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 12:05 AM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 2/6/07 (Topic: Budget) — Wednesday, February 07, 2007 — Q Can I ask you about an argument the President made today and has made repeatedly in terms of the tax cuts? He speaks of the economic output that is raised by the tax cuts. But he specifically is crediting his tax cuts for the increased revenues to the U.S. Treasury. Does the President believe that the tax cuts have paid for themselves, or will pay for themselves anytime in the foreseeable future? MR. SNOW: What you're doing is you're getting yourself into abstruse ground. There are any number of ways of calculating it. By some calculations they have paid for themselves and then some. But what I'd ask to do before getting into that thicket is to find out what you want to use as your base, know what your baselines are, because whenever one gets into games like this, it's all about assumptions. And I don't know what assumptions are embedded in the question. Q I'm not sure I'd look at it as a game, but when the President says low taxes means economic vitality, which means more tax revenues -- MR. SNOW: Yes. Q -- does the Treasury tell him that more money is coming in than was lost to the tax cuts? MR. SNOW: Well, I'm not sure -- the whole point is that the tax cuts generate extra economic activity. All you have to do is -- I would, if you want to -- Q That's a separate issue. MR. SNOW: Well, no, it's not. It's not a separate issue at all. What it says is when you have greater economic -- Q If the economy is growing more, that's one thing; but whether tax revenues are growing is a separate issue. MR. SNOW: Well, but tax revenues tend to grow in tandem with economic activity. When you've got a growing economy -- let's take a look at what we have. We have an economy where we've had economic growth for 42 consecutive months. You also have an economy that now has more people working than ever before. You've got higher levels of employment, home ownership, economic activity. Wages, especially in recent months, have shown real significant growth. Real disposable income up 5.4 percent in the fourth quarter of last year. You put all that together, you're going to have more revenue. And the fact is, a good, growing economy is always good for revenues. Q I'm asking specifically about the budget, which is what the President was arguing about today. And when he says low taxes means more tax revenues -- MR. SNOW: Yes, that's right. Q -- he is, in a sense, saying that it makes it easier to balance the budget, is he not? MR. SNOW: Yes. A growing economy always makes it easier to balance the budget. Q No, that cutting taxes in the way he's done makes it easier to balance the budget. MR. SNOW: But cutting the taxes -- you're not connecting the dots. Cutting the taxes, in fact, is something that encourages economic growth. And it is that economic growth that ends up generating the revenue, that allows you to balance the budget ahead of time. Q But has the Treasury told him that the tax cuts enacted on his watch make it easier to balance the budget? MR. SNOW: I'm not sure that anybody has framed it that way. Call over to Treasury, ask them. Q I've looked at their analyses; I don't see it, is why I'm asking. MR. SNOW: Like I said, that's why -- when you talk about pay-for, that really does get into how are you cutting it, and what are you using as your baseline, what's your projection, what are the assumptions. That is not as simple a question as you might think it is. It just isn't. Whenever you get into -- Q I know this debate is to how big the effect is, but I've not seen it -- MR. SNOW: But I've also heard people say, yes, we can say it's paid for. But you're asking me to play the role of economist, and as any first-year economic student will tell you, it's all about assumptions. So if you want to get into that argument, I really would suggest you talk to trained economists at the Department of Treasury or within our economic shop, and they'll be able to give you a more precise readout on it. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Budget
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 12:01 AM Press Briefing by OMB Director Rob Portman on the President's Fiscal Year 2008 Budget 02/05/07 — Tuesday, February 06, 2007 —
