MS. PERINO: Hello, everybody. Hello to my mom in the back, my mom and my sister -- friends. (Applause.) I don't usually get that reception in here. (Laughter.) Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Yes, I know. (Laughter.) So I don't have anything to start with -- just happy 4th of July eve. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: As far as I know, I don't know of anybody who was aware of it. As we have said before, the State Department had said that they had been aware of it and they had raised questions about it, and that's what they are maintaining today.

So I don't know of anybody in the White House who was aware of it. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'm not sure -- I think a lot of these conversations actually happened in Iraq, and so I'm not sure how all that happened, so I'd refer you over there.

I think one of the things that -- one of the questions has been that there was notification by Mr. Hunt that he would be traveling overseas. I just want to make sure something is very clear on that: It is the law and it is routine and it is required that any member of the PFIAB* board, if they're going to be traveling overseas, send a letter notifying that they will be doing so. So that suggestion that that letter is suspicious is, I think, just headed in the wrong direction. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: It goes to the PFIAB*, but that doesn't necessarily -- I don't know what's in the letter, but I don't think it had anything to do with substance of the travel. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Yes, just that you have to list where you're going. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Not that I'm aware of. And again, it's the PFIAB*, and I don't know who all saw it -- who all would have seen it at that time.

So I'd refer you to the State Department, because they had said that they had had the contacts beforehand and that's what they're maintaining today. I don't know of anybody else in the White House who would have known about the letters. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Dana, can you talk -- you probably discussed in the gaggle a little bit -- but on camera, if you

MS. PERINO: Sure. I think you just heard from the President -- I don't know if you've seen it yet, but he was able to make a couple of comments about the hostages being released from the FARC down in Colombia. The President got a call yesterday from President Uribe to let the President know that the operation had been successful. The United States had been working with the government of Colombia for the last several years, ever since the American hostages had been taken, in order to try to free them safely and successfully in a way that would not cause any harm to the individuals. And thankfully, that's what happened yesterday.

We were aware of the operation in its planning stages. We provided some specific support, which I'm not allowed to go into the details on, but President Bush was certainly supportive of it. But I will say that President Uribe and his government and his military really get the credit for successfully freeing these hostages, because they conceived of the operation and then they carried it through -- with some support from us, but it was largely a Colombian exercise. And the President congratulates President Uribe and the military. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q After the U.S. learned that this rescue mission was going to go forward, did at any point any U

MS. PERINO: I don't know. I think this was long in the planning stages and I think the Colombians were able to take action when they were ready to and there was actionable intelligence to be able to carry out the operation. I've heard nothing to suggest that there was any connection. I just think it was a coincidence, but I did read somewhere that President Uribe let Senator McCain know about the possible operation when he was down there, but there's no connection in terms of timing. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Absolutely not, no. And President Bush yesterday -- just a little bit more -- he was yesterday getting ready for -- to do some of the Japanese television interviews. He was informed by the Chief of Staff and the National Security Advisor at about 3:00 p.m. or 3:30 p.m. yesterday afternoon that the operation had been executed and that it had been successful. And he's very happy for all of the families today, and he's glad that they're able to be reunited on the 4th -- right before the 4th of July. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Dana, looking ahead to the G8, a couple of global warming experts who are usually quite critical

MS. PERINO: Well, I think -- when I read those quotes this morning, you could have knocked me over with a feather, too, because the President gets absolutely no credit for all that he has done here in our own country, because we have actually been able to reduce actual emissions from our country, even though our economy has grown over the past several years.

But to the G8, let me just take you back one step. So, in May of 2007, President Bush announces a new way forward on climate change, because for the past several years, ever since the Kyoto Protocol, we have been stuck in this situation where only 30 percent of the countries that emit were required to be a part of Kyoto.

President Bush realized that, one, it would not solve the problem that we're trying to solve, which was to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, but instead it would hurt our economy while emissions continued to go up overseas -- just unworkable, from his point of view. What he thinks is going to work is a real push on technologies for research and development, but also having everybody committed, especially the emerging economies such as India and China.

So last May before the G8, the President suggested a way that we could all work together to get the major economies of the world all at the same table and working towards the same goal. And that has held over the past year. The emerging economies are still at the table. We're talking now in terms of "our" challenge and how "we" are going to solve this. And the President laid out a way to try to work on both midterm and then a longer-term goal. We're optimistic that we can get there, but there's a lot of issues that have to go -- have to be ferreted out.

And one of them -- if you just look at what happened, I think it was three weeks ago, when Senator Boxer's bill was brought up for a debate on the Senate floor. There was considerable debate on the Senate floor, and you also saw a lot of people finally coming forward and saying, we've got some real problems with how this might actually work in the practical sense.

So that's not only happening in our capital, it's happening in all the other capitals as well. So while I say we're optimistic that we can maybe get something, I want to make sure it's very clear that these are difficult issues and we have made progress -- I am not saying that we're going to be able to come out of there with a signed deal, out of the G8 -- that was never the purpose of this point of the process anyway. We hope to get something done by the end of this year so that the major economies could feed into the U.N. process, which is going to take place next year. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, no, because it's what the President had -- that's what the President proposed last May and that's what we've been working towards. We think we've made some good progress. But the key to this -- and actually, I think other nations agree with this now -- that we have to have the developing nations at the table -- we're all rowing in the same direction -- or else we're not going to solve the problem and we're going to hurt people's economies.

You can't have research and development dollars going into helping find the new technologies if all the economies are slumping. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Absolutely not. And that's one of the keys -- and that's one of the reasons that this is working. When he announced it last May, one of the things he said is each country is going to do this in a different way. Everybody has a different fuel mix, they have different constituencies, they have different economies that run on different types of fuels and they produce different types of things. So each country is going to have to come up with its own plan in order to get to both a midterm and then that aspirational longer-term goal.

But the midterm goal is one of the most important because it gets people to commit to actions right now, and that's what we're working towards.

Bret. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Sure. There has been ongoing discussion in the administration about dealing with detainees at Guantanamo Bay for quite some time, but more intensively, certainly, since the Supreme Court decision.

Let me take you back. A couple of years ago the Supreme Court said that the United States, both the executive branch and the legislative branch, needed to work together to come up with a way to -- a law that would allow detainees to challenge their detentions in our judicial system. The Military Commissions Act was passed, amongst other laws. We took that action and then just recently -- I think it was about three or four weeks ago -- the Supreme Court decided against the Congress and the executive branch and said, actually, no, that's not good enough. And for the first time in American history, the Supreme Court afforded constitutional rights to enemy combatants. And there's a lot of unanswered questions that come from that decision.

