MS. PERINO: Good afternoon. Happy Friday. I have nothing to begin with; go ahead. Kelly. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I didn't -- I wasn't there for the conversation. I know that they did speak. The President was happy to take a phone call from the Speaker, as he always is. They had a conversation in which Speaker Pelosi asked the President not to veto the bill. The President has been very clear for months that if the bill came to him in its current form, that he would veto it. That is his intention. And I don't see any changing of the minds there.

But what he did say is that, I'm going to veto this bill and after that let's see if we can sit down and come to a compromise. The President's position and the principle that he will stick to is that the neediest children should be served first, and that's the one he's going to stand by. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, you know, just one thing about that -- I think that the rhetoric in Washington can get so heated sometimes. I think it is preposterous for people to suggest that the President of the United States doesn't care about children, that he wants children to suffer. There are things I've been reading about feelings that the President -- that there's -- ascribing feelings that the President has about children that are absolutely not his view. You don't see the President suggesting that no one cares about children.

The President's principle on this program, the State Children's Health Insurance Program, is that the neediest children should be taken care of first. The bill that they signed -- that they passed last night specifically eliminated the requirement that states enroll 90 percent of children in households under 200 percent of the federal poverty level. And that's the reason the President is going to veto this bill.

The President cares just as much as anyone else about the children of the United States. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: It eliminated -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: -- it eliminated that requirement from the bill. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: No, but it rules out the requirement, and the point is that the President believes that the requirement is important for the neediest children to be taken care of first.

There is a policy difference here. It's not about who cares about children more than the other. It's a policy difference. And the President is saying, let's take care of the neediest children first, let's not put scarce federal dollars towards a program that was meant for the poorest children and let it creep up to middle income families with incomes up to $83,000 a year. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: And on that point, the President consistently since his -- since he has been President has tried to address the root causes of our health care problems. If you go back to this year's State of the Union, he wants to provide Americans, all Americans, with access to affordable health care. And he has proposed ways to do that through our tax system and making it more fair for people to be able to buy insurance on their own; on portability, meaning allowing people who are changing jobs to be able to take their health care with them; to be able to work with the states in order to provide more money. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: And another point on S-CHIP -- the other thing on S-CHIP is that the states are welcome to spend as much additional money as they would like on their program in their state. This is about a federal match program. And so the President is going to veto the bill, and then we will get about the business of talking about how to move forward.

Another point to make, just so that you all know, there is an extension of this program in the continuing resolution. So no one is going to lose their coverage because of this veto. There will be an extension and then we'll move forward.

Terry. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: The President does not have second thoughts. We have continued to reach out to members of Congress to let them know what the President's position is and why he feels that way. And he recognizes that there are some on Capitol Hill who disagree. As the President, he has the power to veto a bill, and that's what he intends to do. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, certainly we want -- when the President says to Nancy Pelosi that he would like to make sure that we all sit down and have a conversation, that will include the -- members of the President's own party. I don't have any updates for you in terms of scheduling on that. We don't know when we will get the bill to veto it. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Of the veto? Stay tuned. I would assume so. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, we'll have to see. I'm not a vote-counter. But right now it looks like the House would not be able to override the President's veto.

Roger. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Just by Sunday night. So we'll keep you updated. He will sign it before then, to make sure that everything -- all the trains continue to run on time. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: He will sign it. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I don't know.

Peter. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I think that the House Republicans are able to make up their own mind and to look at a policy and make a decision. No doubt that it's difficult, especially politically and in a communications -- it's a communications challenge when there are advertisements running in your district saying that you don't care about children, which is preposterous. But if you stand on principle, you ultimately will win on the end because you have good policy. And that's what the President -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Sure, there's a lot of pressure from all different sides, and we're going to have an increasing number of spending bill fights going into the fall. As you know, the Congress hasn't passed any of its appropriations bills yet, and we're going to have a continuing resolution. The President would prefer to have some bills so that we can actually make sure that we're spending taxpayer dollars wisely.

And advice that the President would give, I think, is that they have to think about the principle here. What the President wants to do is cover the neediest children first. And that is a really good principle to stand on.