Q Are there any specific places where he's willing to soften his stance, any compromise areas? DIRECTOR PORTMAN: Well, by saying there are no preconditions and we should all come to the table and talk, that was a change in position. And by putting into the budget some specific ideas, the President is, again, taking the next step, which is not just the need to discuss, but the need to actually start to put solutions on the table. Q Mr. Portman, you said there are no preconditions. But in the Cabinet meeting a couple hours ago, the President said no tax increases. That sounds like a precondition. DIRECTOR PORTMAN: What the President said was, that we can balance the budget in five years without increasing taxes, and that, in fact, to increase taxes would put at risk the economy that's generated the revenues that are largely responsible for putting us in a better fiscal condition. So he was very explicit about that issue, but it was in relation to this proposal. Q So he would welcome tax increases beyond those five years? DIRECTOR PORTMAN: No, that's not what he said. I'm just telling you that -- unless I missed something -- I was sitting next to him at that Cabinet meeting -- what he was talking about there was his strong belief that it is incumbent upon us to keep the tax relief in place. It's encouraging innovation, encouraging investment. It's been very responsible, as we saw on those charts, since 2003 for the growth in jobs, the growth in productivity, and the ability for us to see these increased revenues. And it would be exactly the wrong thing to do to put the economy at risk and raise taxes on the American people at this point. Instead, what we should be doing, restraining spending a little bit better, which is in this budget, and continuing with solid economic growth so that we can, indeed, balance the budget for the American people. It's an exciting opportunity, and we don't need to raise taxes to do it. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Budget
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 12:34 AM Press Briefing by Stephen Hadley 2/2/07 (Topic: Iraq) — Friday, February 02, 2007 —
Q Mr. Hadley, I want to go back to the term "civil war." The administration has really gone out of its way not to use that term, "civil war," in the same way that Don Rumsfeld wouldn't call it a "guerilla war" when it was, or an "insurgency" when it was. Why do you go out of your way not to use that word? The President goes out of his way, as well. You say labels are difficult, but is it not important -- certainly any military strategist will tell you it's important to know what kind of fight you're in. Can you call it a civil war, and why haven't you? MR. HADLEY: We know what kind of fight we're in. We know the facts. That is described well in this NIE, and we have a strategy to deal with those facts and to try to succeed. Q Is it a civil war? MR. HADLEY: I will tell you what this NIE says. Q I want to know why you avoid using that term. MR. HADLEY: Because it's not an adequate description of the situation we find ourselves, as the intelligence community says. Intelligence judges "the term civil war does not adequately capture the complexities of the conflict in Iraq." And what we're doing is saying, if you're going to run policy, and if you're going to explain it to the American people, we need to get across the complexities of the situation we face in Iraq, and what is our strategy to deal with that. And simple labels don't do that. We're going to try and force everybody to get into the facts. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Iraq
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 8:20 PM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 2/1/07 (Topic: Senator Joe Biden) Q Thank you, Tony. Two questions. Since the President told Fox News yesterday that he is "impressed" by Senator Obama, who he finds "attractive and articulate," surely you can tell us, Tony, what the President thinks of a widely reported page 1 quote of Senator Biden that Senator Obama is "clean"? MR. SNOW: No, I can't. But thank you. I haven't talked to him about it. It's just -- I don't know. Q Well, Senator Obama said yesterday that "Senator Biden certainly didn't intend to offend. And I'll leave it at that." At which Senator Biden called Obama "a superstar, the most exciting candidate from either party in decades, he's fresh, he's new, he's smart, he's insightful, a very special guy, who is like catching lightning in a jar. I think he's great. I think I'm better." And my question, does the President -- MR. SNOW: Whoa, wait a minute -- all that, and he's better? Q Yes, right, right, and he's better. MR. SNOW: Wow. Well, you need to call him and ask him how he'd describe himself. Q He says he's better. MR. SNOW: But what's better than lightning in a jar? (Laughter.) Q Fireflies in a jar. Q White lightning in a jar. (Laughter.) Q White lightning in a jar. Does the President recognize this hilarious contradiction as the indication of a preface to another Biden withdrawal, as he did i 1988? MR. SNOW: Oh, my goodness. Let the candidates make their cases to the public. The public will decide. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Joe Biden
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 1:30 AM
|
|