And so after the President learned of the decision -- we were in Rome, and he said that he disagreed with the decision, but the Supreme Court is the law of the land and that we would work to understand the consequences, the ramifications and implications of this law. That's what we're doing right now. So there is a lot of smart lawyers working on this issue, and I think that we're in unchartered territory when it comes to understanding what all we're going to do when it comes to detainees. It should come as no surprise to anybody that here at the White House we're coordinating amongst the interagency to discuss all of this.

And I think that -- one of the things that I would just remind you of is that the Department of Defense has been working for years to try to get many of these enemy combatants repatriated, and in fact we've gotten hundreds repatriated back to their country where they would be held securely. But some detainees have been released, and some have returned to the battlefield, and some have even become suicide bombers. And we have to be really careful about what we're going to do with these detainees.

One of the possible consequences of this decision is that it is possible that some of these detainees, after challenging their detention in court, could be released into the United States. And then you have further complication when it comes to our immigration laws, and how long you can hold a detainee, which right now under our immigration laws is for six months.

And so there's a lot of complicated issues that go into this decision, and we are working hard, but I will tell you there's no imminent decision that's going to be announced from the White House. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Yes, right there and then. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'm saying it is a possibility. And I think that because we are in unchartered territory, and we have never had enemy combatants afforded constitutional rights like all of us have, and -- so anybody who thinks that they know exactly what's going to happen if a detainee challenges his detention -- his or her detention -- in court, they're not being honest, because we don't know what's going to happen.

But there is considered judgment from many federal government lawyers, all the way up to the Attorney General of the United States, that it is a very real possibility that a dangerous detainee could be released into the United States as a result of this Supreme Court decision. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, we have to move quickly because the Supreme Court invalidated one of -- a law that was passed by wide bipartisan margins in the United States Senate and the House of Representatives. So we have to move quickly because we have to understand its consequences, its implications and ramifications so that we can figure out where we are in this unchartered territory.

And a judge now would be able to conceivably call into question the considered judgment of a member of our military who picked up one of these enemy combatants and put him into detention. Or he would be -- a judge might say, the United States, you don't have enough evidence to hold this person. And then what do we do, because habeas corpus literally means, bring me the body. And then what happens? Is he allowed to leave? And if so, is he picked up by immigration -- but even if that's the case, they're only allowed to be held for six months. So there are some really complicated issues surrounding this decision, and we're working very hard to get through them, but it's going to take us a little while. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Yes. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: It is a possibility, but I think we're a ways away from deciding if that's the way to go. But because the Supreme Court invalidated a law, then we have to take that into consideration.

Anybody else on Gitmo? Okay. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, yes, but what I just told you is that -- look, first of all, in terms of immigration, you're only allowed right now under our -- under another Supreme Court decision to hold somebody for six months. But there is also -- there's legal immigrants. They're all over the place, and we have to take into consideration what all of this means. And I'm sure that none of us want Khalid Sheikh Mohammed walking around our neighborhoods. And there might be some lawyers that you can find that would say that's a stretch, but what I would submit to you is that they don't know either, and that the Attorney General of the United States, who has been intimately involved in trying these types of cases, and in fact oversaw the first World Trade Center bombing case, he's very concerned about the situation. And so you can bet that he is at the table as well, trying to figure this out so we make sure that we don't endanger any citizen of the United States. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Not necessarily. That's not how it works. People can then challenge in court -- people can challenge their immigration. That's why we have whole slates of immigration courts. It's very complicated. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q One quick follow on that. When you were answering to Bret that there's nothing imminent -- no imminent

MS. PERINO: I don't mean to suggest that there's -- they're not separated, it's not that -- we're not going to have the President make a decision and then wait for weeks or months to announce it, necessarily. It's just -- it's really premature to be talking about this. Obviously there's somebody out there talking about conversations that are internal and confidential that are being held within the interagency and we are not in a position to be able to talk about them publicly.

But I can confirm for you that we certainly are talking about them. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q One last thing, then. If the stakes are so high, and you're saying there's a possibility that

MS. PERINO: Well, I think you -- the Supreme Court, again, didn't provide a lot of answers. They just asked -- basically asked a lot of questions. And we don't know how this whole system would work for them to be able to exercise their now constitutional and habeas rights. It's unchartered territory, so we don't know. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, that's what we're working through right now. And we're trying to make sure that everyone remains safe and that enemy combatants who are a threat to innocent life are kept in detention.

Goyal. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Dana, two quick questions. One, as far as Afghanistan situation is concerned, Chairman Mullen

MS. PERINO: Where will it be discussed? Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: At the G8 -- in Afghanistan? Certainly many of the members of the G8 are part of NATO, and NATO is heading up the operation in Afghanistan. So I think it will probably come up, and probably in the bilaterals as well; the President has a series of them. And we'll continue to work with all of our partners to make sure that we can beat back the Taliban. We have taken some serious casualties, and a higher number of casualties than anybody would want. But we've also been going after the Taliban, and they've suffered a lot of casualties as well. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q And according to The Washington Post op-ed by Secretary General -- U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki

MS. PERINO: Well, I think -- look, the G8 is a good forum for a lot of different reasons. It brings together a multilateral, diplomatic way for people to share ideas and to actually take some action. One of the things President Bush said yesterday is that over the past eight -- this will be his eighth G8, and we have asked a lot of our partners in order to help us in combating HIV/AIDS or malaria, now neglected tropical diseases and health workers, amongst other things, in terms of energy, like the clean energy technology fund and this new major economies meeting process that's been taking place over the past year.

So it's a good forum to be able to discuss a lot of things, but the President also will talk about trade, fighting terrorism, making sure that we are helping each other in those areas, but at the same time thinking about the core mission of the G8, which is to try to help other nations rise -- lift themselves up out of poverty.

Go ahead, Olivier. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Dana, the French President is linking his attendance at the Olympic Games, the Opening Ceremonies

MS. PERINO: I'm sorry, who said that? Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'm not able to announce his schedule yet. He certainly is going to be going to China and I would certainly think that the Opening Ceremonies will be a part of that trip. But we also are pleased that the Dalai Lama and the Chinese are finally in discussions, and that's one of the things the President had called on. And he -- every time he talks to President Hu he talks to him about the importance of having a good relationship there with a peaceful man, the Dalai Lama. But also for all of China, that it's good to open up and to have better relations and to improve human rights there and make sure that people can live lives of freedom. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I said it's a distinct possibility. I don't remember the last word I -- actual words I said, but I would -- I think I said I would expect that the Opening Ceremonies could be a part of the schedule, but I can't announce his schedule yet. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Could be. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I think I said -- I said "expect" they will be. MS. PERINO: The transcript. (Laughter.) Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Thank you. Mom, help me. (Laughter.)