Paula. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Another principle the President made in his State of the Union, like you said, was to increase

MS. PERINO: I'm not going to comment on what future discussions are going to be. It could be a range of things that they talk about. But I can tell you this: In the State of the Union the President announced his health care policies, and we did lots of outreach on that. And we would hope that the Congress would try to take those up. And that was in the President's budget. At the same time -- and in the same budget -- was the President's proposal to increase the S-CHIP funding by 20 percent for the next five years. And so those two things have been going on a parallel track -- we didn't link them, meaning that you could only have one without the other. They were both in the budget. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: As I told you earlier -- probably in my office -- there's going to be lots of discussions moving forward and we'll keep you updated as we can.

Martha. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, the fact is that -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Sure. Well the fact is that there are -- I don't know which report it is, there's lot of reports out on this -- but that there are many children in the states who would qualify for S-CHIP who are not signed up. They are not enrolled. And over the years the states have signed up children of higher incomes that wouldn't necessarily fit under that 200 percent of poverty level or under. We would like to have more aggressive searching for these other children who could be on this program and take care of them first. And the other thing we don't want to do is have people move off of private insurance onto government-run health care. We don't think that's the right policy here. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: We should sign them up. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: We don't think that we should move -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, because we don't think that we should move children who are already able to be covered under private health care insurance should be simply moved off of that and put on to a government program. If they have private health insurance, that is a better system for the children as well. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: That has been happening. That has been happening.

Goyal. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Dana, two quick questions. One: At the United Nations, that was really one of best speeches President

MS. PERINO: Well, we are very pleased that U.N. Envoy Mr. Gambari is going to be going to Burma; he will be there tomorrow. We have called on the Burmese to allow him to be able to meet with anyone he wants to meet -- military leaders, religious leaders, and Aung San Suu Kyi. And we will have more information as we get it out of that meeting. It could take a little bit of time over the weekend to get that. In addition to that, yesterday Treasury Department tightened sanctions on many individuals, and the State Department has just announced additional people who are placed on their travel ban. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Oh. Well, the President of Iran said a lot of things in the United Nations but I think the one thing that he accomplished was to remind the United Nations Security Council why they should remain tough, hang together, and make sure that Iran never has a nuclear weapon.

Toby. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Go ahead, Toby. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I wasn't there for their private discussion. I know that the President was pleased that -- I think that the Chinese were helpful in allowing to make sure the U.N. Special Envoy was allowed to get there, to Burma. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, I think that they've had impact in other places around the world when we've used them. It's a good tool. And by tightening them on the individuals we announced yesterday, in addition to this travel ban -- we can do that from our end, but the President also spoke to Prime Minister Gordon Brown today, in order to continue to have conversations with our international partners to keep the pressure on, to make sure that we are supportive of the Burmese people so that they can return to a free society. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, that's part of the problem -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, we've had lots of statements of administration policy on this. It is an issue that is very complicated. But one of the things that has happened over the past several years is that children who would be over 200 percent of poverty in their household have been added to the S-CHIP rolls over time. And some states have started putting adults on that program, as well.

The President thinks that we should return to the original intent of the program, which is children under 200 percent of poverty should be covered first, before others are added to the program. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I believe it's well documented. I can't remember the study, though. I don't think that anyone is actually disabusing us of that notion. The states -- one of the things that Hillary Clinton and Senator Schumer put into their -- one of the bills was an allowance for people to go up to -- that that state to go up to 400 percent of the poverty level. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'll get it for you. I'll get it for you. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: No, the other point that we have is there is a -- the policy difference; the policy difference of not wanting to have additional government-run health care, socialized-type medicine, for this problem. One of the things here is that we have a problem where we need to address the root causes of it. And there are differences of opinion. Democrats tend to want to address things with bigger government programs; Republicans don't, and this President falls in that category. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Let me go to Martha and then I'll go to Wendell. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: That have been moved off. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Let me see if I can get them for you. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'll see if I can get them for you.

Wendell. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q On the climate change speech the President gave today, he said once again that goals for greenhouse

MS. PERINO: Not necessarily. I think -- yes, the President believes that the mandatory limits that Kyoto would have placed on the United States would have been very harmful. And apparently, so did 98 other senators who voted against Kyoto back in the Clinton administration. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'm making a point. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: The President has set a goal in 2001 for the -- I'm sorry, 2002 -- for the United States to reduce greenhouse gas intensity by 18 percent by 2012. That was a goal. And we measure it every year. And we are held to account on that goal. And we, because of lots of different actions in several different sectors across the economy, we are on track to meet that goal. Countries that place -- that have goals strive to meet them. That is the point.