Look, I am not able to announce the President's schedule. But he is going to the Olympics and I expect that the Opening Ceremonies could be a part of that trip. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Okay, well, I hope we caught you in time, because a lot of people back there are ready to type

MS. PERINO: No. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: No, I'm not. And that's what the President has said before, which is he believes he's going to China to support first and foremost our athletes; he sees this as a sporting competition. But at the same time, just as he will this week when he sees President Hu, he will talk to him about these important issues of human rights and especially religious freedom.

Okay. Lambros. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q According to extensive reports (inaudible) of Turkey's (inaudible), in full cooperation with some

MS. PERINO: Are you talking about Turkey? Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, I think you've heard the President say he's a strong supporter of Turkey. He supported them for EU ascension, but he wants to make sure that democracy is firm in that country. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I think you actually might speak faster than I do, which is -- (laughter.) Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Between the President and who? Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: No, recently I don't think there's been anything. But I'll refer you to the State Department who might know more.

April. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Dana, back on the issue of Zimbabwe, the opposition leader is not happy with the AU. What is this

MS. PERINO: I think he has -- well, we have said that. We thought that the March 29th election should have stood, and we believe that because Mr. Tsvangirai won 48 percent of the vote to Mugabe's 43, that that was a clear indication. However, under their constitution, if you don't have a clear majority, then you have to go to a runoff. As we saw last week, President Mugabe made sure that it was a sham election, and Mr. Tsvangirai decided not to even participate, mostly because he was concerned about the safety of his supporters.

So Jendayi Frazer from the State Department, she is there in the region. She might be back now, but she has been very actively involved. And I'm not sure if we -- what our position is at the moment on a power-sharing arrangement. We do think that Mr. Tsvangirai won that election, and so we do not believe that Mr. Mugabe is the legitimate leader of Zimbabwe right now. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, I think that we've got some work to do. I think that first and foremost, you look at the U.N. Security Council who spoke with one voice; that was good. There were several African leaders who did speak out at the AU meeting, but obviously not to the satisfaction of all of us, and certainly not to Mr. Tsvangirai's. So we have work to do, but the main source of instability in sub-Saharan Africa is in Zimbabwe, and so the African leaders have an interest in making sure that they continue to press the situation, especially when it comes to the human condition, of people starving, young children orphaned, people afraid for their lives and living in absolute fear. And it's just terribly sad how President Mugabe has completely devastated his country.

John. Yes, John, go ahead. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: You're such a gentleman. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Thank you, Dana. Earlier this year -- going back to the rescue of Senator Ingrid Betancourt and

MS. PERINO: Okay. I don't believe -- I don't know if anyone in the administration has talked about it, so I -- I haven't seen everything that might have come out of the Defense Department or the State Department. What I can tell you is that the whole world now saw who is responsible for releasing the hostages, and that was President Uribe, who deserves all of the credit. We certainly supported the operation and provided some specific support.

I don't know, in terms of the intelligence threads that came out of that laptop, if it helped lead to this rescue. I'll leave it for the Colombians to make that determination and whether or not there is anything else, but I think that when it comes to the President of Colombia, he has proven himself to be a strong leader, one who is committed to making sure that the security of his country is improved. He is one of America's strongest allies in South America and in this hemisphere, and I think we should all look to him for inspiration for how one of these countries can be run, because he's really turned it around down there.

And it's one of the things that Congress is going to have to contemplate when they get back next week, is whether or not continuing to hold up the Colombia free trade agreement is actually, one, merited; and two, in our best interest. And I think the answer will be no. And I hope that by the end of this month that the Speaker of the House will change her position and allow for a vote on the Colombia free trade agreement. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: No, I'm not here campaigning for anybody. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. JOHNDROE: Good afternoon. This is an on-the-record, off-camera briefing by Dennis Wilder, National Security Council Senior Director for Asian Affairs; Dan Price, Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs, and Deputy National Security Advisor; as well as Jim Connaughton, Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality -- a briefing on the President's trip to Japan and the G8 Summit. We'll start with Dennis. MR. WILDER: Thank you. Good afternoon. I'd just like to take a couple of minutes to brief you on the bilateral agenda with Japanese Prime Minister Fukuda, as well as the bilateral meeting the President will have with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, and Chinese President Hu Jintao.

This will be the President's fourth visit to Japan since taking office, and his second meeting with Prime Minister Fukuda since he assumed the office last September. After arriving in Japan on Sunday, July 6th, the President will have an hour-long meeting with Prime Minister Fukuda, followed by a joint press briefing. Later that day, Prime Minister and Mrs. Fukuda have invited President and Mrs. Bush to a small social dinner.

The meeting with Prime Minister Fukuda offers a good opportunity to review the steps the United States and Japan have taken during this administration to strengthen our alliance, which is the cornerstone of our security policy in East Asia. As you may know, we are in the midst of a major force posture realignment in Japan that will see some American forces transferred from Japan to Guam, and other U.S. forces consolidated in areas of Japan away from major urban centers and better suited to military training.

The two leaders will also discuss the way ahead in the six-party talks as we work to put in place a verification regime so that we can verify that North Korea has given up its nuclear ambitions and stopped proliferating nuclear technology.

The President, as he did last Friday, will reassure the Japanese people that he will never forget the abduction of Japanese citizens by North Korea, and that we will continue to cooperate closely with Japan to obtain a swift resolution to the abduction issue.

I'm sure other topics of major international concern will be discussed between them, such as the situations in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Burma and Zimbabwe. The two leaders will also certainly compare notes just prior to the G8 meeting on major global issues such as how to bring the Doha Round negotiations to closure, and international policy on climate change. They will also likely give special attention to U.S.-Japan cooperation in the area of health and food security, particularly in Africa.

Let me now briefly discuss meetings the President will have on his final day in Japan, that is on July 9th, with President Lee and President Hu. In each of these meetings the President will have a chance to coordinate U.S. strategy in the six-party talks, and explore the best ways to move the process of Korean denuclearization and peace forward. Let me also note that the meeting with President Lee will be an opportunity to lay the groundwork for the visit that President Bush will make to South Korea, which is now scheduled for August 5th and 6th. That is just prior to the President going to Beijing for the Olympics.

As you may remember, President Lee, when he visited Camp David in April, said that he looked forward to creating a 21st-century strategic alliance with the United States. At this meeting in Japan the two Presidents will begin to put real substance to that goal by discussing ways in which to expand the peninsular regional and global dimensions of the alliance. President Bush and President Lee will discuss their commitment to getting their respective legislatures to ratify the U.S.-Korea free trade agreement, which will bring important benefits to workers, farmers, ranchers, and entrepreneurs in both the United States and Korea.

In the meeting with President Hu, President Bush will review developments and Sino-U.S. economic and political relations since their last meeting at APEC in Sydney almost one year ago. The President will be eager to hear from President Hu firsthand about the improvements in cross-strait relations and what the future holds there. He will also want to hear about the negotiations between Beijing and the representatives of the Dalai Lama that are going on even as we speak in Beijing today.

The President will also want to discuss a range of international issues with President Hu, where we hope to see China play a constructive role, such as on Darfur, Iran, Zimbabwe and Burma. As always, the President will remind China's leader of the importance the United States places on human rights and religious freedom. The two leaders are also likely to touch on the work of our two governments in forums such as the Strategic Economic Dialogue and the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade, aimed at improving the U.S.-China economic relationship. Finally, the President will stress to President Hu the need for China to actively contribute to a successful market-opening Doha Round.

And on that note, let me turn it over. MR. JOHNDROE: Before I introduce Dan Price, let me just say the President will also have several other bilateral meetings while he is there in Toyako, and we'll have those for you tomorrow or on Thursday.

All right, Dan. MR. PRICE: Well, good afternoon. I'm going to sketch out the kind of choreography of the summit, what is likely to happen on each day, and then focus on a few of the critical issues.

The summit will take place in Toyako, on the island of Hokkaido, and it will cover three days. On Monday, July 7th, it will begin with a lunch and working session involving the G8 leaders and leaders from seven African countries: Algeria, Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania and Senegal. We expect that these sessions will look at global issues, as well as development issues. The first day will finish with a dinner for the G8 leaders and spouses.

The second day, Tuesday, July 8th, will be devoted to the meetings of the G8. Leaders will have four sessions. We expect that they will discuss a broad range of issues, including development, Africa, food security, trade and investment policy, energy security, climate change, and issues relating to the global economy, including oil prices. We also expect that day the G8 leaders will discuss regional political issues, counterterrorism and non-proliferation.

On the third day, Wednesday, July 9th, it will begin with an outreach session with the G8 leaders and the leaders of Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa. These are the five outreach countries involved in the Heiligendamm process that was launched by Germany last year.

Following this session with those five countries there will be the leaders' meeting of the major economies. This is the G8, plus the five Heiligendamm outreach countries, plus Australia, Indonesia and South Korea. The major economies leaders' meeting will be followed by an outreach session and a discussion involving the G8 plus all of the outreach countries, and we expect that issues relating to the world economy and food security will figure prominently in those discussions.

Now I'd like to focus on a couple of issues that are of particular significance to the United States and that we think will receive considerable attention during these three days. The first has to do with the subject of accountability. The President has underscored the importance of ensuring the G8 members follow through on meeting commitments that had been made at previous summits. It's not enough for the G8 leaders to meet and issue declarations and make good promises; G8 members need to follow through with actions to make good on those promises.

We, together with our colleagues, have this year been focusing on enhancing G8 accountability and establishing mechanisms to ensure that G8 commitments are met. I'm not going to review in detail all of the prior G8 commitments, but there are some very significant ones that were made with respect to malaria, HIV/AIDS, polio, assistance to Africa, and committed levels of funding to fight AIDS, malaria, TB, and other infectious diseases.

The United States has strongly encouraged efforts to produce G8 accountability reports that will provide greater transparency into actions to implement these specific commitments. We would also like to see accountability become a fundamental part of the G8 going forward, and are seeking to ensure that the accountability reports released this year are updated annually.

Let's start with health. At this year's G8 summit, we expect leaders will be discussing efforts to fulfill past commitments on HIV/AIDS, malaria, and polio. The United States is meeting its pledges in all of these areas. To date, through PEPFAR, the United States has supported lifesaving treatments for nearly 1.7 million people in sub-Saharan Africa. The President's reauthorization request for $30 billion over the next five years would provide treatment for 2.5 million people, prevent 12 million new infections, and provide care for 12 million people, including 5 million orphans and vulnerable children.

At least year's G8, the United States challenged the G8 to match our efforts under the reauthorization request for PEPFAR. The G8 agreed, and is committed to provide treatment for 5 million people, prevent 24 million new infections, and provide care for 24 million people.

On malaria, through the President's Malaria Initiative, the United States is working, itself, to reduce malaria-related deaths by 50 percent in the 15 hardest-hit African countries. At Heiligendamm, at last year's summit, again, the United States challenged the rest of the G8 to match our efforts under PMI, and again the G8 took up that challenge, committing to meet the needs in a total of 30 of the hardest-hit countries in Africa. In 2007, more than 25 million people have benefitted from the President's Malaria Initiative, dealing with prevention and treatment interventions such as the provisions of nets, spraying, and medicines.

There was also a commitment on polio at past G8s. And here again the United States has honored its commitments by maintaining its level of contributions. We've provided over $1.4 billion for polio eradication since 1988, almost double what any other country has done. We have urged our G8 partners to honor the pledge to maintain or increase their funding levels. We are committed to finish the job and eradicate polio.

We also expect that the President will discuss with his counterparts two new initiatives that he has announced in the area of health care. One is training of health care workers, and the other is fighting neglected tropical diseases. Like the malaria and HIV/AIDS initiatives last year, these initiatives -- we have suggested that these initiatives also include benchmarks for measurable results.

On health worker training, you may recall that during the visit of Prime Minister Brown in Washington, the President and the Prime Minister announced an initiative to increase the number of health care workers in four African countries, to work towards the World Health Organization's minimum threshold of 2.3 health workers per 1,000 people. The U.S. and the U.K. will be working together in partnership with Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique and Zambia towards this goal. And the United States is investing at least $1.2 billion over five years toward the effort in these five -- these four countries. We expect to discuss this initiative with other G8 leaders.

Similarly, with respect to neglected tropical diseases, as you may recall, the President announced a U.S. $350 million initiative to fight certain major neglected tropical diseases. That $350 million figure is a commitment over a five-year period that would provide treatment for more than 300 million people in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

At the U.S.-EU summit, the European Union announced support for both the neglected tropical disease initiative and the health care worker initiative, as did Prime Minister Brown during his visit here. The President will be discussing this initiative -- or these initiatives with his colleagues at the G8.

At the Gleneagles summit in 2005, the G8 pledged to double aid to Africa by 2010, and noted this commitment, in combination with other donors, would result in an increase of aid to Africa by $25 billion in 2010. At that same summit, Gleneagles, President Bush announced that the United States would double our assistance to sub-Saharan Africa between 2004 and 2010, and we are on track to meet that goal and increase our assistance to $8.67 billion by 2010.

Let me turn now to the subject of food security. We expect that the leaders will be discussing the G8's response to the rise in food prices and to efforts to boost food security through short-, medium-, and long-term approaches. We think it's important that the G8 address immediate food aid needs, including through the local purchase of food aid and providing essential non-food assistance such as seed and fertilizers. It's also important to improve coordination among assistance providers to work towards the goal of increasing agricultural production and improving delivery of food aid.