But mandatory cuts on carbon emissions, the President believes, would not be the right thing for the economy because, one reason -- the technology does not exist today to be able to do that. On the other hand, if you look at the Montreal Protocol, which reduced CFCs -- it's the substance that helps eat away the ozone layer -- that technology existed. And so when governments were putting money into those technologies, they were seeing an immediate return on investment.

The only way right now, today, in order to stop carbon emissions coming out of coal-fired power plants -- of which 54 percent of our energy is derived -- is to turn them off. And that's why the President thinks that we should move forward on several different parallel tracks: alternative energy, new technologies that are cleaner-burning, and also some mandatory measures. We have a renewable fuel standard that we want, 35 billion gallons by -- let's see -- 20-in-10, so it's 2017. So we have lots of different ways that we can move forward.

But one of the things the President wanted to do today is to get beyond the fights about Kyoto and to get to the post-Kyoto discussions that the U.N. is going to be having, and bring together all the major economies. Because in Kyoto the developing countries weren't a part of it. Now, what the President did today is have all the major emitting countries, all the major economies come together and decide, how can we establish a goal long-term. And everyone is going to have to report what their midterm goals are, as well.

Each state is different, each state has a different fuel mix: some use a lot of coal; some use a lot of wind; some have natural gas. It's going to depend on individual countries. Instead of a cram-down, the President wants to see some bottom-up action. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q You seem to be telling me that mandatory caps would have to be the Kyoto caps; goals would be something

MS. PERINO: That's not necessarily true. A goal can be just as aggressive. If you look at -- many countries that signed up to Kyoto, they weren't able to meet those targets. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Okay. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Let me take a step back. Whether you have a mandatory cap or a goal, there are some countries that didn't meet their mandatory cap anyway. So I think the President's point of establishing a goal that the entire world can get behind is a better approach than having just a few countries, and not including the developing world.

Look, the developing world is going to have to not only reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but also figure out a way to keep their economies going. Some of these countries, people live in terrible poverty and they need energy in order to have jobs and heat their homes and light their homes and their schools, and they need to have clean-burning technologies in order to be able to do that.

One exciting thing that the President announced today is this international global technology fund, which people could put money into, we could pool resources, pool ideas and ingenuity so we can come up with the new technologies. But then these other countries that are developing, like China, India, Mexico, and South Africa, can take advantage of what they have -- an ability to grow their economy without harming the environment at the same time. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: It's 95 percent. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: We'll see what happens in the discussions after the -- after he vetoes the bill. I don't know. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Look, as a society we have a responsibility to help the neediest people first, and that's what the President wants to do.

Paula, I'm going to go up here, since you've had a few. Elaine. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: On which, on Burma? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: They had a very good discussion, the Prime Minister and Gordon -- and President Bush this morning. It lasted about a half an hour. There was a discussion on Burma. It lasted about a half an hour. They covered several topics. On Burma they agreed to continue to work cooperatively. The EU is currently looking at sanctions, as well, and that would be coupled with the ones that we've done, including -- and possibly others around the world. So there was a commitment also to follow up after the Mr. Gambari visit. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q And then I have another question, unrelated to this. Apparently this week Rush Limbaugh used the

MS. PERINO: It's the first I've heard of that comment. I'm taking that it is accurate; I have not heard it myself. The President believes that if you are serving in the military that you have the right that every American has, which is you are free to express yourself in any way that you want to. And there are some that oppose the war, and that's okay. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: It's not one that the President would have used, no.

John. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I actually think that we're closer -- I think that a lot of Europeans support this meeting that we've had today. And if you look at -- I know that there have been some comments out there, with some people saying they wanted to have it the old way. The old way didn't work, and it didn't include the developing nations. And this is a way to get everybody talking on the same page, so that as you go into the 2012 -- post-2012 U.N. discussions and negotiations in a post-Kyoto world, you have all those major emitting countries on the same page, working together. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Certainly. I think that if you talk to any of your colleagues who were there at the State Department meetings, you'll see that there's a lot of support for what the President is doing. And we didn't do it on our own, we had a lot of help. And we're looking forward to the Bali meetings in December, and then additional actions over the year. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Yes, Les. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Thank you very much. Two questions. The Washington Post quotes Irena Briganti of FOX News as