And finally, it's necessary that we address the suite of policies that inhibit agricultural production, or inhibit the development of open and efficient agricultural markets, such as restrictions on exports or restrictions on biotechnology. We hope to discuss among the G8 how we can work with African-led frameworks, such as the Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Program to boost agricultural production.

As far as USG actions go, as you know, on May 1, the President announced a new initiative to provide $770 million to support food aid and development programs, bringing to nearly $1 billion total additional USG funds announced to address the food crisis since mid-April. With these additional funds, the United States is on track to provide a total of nearly $5 billion to fight global hunger in 2008 and 2009.

Let me turn to trade and investment liberalization. We expect the G8 leaders will discuss the necessity of maintaining and promoting open markets for trade and investment, particularly in the light of growing protectionist sentiment. With respect to Doha, we anticipate that the leaders will discuss the importance of achieving an ambitious conclusion to the Doha Round, focusing on the three market access pillars of the negotiation: agriculture, industrial goods, and services. The United States believes that the Doha negotiations have made progress in recent days, although there is much work ahead of us. The United States will continue our intensive efforts to resolve differences, and if other developed and major developing countries work with us in that spirit, we can achieve success.

With respect to international investment, we think that the G8 leaders are likely to discuss the benefits of international investment to the global economy in terms of stimulating growth, creating jobs, enhancing productivity, and fostering competitiveness. We believe the G8 leaders should discuss the importance of the G8 countries themselves embracing, and encouraging others to adopt, certain core principles on open investment, such as fair, equitable and non-discriminatory treatment; the need for transparency and predictability; and the importance of ensuring that any governmental review of proposed foreign investments be focused on national security concerns.

Let me turn to the issue of climate. As we have prepared for the G8 summit and the major economies leaders' meeting, we have found increasing recognition that meeting the challenge of global climate change requires contributions from all the major economies, and that climate change policies must be compatible with economic growth and energy security.

In the view of the United States, and increasingly in the view of others, a post-2012 climate change agreement under the U.N. Framework Convention will be effective only if all major economies undertake greenhouse gas mitigation actions reflected as binding commitments in a future international agreement.

Now let me address some of the issues that could be discussed within the G8 and within the major economies meeting. We think that the G8 countries, due to their resources and capabilities, have crucial roles to play in addressing climate change. Technology change is key to achieving our interlinked objectives on climate change, energy security and economic development.

At the G8 summit, we are hopeful to see support for the launching of a clean technology fund that will facilitate the spread of clean technologies in the developing world. The United States has committed $2 billion to this fund. In addition, we would like to see G8 governments enhance and increase their funding for R&D involving clean energy technologies, which are the key to addressing climate change. In this regard the United States is investing more than $4 billion this year, and has requested the same for next, for research and development of technologies to reduce, avoid, or sequester greenhouse gas emissions.

This year alone, the United States alone will make available more than $40 billion in loan guarantees to support investment in innovative clean technologies. We also hope to find support for a wide range of actions to accelerate energy efficiency in G8 countries.

Now let me say a word about the major economies leaders' meeting. We think that the meeting, the major economies leaders' meeting, will be an important demonstration of leadership on climate change by the world's largest economies, developed and developing. In support of the U.N. negotiations, the major economies meetings, or MEM, process can advance some important themes: First, emphasizing that climate change is interlinked with energy security and economic development, getting all of the relevant parties -- all of the major economies that together constitute 80 percent of emissions and 80 percent of energy use, recognizing and discussing how these challenges interrelate.

We also think that leaders will be in a position to discuss the value and contribution of the major economies meetings in building confidence, identifying common ground and making recommendations to the broader U.N. negotiating group. We also think that it will be possible for leaders to spotlight the importance of developing and deploying technology in achieving large-scale emissions over the long term.

Building on the work of the leaders' representatives, -- and Jim Connaughton, our leaders' representative, is here -- the leaders of the major economies will, for the first time -- the leaders will meet for the first time to discuss as a group a range of issues, including the need for a long-term global goal; national mitigation goals and plans; concrete early actions, including the desirability of sectoral approaches, technology cooperation, forestry; intensified WTO discussions to address trade issues relevant to climate change; and improving measurement methods. We remain focused on finding outcomes that are ambitious, realistic and achievable, and we believe that others share this view.

And finally, as the President has made clear, the United States is prepared to sign on to binding international commitments if all major economies also are prepared to make binding international commitments, recognizing that what each economy commits to will differ according to its national circumstances, demographics, energy needs and other relevant factors.

I think I'll stop there, and while we have the benefit of Jim's presence, entertain any questions you may have on climate or the other topics. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. PRICE: Let me say that there's been a lot of discussion about whether the major economies leaders' meeting or G8 would establish a numerical long-term goal for emissions reductions. And we've had good discussion really in both fora. I think there's broad recognition among all major economies that having a long-term goal is desirable in pointing us all in the right direction and indicating the scale of the challenge we face.

There's also recognition that progress toward any long-term goal will require the efforts of all major economies, not just the G8. Indeed, with evidence mounting of rapidly rising emissions from emerging markets, action by the G8 alone will not be effective to address this problem. That's why we believe that all major economies and indeed all parties to the U.N. convention need to be part of the discussion on setting a long-term goal.

To us, it is not appropriate for the G8 countries alone to set a goal or to pick a numerical target and then seek to impose it on major developing economies. Those countries need to be part of the discussion, and they have been part of the discussion, through the major economies process.

The Bali Action Plan makes clear that in respect of the shared vision and long-term goal, it's for all to decide, and here leadership by all major economies is needed in coming up with that shared goal. What is important, and what has become important in these discussions, is that all major economies are moving toward a shared vision on how to achieve a low-carbon future, again recognizing that what each economy does will differ according to its national circumstances. And we're making progress on this in the major economies process.

We've discussed a range of ideas on a long-term vision and goal, including a 50-percent reduction by 2050, and have been exploring in the major economies process the implications of particular goals for both long term and mid term. We've advanced that discussion in the major economies process. We expect that the advances in this discussion at the leaders' rep level will be reflected in the discussion among the leaders themselves, and no doubt reflected in the declaration next week.

Critically, ultimate agreement in the U.N. on a long-term goal will gain confidence through the work we do together on important topics like global technology R&D, accelerating commercial deployment through clean technology, and the establishment of national mid-term goals and plans, and through work on sectoral approaches. These discussions, whether in the G8 or in the major economies process, in July are not the end of the story. These discussions will continue just as our work in the UNFCCC negotiations will continue, heading towards the meeting in Copenhagen in December 2009. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Given the President's expression of strong support for the dollar, do you expect exchange rates

MR. PRICE: I have no comment on that at this time. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. PRICE: Issues relating to the global economy are on the agenda. And when leaders get together they're, of course, free to discuss whatever it is they wish to discuss. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Thank you, Mr. Price. Earlier this year, at the last World Bank-IMF meeting here, President

MR. PRICE: Well, I think the issue of food aid will certainly be discussed among the leaders, and the United States is firmly supportive of the view that we need to meet immediate food aids. We have midterm developmental goals that we need to seek to achieve in terms of boosting agricultural activity. We've got infrastructure bottlenecks we've got to address, and we've got a set of policy questions that also need to be addressed. So the issues that you raise will certainly be discussed. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. FRATTO: Good morning. We're on our way to Jackson, Mississippi. The President had his normal briefings this morning. At 12:55 p.m. local time he'll attend a Senator Roger Wicker fundraiser, and it's also a Mississippi Victory Committee luncheon. It's at a private residence, and as you know is custom, it will be closed press.

At 3:25 p.m. this afternoon, the President participates in a roundtable on housing counseling with a group called Family Service Agency. I'll come back and say a few words about this group. And that's in North Little Rock, Arkansas.

One note on that. Secretary Preston -- HUD Secretary Preston will meet us in Jackson and travel with us the rest of the day.

At 5:05 p.m., the President attends an Arkansas Victory 2008 reception; private residence in Little Rock, Arkansas. And then we return to the White House at 9:40 p.m. this evening.

A little background on Family Services Agency. You've probably heard us talk a lot about the HOPE NOW Alliance. The Family Service Agency and certain other credit counseling agencies like them existed far before the creation of the HOPE NOW Alliance. They have some affiliation now with the network of the HOPE NOW Alliance, but these are people in local communities who meet face to face with the citizens of those communities to help them with their credit counseling trouble they may have, including problems they may have in keeping up with their mortgage payments.

These are people who want to stay in their houses; they want to clear up their credit histories, get back on a schedule that they can sustain and improve their credit scores, and that kind of thing. So these are people who live in a community, they're there face to face, meeting with people. They've been affiliated with HUD, going back to 1942. There are about 1,700 of these kinds of offices across the country. This is the -- Family Services Agency is one of the largest. Neighbor Works, which is another HOPE NOW Alliance affiliated -- Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. PRICE: As I said, the 10-point plan outlined by President Bob Zoellick has many points that are in common with the U.S. approach, so I do not see any conflict at all between what the World Bank has suggested as the focus of considerations and what we are also focusing on. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. FRATTO: It's not government-run, it's independent. It does get some federal dollars. In recent years it's gotten about between $3.6 million and $3.7 million for different programs. But most of the HUD -- million, with an "m" -- this particular organization directly. It also gets funding indirectly through other organizations that might -- where that funding might originate as federal dollars, as well.

The President, in the roundtable, will have an opportunity to sit with a number of the credit counselors, themselves, and the individuals who run this particular office. There will be a homeowner -- one homeowner in the group who will -- so he'll have the opportunity to hear the story of that individual, and we'll have background information for you all in terms of everyone participating in the roundtable later on.

I think that's it. So with that, I'll take your questions. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Two questions on HIV/AIDS. First, the President's PEPFAR reauthorization is kind of stalled

MR. PRICE: Let me start -- I'm not going to comment on the text of a draft communique that is not yet public. Let me say that there is no intention by any G8 member of which I am aware to backtrack on any of the pledges that have been made. And as I said, we believe it is important not only to make clear that we intend to fulfill our commitments, but to produce tangible evidence of that in the form of progress reports. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. FRATTO: Well, it's both. I mean -- and I have no idea why or how many people they tried to reach out to. I think people are naturally somewhat reluctant to talk about their troubled financial history, troubled credit history. It's not the thing that most of us would want to sit around and talk about in public. So I don't know, though, if they tried to get more, or not. But certainly the people who are dealing with troubled homeowners every day are in that room, and those are the people who handle these cases and meet and talk to them. And they can relay the stories of many individuals with credit problems. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. PRICE: I think the G8 and the African beneficiaries of PEPFAR know the commitment of this administration towards dealing with HIV/AIDS, as well as other diseases that have had such a debilitating effect on Africa. No country's commitment is greater than that of the United States. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. FRATTO: I can't speak to specific areas of progress, but discussions continue, certainly. And members of the Senate know I think pretty clearly where the President is on this and what our position has been on various elements of housing legislation.

There are parts of the Senate bill that we really like and think are -- would make an important contribution to improving conditions in the housing markets and in financial markets, and so -- the strong oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- so the GSE part we really like. There are other portions of the bill -- FHA modernization -- that we like, although we'd like to see some critical elements added to FHA modernization.

And there are some elements of the bill that we don't like that we'll have to deal with, and some of that is on the financing for the expansion of FHASecure. This $4 billion of funding for CDBG -- block grants -- is something we don't think will contribute to solutions or prevent foreclosures, and in fact, it's funding that actually goes to those holding these foreclosed loans, and that's the original lenders. And we prefer not to be subsidizing lenders. We'd rather try to focus on ways we can help homeowners who want to stay in their homes.

But the Senate will come back. We hope to see that bill come back with some improvements in a way that we can get the President a bill that he can sign. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. PRICE: I think leaders will want to discuss the issue of the rise in oil prices. They may wish to discuss outcomes from the recent conference. There's a whole set of issues that they may wish to talk about in connection with oil prices. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. FRATTO: We'd like to see it done as soon as possible. The Senate put off a lot of work. They've been in session for a long time and some very critical pieces of legislation got put off for yet another recess, and now this last session is getting pretty close to the August recess. So the Senate is running out of time to get work done.

And as we know, they put off the Medicare physician payment fix; they put off FISA, which we've been working on for a year now, to try to get long-term legislation; housing has been put off; and we still haven't seen action on other pieces of legislation we think important, like Colombia FTA and some other issues.

So I think they understand that time is running out and they're running short of legislative days and they need to get back to work quickly and try to get these bills to the President. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Two questions, if you will. The first: Why is it that the G8 and the major economies as a group

MR. PRICE: Well, I think that there are a number of things that have come out of the major economies process; consideration of a long-term goal is one of them, and it's an important one. It will be up to the leaders, as they sit there and discuss, to see how far they wish to go on quantifying a long-term goal. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. FRATTO: Well, we've already taken steps on our own to expand FHASecure so that we -- so that FHASecure can go out and reach more troubled homeowners. And so those are -- those administrative changes that we've been able to do are being implemented by Brian Montgomery over at the Federal Housing Administration. They're doing those things. The HOPE NOW Alliance is expanding their network and expanding their reach and dealing with lenders in ways to show how lenders can be -- take a more standardized approach to helping the individuals.