MS. PERINO: That's a question for NPR to answer, for the decision that they made -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I've never spoken to the President about what he thinks about any particular organization. We enjoy working with them here at the White House. They have really good correspondents that we like working with. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q All right. The President does not believe that the First Amendment prohibits him from speaking

MS. PERINO: Well, you're clearing the room, Les. I'm going to decline to comment. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SHARP: Welcome, everybody. I'm Jess Sharp, with the Domestic Policy Council. You've just heard from the President about the state of air travel delays in this country. He just received a briefing from Secretary Mary Peters and from Acting FAA Administrator Bobby Sturgell. Clearly, he understands there's a lot of frustration out there. Travelers are being stranded at the airport, stranded on the plane, stranded on the tarmac. And he expects us to -- as part of his administration, to solve this problem. He expects Congress to enact an FAA modernization bill. And he has asked very directly the Secretary and Bobby to go back and to work with the stakeholder community to try to make as big of a dent in this problem as we possibly can in the shortest amount of time we possibly can. And he's expecting a report back from them by the end of this year.

So with that, I'm going to turn it over here to the Secretary first, and then to Acting Administrator Sturgell for some opening remarks, and then we'll go to some questions, and eventually get to folks on the phone, as well, for some questions. SECRETARY PETERS: Again, thank you all for being here. As Mr. Sharp said, I've just earlier today -- in fact, just a few minutes ago the President and Acting Administrator Sturgell and I met with the President about the need to fix the aviation gridlock that is making America's skies increasingly unfriendly for a number of travelers. And I said to the President that travelers today are plenty cranky, and they have a good reason to be. I told him that we need to confront this challenge on multiple fronts. We need to use innovative new approaches to provide targeted relief for the nation's most congested airspace. We need to modernize our air traffic control system, and we need to ensure better customer or consumer protection.

Immediate actions that we will be taking on behalf of consumers include advancing a rulemaking to increase the compensation for passengers who are involuntarily bumped from an oversold flight. Today that fee is about $200, the compensation that those travelers would get, and we have proposed moving that up to approximately $624.

We also want to provide better information for travelers, and stepped up oversight of chronically delayed flights. Further, we're updating our complaint system, and we'll be conducting reviews to determine carrier compliance with consumer protection requirements. In addition, we have a report that was released this week by the inspector general, upon my request. I have tasked the Department's consumer protection officials to address the recommendations in the report, the ones that we're not already covering. And we will be ready to act on these proposals and report back to the President by the end of the year.

But consumers need more than that. What they need, really, are solutions to congestion so that these delays aren't happening in the first place. We need to treat the symptom -- not just the symptoms, but the actual cause of the delay. They need real flight schedules, not a guestimate about when a flight may take off. They don't need to be sitting on runways for hours, sleeping at airports. None of that should be part of the adventure of travel.

So we also have just recently undertaken an airspace redesign in the New York City area that Acting Administrator Sturgell will speak to. But to help us get to the real causes of the delays, and to fix them, we're bringing together the top executives from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the airlines that operate in New York's three airports, aviation groups representing pilots, commercial airlines and general aviation, and consumer groups.

They will all serve on what's known as an Aviation Rulemaking Committee, or ARC. At their opening meeting that occurred just earlier this afternoon, I challenged them to be bold, and to identify market-based mechanisms and other policies that can be used to reduce congestion and more efficiently allocate the airspace in the region. And I've asked them to finish their work by the end of the year. This time frame will hopefully allow us to provide relief before next summer's heavy travel season.

And we're focusing on New York-area airports specifically because delays there have a rippling effect throughout the entire system. If we can fix the delays in New York, we'll provide improved flying for a significant number of travelers. One-third of the nation's air traffic goes into, out of, or over the New York airspace, and it accounts for three-quarters of the chronic airline delays that we're experiencing today.

Demand for travel at New York's JFK airport guarantees delays during peak hours even in the absolute best of conditions. The airport has capacity for around 44 departures between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m., but on a typical Tuesday morning in August, airlines needed room for 57 scheduled departures. So we're going to watch the situation, we're going to continue to monitor what happens in New York with the ARC very closely, and if necessary we're prepared to take the next step and issue a scheduling reduction order to reduce the number of flights scheduled at JFK airport.

So today I'm also announcing that the Department is convening a scheduling committee made up of the airlines operating at JFK. The committee will develop recommendations for reducing the number of flights into and out of this overcrowded airport. Let me emphasize, though, our strong preference is to find a way to let the market incentives do the job and not to return to the days of government-regulated flights and limited competition.

It's very clear to all of us that without fundamental changes in the way that we manage air traffic in New York, congestion everywhere and all of our system will get worse and even more travelers will be inconvenienced. Directing New York will help, but the current air traffic control system is simply incapable of addressing the flood of travelers that will be taking to the skies; a number that will be more than a billion by 2015.

So to prepare for this growing demand, earlier this year the administration proposed a major reform bill to Congress. This is a bill that overhauls the nation's air traffic control system by changing the way we pay for it and by investing heavily in new technologies. The new satellite-based system that we're building will dramatically expand the airspace capacity over the next 20 years, and that, of course, is the long-term key to reducing congestion.

We've also asked Congress for greater freedom to allow the market to work, to reduce delays in the air and on the ground both now and in the future. And I'm calling on Congress today, as did the President, to put aside special interests and move quickly to pass a bill that includes the kind of reform that will make a true difference for travelers.

We're acting very aggressively to unclog our skies with the ARC, with the New York airspace redesign, and with new ways to manage our traffic. But ultimately the challenge calls for broader solutions; solutions that won't happen without the help of Congress, without the commitment of the airlines, and the understanding of travelers. But with the announcements that we're making today, we're confident that if we all pull together, passengers can look forward to a time when the skies are clear of congestion and air travel again is comfortable, reliable and enjoyable.

Thank you, and I'd like now to ask Bobby Sturgell, our Acting Administrator at FAA, to discuss the steps that FAA is already taking to address the congestion at JFK. And then we'll take your questions. ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: Thank you, Madam Secretary, and thank you all for coming. The President put this issue in terms that everybody can understand. The passenger has had enough and all of the parties involved need to step forward to avoid a repeat of this summer. It's not an easy fix or a quick fix. But when all is said and done, it's going to make a difference.

Focusing our efforts on the New York airspace will enable us to keep a spotlight on where the problem is at its worst. In just three years, delays there have doubled. That sends a bow wave through the system that affects airports all the way downstream, even if they're looking at blue skies and not a cloud in sight. The President and the Secretary are providing direction that's going to give a boost to several efforts that are already underway.

As many of you know, we've been working to redesign New York's airspace, a move that could cut delays by 20 percent. It also cuts emissions by 430,000 pounds a year of C02, and it's a net-noise reduction of nearly 600,000 people. We've accelerated the deployment of new technology called ASDE-X -- Airport Service Detection Model X -- that will make runways there safer and more efficient because part of that deployment includes a circuit traffic management system which we intend to make available to the carriers before the summer of next year. This is a full year ahead of the original schedule for deployment of ASDE-X at JFK. We're combining high and low altitude airspace to create more efficient arrivals and departures. Frankly, we're looking at every way we can to cut delays in that area, especially in the short-term.

We've been hard at it at other major airports, as well. Since 2000 we've built 13 new runways at big airports, adding 1.6 million operations per year to the system. We're working on a runway extension in Philadelphia that will hopefully be complete in '09 and will cut delays by another 3 million minutes a year. In Atlanta, we commissioned a runway that enables 100,000 more takeoffs and landings a year -- a 30 percent increase in capacity at that airport. And we redesigned Atlanta's airspace and those new routes are saving $34 million a year in fuel. We have another airspace redesign effort underway in Houston, and in Chicago we've been using temporary, short-term caps that will be lifted as soon as that airport brings on additional capacity.

Next year we'll be commissioning four new runways at major airports across the country -- two in Chicago, Seattle, and Washington Dulles. In addition to these steps, bringing together the stakeholders to make decisive recommendations about fixing what's going on in New York will go a long way. The President made it clear that we've got to get it done, and the Secretary has set a December deadline for the recommendations. We've used this approach bringing stakeholders together with other tough issues like fractional ownership, performance-based navigation, aging aircraft, and most recently with ADSB and satellite navigation. I'm confident that working together we can get this done.