So all of those things continue. All of the initiatives that the administration took are continuing and, in fact, expanding and trying to reach more people. So that will continue.

But there's no question that it is -- we are now approaching a year since the President called on Congress to pass housing legislation. I'll remind you, it was August 31st of last year. It's hard to believe that we've gone 10 months now waiting for Congress to act, from that urgent call that the President made on August 31st of last year to pass FHA modernization, pass GSE reform. And that was the day that he announced the creation of FHASecure.

Now here we are in July of the following year and Congress still has not sent the President legislation that he can sign. So like we -- so, yes, you're right; every day that we wait, the problem gets worse, more people go into foreclosure. We could really use the extra tools and some of the extra authorities that are contained in this legislation. We would really like to see the GSE oversight part of this become law. That would be a major contribution not just to housing, but also to the long-term risk factor for the federal government. So it's -- this is critical legislation, and we need to see them move on it. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. PRICE: It is up to the leaders to, I think -- and then I'll invite Jim to comment -- the test of whether the MEM is or is not successful is not whether, at this stage in July, all 16 agree on a long-term goal. This process will continue. Certainly from our perspective, to reach an agreement on a long-term goal is desirable and something we think the major economies needs to work to. Whether it is in a position to do so at this point, or make other statements about the long-term goal, that remains to be seen.

Let me invite Jim Connaughton to offer a comment on this. MR. CONNAUGHTON: Again, this goes to your -- the reason to get together. Actually, there's a quite dynamic agenda to the major economies meetings. A long-term goal is just one piece, but that's a long-term vision. The more essential aspects of the discussion actually center on each nation's development of their own midterm plans and goals, and the structure by which those can be reflected in a new international agreement. That goes to the core of what we're going to do now and in the mid-term.

In support of that, we've also initiated conversations about shared sectoral approaches, which is a bottom-up approach: How do we get our steel sector, our aluminum sector, our transportation sectors focused on the best outcomes that each of our nations can achieve? We do some things really well in America that aren't being done in India right now. If India can replicate that, they can make further progress on emissions. So this is a very practical set of conversations on pushing for best practices in key emitting sectors.

With that, then, comes the ability to do much more technology exchange on the technologies that are central to solving the problem. It's coal-produced power, it's personal transportation, and it's forestry and land use. These are the big drivers of climate-related emissions and activities. The major economies are the ones that engage in most of that activity. And so we've got very specific conversations going on on forestry, for example; a very specific conversation about more technology exchange on carbon capture and storage from coal. We're even talking about how do we get large-scale renewable projects going, and how do we get nuclear energy going at a pace that far exceeds the current level of investment. So these are very practical discussions that, really, this group of countries will make that happen.

Finally, you may have read a bit about just the issue of measuring emission reductions. We do pretty good about measurement in America and a few of the other developed countries, but we've got an accounting system on greenhouse gases that is not as precise as it could or should be, and even getting common ground on measures is going to be important in order to demonstrate the success of different policies.

So just note, you'll see, as a result of this conversation, a fairly expansive set of activities that this group has generated in the near term that will help lead to an agreement next year, but also that will sustain a whole variety of other activities in support of an agreement next year. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q And, sir, I'm sorry for hogging, but how concerned, though -- with the stock market tumbling again

MR. FRATTO: I'm not going to try to predict the future of markets. There are people out there in the private sector that do that. What we're focused on is trying to improve the economic fundamentals. And you're speaking about one of them -- that's the housing sector, which has an impact not just on financial markets, credit markets, but also on the real economy. People aren't out there buying homes; they're not going out to home improvement stores and buying equipment; they're not hiring people to come and work on those homes; they're not filling those homes with furniture; people aren't building equity up in their homes. So it has ripples that move throughout the economy, and you want to try to stem that as much as possible.

Now, in terms of the President's concern, like I said, he's been speaking about this on a regular basis for well over a year now, about the importance of getting this legislation done so that we can avoid turbulence, so that we can mitigate problems for homeowners out there in the real economy, and for investors out there in the financial sector, so that we can have some stability there and the financial industry can do the job that it does best, which is supplying the funds to help to grow this economy. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q If I could add a second question, which is the reassurance the President will give to Japan that

MR. JOHNDROE: I think you heard Dennis already address that, and you've heard Secretary Rice and the President address that last week when the North Koreans made their agreement and -- or presented their declaration -- Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. FRATTO: You know we don't talk about the value of the dollar. I think the President commented on it in an interview yesterday. There's always someone who will bring it up, and I'm sure if they bring it up the President will be happy to make them aware of our policy on it.

But, as you know, the G7 -- well, G8 finance ministers met recently. Hank Paulson, who leads our policy on currency, he has spoken to it, as well. And if the President feels that he has something he needs to say, he will. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q They didn't address whether or not there was an agreement between the United States and Japan

MR. JOHNDROE: No, what the U.S. position has always been -- and the Japanese and everyone in the six-party process are well aware of this -- is that the United States would remain committed to the resolution of the abduction issue. And I think President Bush and Prime Minister Fukuda had a very good conversation about this last week. Secretary Rice had a very good visit to Japan this past week, as well. And I think the Japanese government and the Japanese people should know that the United States will not forget the abduction issue. And so the Japanese and the DPRK are involved in discussions, as well, and we want to see those progress.

We'll take two more and then we have to go. MR. PRICE: Mike, right? Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. FRATTO: Nothing on that. I'll refer you to the Israelis on that. There's nothing for me to report. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Just one on the accountability issue that you talked about, Dan. I'm just a little bit unclear

MR. PRICE: We, the United States, will not be naming names. We -- and we're not naming names today and we don't intend to name names. That's not the point. The point is for the G8 countries themselves to produce reports showing how each of them is meeting the pledges made in the G8. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. FRATTO: It's a tough time for automakers. I think the changes in -- the slowdown in the overall economy -- we're now in a period of slower growth, and that was going to have an -- that was always going to have an impact on that important sector -- combining that with the very high gasoline prices that we've seen in recent years and, most recently in recent weeks, are causing customers to change the kinds of vehicles that they want to buy. And that means that the automakers are going through a real transition. They're changing their vehicle fleets to try to respond to the tastes of customers out there. And so there's no question it's a tough time, not just for U.S. automakers, but even for foreign automakers making cars in the United States are experiencing some of the same challenges. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. PRICE: I think it is fair to say that in respect of a certain number of these pledges, we are challenged in meeting them. As I said, the United States has met its commitments as made in past G8s. And it's important to demonstrate for the world and for the beneficiaries of these pledges that we are meeting the commitment; that we are not, year after year, simply making promises without looking back to see, are we fulfilling them. And we think it would enhance transparency, credibility and reliability of what the G8 says to institute such a mechanism in respect of their core pledges. MR. JOHNDROE: One last question from Mark. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q I had questions on two other quick topics. What's the reaction from the White House so far about

MR. FRATTO: Actually, I really wanted to -- look forward to what happened today out at the AU-EU meeting. I don't have a new report on what was said out there. But I think what you saw yesterday was a number of African leaders who spoke out actually quite forcefully about what was happening in Zimbabwe. And I think, in particular, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf from Liberia was very strong in her remarks, and a number of other African leaders. That alone is a major change for how the African community has traditionally responded to concerns on the African continent. I think Prime Minister Odinga in Kenya also addressed this issue, and he, having recently had to deal with a controversial election, I think has a lot of credibility on that issue, as well.