And adding onto the Secretary's comments about what the Department has proposed in terms of compensation for bumped passengers, I would refer you to the DOT website that contains comprehensive information on the new amounts that are being proposed for the various situations. Thank you. MR. SHARP: Okay, we'll go to questions I guess. I think it's the easiest just to work around the room here. You, you first. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Secretary Peters, the airlines look at the O'Hare experience as not a good model for the future

SECRETARY PETERS: Matt, it is going to be different for O'Hare. It's a different situation with O'Hare. What was implemented in O'Hare we felt was a temporary solution back in '04 pending the completion of the new runway there and a new airport in the area as well. But it's different in New York. As Administrator Sturgell said earlier, we can't fill in the bay and make a new runway there.

And that's why nothing is off the table. We want to provide relief to consumers, we want to better manage our nation's available airspace. So within the context of this ARC and the scheduling, nothing is off the table. We hope that we can bring some real market-based solutions that will continue to give consumers a lot of choices, keep prices down, and increase the options for American travelers. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SECRETARY PETERS: It could mean variable pricing, congestion pricing -- it could mean either of those. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SECRETARY PETERS: More likely variable by time that they're using the airspace. I think that would be probably initially where we would go, but, again, nothing's off the table. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Back in 2000, the Clinton administration had a similar briefing to this, back when the last time

SECRETARY PETERS: Andy -- I'm sorry, is that the name? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SECRETARY PETERS: Andy, the difference -- and of course, we all were talking about these same issues, as you said -- in 2000, into the summer of 2001; Congress was holding hearings on these issues, and some steps had been talked about -- I would say not as extensively as we're talking about today. But then tragically came 9/11/01, and it wasn't the problem anymore.

But today we're seeing air travel back up, increasing to and exceeding the levels that we saw in '01. And that's why we're taking the substantive steps that we are today, and we will over the next few months, to really address this issue not only in a comprehensive manner, but in a sustainable manner, so that we're not dealing with this again next summer or the year after. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q You're going to come back -- with these groups, come back with recommendations to the President

SECRETARY PETERS: Lisa, we certainly hope that everyone will come together and come up with some substantive recommendations that can move us through this. But we are going to do, as the President asked us to do, we're going to address customer concerns and we're going to address congestion. And we -- our preference, of course, is to get a bill and to work cooperatively with the industry. But if we can't do that, we will take steps to meet the President's two mandates. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SECRETARY PETERS: We have limited authority and we do think that we have, with the cooperation of the airports, the ability to implement some of these tools in the near-term. Our strong preference is to get the bill authorized that we have proposed to Congress, which would give us an ability to do pilots not only at LaGuardia, but at 15 other airports. But we do believe we have the authority, working in cooperation with the airports, to move forward today. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SECRETARY PETERS: They're at the table. They're at the table with everyone else. And I've asked them earlier today to be bold, to be innovative. And it is in the interest of the airports and the airlines to not cause consumers to have the type of problems that they've experienced over the last summer. So I think it's in all of our interests to do everything we can to address these appropriate consumer concerns, but to do so in a manner that doesn't take away alternatives for American business and personal travelers. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SECRETARY PETERS: The scheduling reduction should be -- both the rulemaking committee and the scheduling committee were convened earlier today -- in fact, at 1:00 p.m. today we kicked off that effort. Is that not accurate, Bobby? ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: We still need at this point to put out what we think is the right number of operating authorizations for the airports. So we plan to do that next week, and specifically have folks involved in the scheduling piece of this by the following week. We certainly did put everybody on notice today at the rulemaking committee that this would be one of the things, in addition to the other market-based and other measures that are on the table that we'll be moving forward with concurrently. SECRETARY PETERS: And this is LaGuardia and JFK. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SECRETARY PETERS: We believe that we can achieve the solutions with these two airports; if we can't, we will reach out to Newark, as well. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q And a quick follow-up question. You mentioned consumer protection. What is your plan with regard

SECRETARY PETERS: Well, what we're asking them to do and what the President had asked us to do is to make sure that they're more responsive to consumer complaints. And ma'am, I haven't yet discussed whether or not we do need to increase the staff, the authority, the funding, but we will address those issues in making sure that we are responsive to consumer complaints -- and timely responsive to the complaints. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SECRETARY PETERS: Well, as I said, everything is on the table right now. And you make a very good point. We expect to see -- we are seeing a lot more planes in the sky, and there are more regional jets today, perhaps, than there were even back in the pre-2000 era.

But the other side of that is that they're providing more flight options for consumers. So we don't necessarily want to say you can't do that, but we do want to say, at the end of the day, we have to reduce congestion and delay. And so, again, everything is on the table today. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q You mentioned reducing the number of flights as a way of curtailing delays, as well as the penalty

SECRETARY PETERS: The ultimate goal is to make sure that we are reducing the congestion and delays. And so, by pricing, perhaps by using congestion pricing or variable pricing, if we can move some of those flights out of the peak, we're going to be better off.

But the truth is that consumers are paying today, but they're paying with their time in a very debilitating manner. And we've heard stories of people who missed weddings, funerals, important business trips, anniversaries, things like that. So people are paying today. And what we hope to be able to do is come up together with a solution that will alleviate that kind of unplanned expenditure, in terms of their time and convenience, that consumers are paying today. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: I'd like to add, if you look at O'Hare as an example, I mean, I just think this is a very, very competitive industry. So we're not aware of any evidence that we've seen costs being passed on at O'Hare, even though we do have operating authorization limitations in place at that airport.

And when you look at JFK, I mean, it's largely split between three carriers: American, Delta and JetBlue. So again, you've got very competitive airlines with substantial route networks, and it's a very competitive industry. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SECRETARY PETERS: Well, what I will comment on are several things. Back in February, we submitted a very comprehensive bill to Congress that would have dealt with many of these issues.

In the spring of last year, I asked the Investigator General to do a comprehensive investigation about the issue of consumer delays and consumer concerns. In June, I established an internal working group that has reported back to me and has resulted in the recommendations that we're briefing on today. In early September we announced the airspace redesign for the New York area and again, today's announcement of the additional consumer protection, the Aviation Regulatory Committee, as well as the scheduling committee. So I think we have certainly taken decisive action. ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: I would also add, since February of this year, I've been meeting with the stakeholders at the New York area, where we've been working through about a dozen operational improvements, on a very technical level, of things we can do to add capacity and efficiency to the New York major airports.

So this has been an ongoing issue. Many of you that follow the industry and the whole history of caps and high density rules know that the caps came off, the HDR was lifted in JFK in January of this year. Very competitive market, very competitive growth, and on top of that, I think some of the extreme weather we saw this year was really focused in the New York area, which added to the problems there. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q I think it was Mr. Sturgell who mentioned that the airspace redesign plan is going to have a net

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: Obviously, the airspace redesign is a redesign of routes into and out of the New York metropolitan area. I cannot emphasize enough how much the airspace affects the capacity and efficiency of the system. And as we transform this system to a satellite-based system, we need to incorporate those kinds of routing -- area navigation, RNAV and RNP procedures -- like we've been able to do in places like Dallas and Atlanta, where we've added anywhere between 11 and 20 operations per hour at those airport. These are huge efficiency gains.

So to some extent, yes, flights will be redistributed differently. Folks will hear airplanes. I think to a large degree it is perception, because under the NEPA guidelines, we found a de minimis increase in noise as part of that air design. And again, it is a net reduction of nearly 600,000 people in noise, with 20 percent cut in delays. It's extremely important. We cannot solve the capacity on the ground without also solving the capacity in the air. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: Well, in terms of net, it is a net noise decrease. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Right. But planes are going to be moving from one area and they're going to be going over different

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: Any increases under the NEPA guidelines will be de minimis, according to our analysis. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: I don't off-hand, no. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SECRETARY PETERS: Well, that's something that we're working with each of the airlines with right now. And I'll ask Acting Administrator Sturgell to tell you what some of the airlines have done already and -- in determining what is reasonable.

What we don't want to do though is put some arbitrary amount out there. Let's say I said it was three hours, and a plane is second in line for takeoff and they hit that three hours and they have to taxi back to the gate. So we want to have some flexibility so that we're able to use common sense.

But, Bobby, if you want to talk about what some of them have already defined? ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: Yes. Just, again, going back to what the Secretary was saying, I think the important thing is to have plans in place. So a couple of carriers have already voluntarily adopted plans, and I know specifically American has a four-hour plan, JetBlue has a five-hour plan. And then on the airport side, I do know that the New York Port Authority is look -- is developing a plan to address this issue, as well.