We'd like to see all leaders in Africa and outside of Africa characterize what is going on in Zimbabwe for what it is, and as the President described in his statement the other day, that it is a sham; it's unfair to the people of Zimbabwe that they don't have the opportunity, through a normal democratic process that is free and fair, to select their leader absent of corruption and intimidation.

We're going to continue to press on it. Secretary of State Rice made it clear that we're going to keep it on the agenda at the U.N. Security Council. And so we'll continue to press on it. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MR. PRICE: I think the President has been fairly consistent in what he has sought in these G8 summits, in terms of addressing these critically important health and development issues in Africa; in addressing questions of global security; in addressing questions of the need to maintain open economies; the need to promote democracy and growth. I think that at this G8 the President's messages will be consistent with those that he has carried to each G8 since he's become President. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Okay, and one other point. It appears Senator Obama is planning to speak today about carrying

MR. FRATTO: Yes, I saw those reports. I haven't seen what Senator Obama intends to say. But obviously all of you who've covered the President know how important the faith-based initiative is to him. And you've seen from events that we've had in recent weeks, whether dealing with recidivism in prison or dealing with global health issues like PEPFAR, the contribution that faith-based -- the faith-based community makes here in our country and across the world. If the future potential presidential candidates support it, I think that's something that we all would be very happy about. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Hi. I don't have anything to start with. Sorry I'm late. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, I think let's see how the meeting goes. We don't believe that the Mugabe regime is a legitimate government. We think that because they ran a sham election last week, in which they intimidated every voter who would have voted against Mugabe, that the African leaders had an opportunity at this week's meeting to really dig into these issues. Because one of the single greatest challenges of regional instability in southern Africa is Zimbabwe. And let's just see how the meeting goes.

I think that they do understand -- a lot of those leaders in Africa understand and did speak out before the sham election. So I think we should let the meeting take place and see what happens.

I do think that it is unfortunate that the Mugabe -- Mugabe's actions has cast a negative light on some really good democratic leaders in Africa. I don't want them all to be painted with the same brush, because I do think that there are many of them who are working very hard to institute democratic reforms in their own way, commensurate with their culture and their traditions and their history.

And so I think that we will continue to put the pressure on. In the meantime, regardless of what happens at that African Union meeting, President Bush has instructed the Secretaries of State and Treasury to develop sanctions against the regime and we will be working on those. Those sanctions could also go against those who support the regime. So as Secretaries Rice and Paulson work on those, we'll continue to keep you updated. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: They could be. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: We will press for strong action by the United Nations, but we could also act unilaterally. It could come in multiple ways. Obviously sanctions work best when there are multiple parties working in concert, like we are with the European Union when it comes to getting Iran to halt its uranium enrichment so that we can have talks with them. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I think that we'll have to see. I don't know if that's necessarily clear. What we would like is for people, first and foremost, to feel safe in their own country and to let their voices be heard. I know that down in the area there's conversation about a possible power-sharing agreement. I don't know a lot about that; I think that it's a little bit too early to say. But first and foremost, we want people to feel safe in their own country.

More on Zimbabwe? Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Okay. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I think that the President has taken a very firm stand on it. He's working -- he pushed very hard last week for the U.N. Security Council to put forward a president's statement, which has to -- which requires a unanimous consent by all 15 parties, including the South African leader. And then he called for the Secretaries of State and Treasury to work on sanctions against the regime and those who support it. And we will continue to press on it. The President is very interested in what's going to happen in the area. And I think that the African leaders, knowing that there is a huge problem of instability in their region casts a pall on all of them, and so I think that they'll have incentive to work for it to make something happen. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I think -- I'm just not going to speculate on any such action. I don't know of any that's being contemplated.

I'm going to go back to April, because she had one, too, on this. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Dana, as you're talking about these stiff sanctions, possibility of stiff sanctions on Zimbabwe

MS. PERINO: Well, again, I think that sanctions would be targeted to the leader and his cronies and then those who support the regime. But what we will continue to do is continue to provide food assistance to more than 1 million people, and then AIDS -- HIV/AIDS treatment to more than 40,000 people there in Zimbabwe who need that treatment. We'll continue to do that -- and I believe that the NGOs were allowed to go back in and to try to help feed those people; that happened I think a couple of weeks ago. But we're going to keep a close eye on it and we'll try to make sure that no one suffers humanitarianly [sic].

But this is also -- I mean, this is something that the leader of Zimbabwe -- now the discredited leader of Zimbabwe -- has done to his own country. And he's led them to this so that -- whereas this was a country that was a shining jewel in Africa, one that was going -- that was able to export food, it was the breadbasket of Africa, is now one that is one of the most impoverished nations. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'm not sure President Bush has. I know Secretary Rice had been in contact with all of the leaders on the Security Council in order to make sure that presidents' statement went out. And Jendayi Frazer is still in the region and working on it.

Les. On this? Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: It would be impossible for me to quantify. I don't know, Les. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Does the White House believe that in the United States there have ever been as many demonstrations

MS. PERINO: Well, I think that any time anyone -- any time there is suffering or people aren't allowed to live free as everybody is guaranteed the right to under God, as the President has said, that that should be condemned. I'm not going to comment as to how many protests there are against a regime. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'm going to move on, Les. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'm going to move on. Olivier. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Can I just clarify a couple of things? One, when you talked about targeted sanctions against the

MS. PERINO: It could be, it's too early to speculate. Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: No, I think actually what I mean is I -- a lot of African nations -- Tanzania, for example -- have moved quite far forward in their democratic reforms. And unfortunately because of the way the world works -- this is not a criticism of the media -- but negative stories get attention and the stories about progress and the good work that people are doing in order to help their populations don't necessarily get the attention that they deserve. And so I just think that people would hear a lot more about the negative actions in Zimbabwe than they would about the positives in other countries and that that would be unfortunate.

Last one for you, April, and then I'll go -- Transcript and your responses (0), Email this.

Q Okay. Back on the sanctions, the British government has sanctions to include the fact that many

MS. PERINO: Travel bans are certainly possible. I don't know about the UK's specific