One of the things we are finding in these chronic delay situations is that surface management is extremely important, and that's one of the reasons why we're going to accelerate ASDE-X into JFK, and why we're going to add a surface traffic management capability to that system. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: The Department is looking at a whole range of options. The Secretary has had a senior working group working on consumer issues throughout the summer. She asked for the Inspector General's report, which the Department has just received this week. So there will be, again, a number of options that the Department is looking at, with respect to consumer issues.

Certainly they have already stepped-up enforcement oversight for chronically delayed flights, flights that are delayed more than 75 percent of the time, that also operate more than 45 flights per quarter. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: At this point, it is just for JFK. We're looking at -- this administration, this Secretary, this President's policies is always to grow capacity first. And that is what we've been focused on, and that's one reason why Chicago is a short-term cap right now, is because we expect runways to come online at that airport and we'll lift it. We want the market to operate as the market should. So our goal is to enhance capacity. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: I think it will be discussed with respect to all three. Our real focus is JFK, because we do see, especially in the afternoon, a lot of overscheduling of what that airport can handle.

I go back to the redesign on the Newark issue. One of the short-term things we'll be able to do with airspace redesign is expand departures out of Newark, which we think is going to add probably one to two operations per hour. It doesn't sound like much, but that's a very significant increase at that particular airport. We're also talking with Continental about their plans, and I think everybody saw that Delta announced, with respect to JFK, they're going to move part of their afternoon bank into the evening hours. So they are voluntarily shifting into a less-used time of day at that airport, similar to what American did voluntarily at Dallas, and what Delta did voluntarily at Atlanta. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: No, I did not say that. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: I would point out that the Port Authority is acquiring Stewart, and -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: Expand departures. Right now, airplanes have to take off on set headings out of Newark, and you have to leave so much time in between those airplanes as they depart. If planes are going off in different directions, you can move them off the runway quicker because you're not worried about the in-trail separation or the wake turbulence issues for the previous departure. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q I'm wondering, this morning at a Senate hearing, I talked with a passenger activist who said that

SECRETARY PETERS: No, we're not ruling that out at this point in time at all. And I know Congress has talked about that as well. What I want to do is take the Inspector General's report that we just received, look at that, and as we implement that over the next few months, make a decision about what best makes sense to deal with passengers' concerns. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

ADMINISTRATOR STURGELL: Yes, there is a notice of proposed rulemaking for LaGuardia. We have comments on it. We'll certainly be considering the results of the ARC as to what the next steps will be for LaGuardia, as well. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Hi, everybody. Welcome back to the briefing room. I have a statement by the President on Burma that I will read out for him, and then a statement about the FAA actions, and then I'll go to questions.

This is a statement by the President. "The world is watching the people of Burma take to the streets to demand their freedom, and the American people stand in solidarity with these brave individuals. We feel admiration and compassion for the monks and peaceful protesters calling for democracy. Every civilized nation has a responsibility to stand up for people suffering under a brutal military regime like the one that has ruled Burma for so long. I call on all nations that have influence with the regime to join us in supporting the aspirations of the Burmese people and to tell the Burmese Junta to cease using force on its own people who are peacefully expressing their desire for change. By its own account, the Junta has already killed at least nine non-violent demonstrators, and many others who have been injured and arrested as they seek to express their views peacefully. I urge the Burmese soldiers and police not to use force on their fellow citizens. I call on those who embrace the values of human rights and freedom to support the legitimate demands of the Burmese people."

In addition to that, on the President's statement, we call on the junta to allow the U.N. Special Envoy, Mr. Gambari, full access to all relevant parties while he is in Burma, beginning tomorrow. This includes those jailed by the junta, religious leaders, and Aung San Suu Kyi.

On to a domestic topic. This afternoon President Bush will be joined by Transportation Secretary Mary Peters. They will announce new steps to address the serious problem of airport air traffic congestion and flight delays that all of us have experienced at one time or another. Missed connections and lost luggage is often a result of what this year has been the highest number of flight cancellations in the nation's history. The President says that's entirely too many, and he wants this problem addressed before next summer's busy travel season.

The steps he is ordering today are ones that the executive branch can do on their own. Last February, we sent up proposed legislation to Capitol Hill, but there has also been delay on that action. The actions fall into two basic categories: reducing air traffic congestion that is the root cause of all of these other problems; and improving air passenger complaint and response systems, like when your flight is over-sold and you get bumped off and you want to complain to somebody. DOT is going to beef up that mechanism.

The President wants solutions to be in place so that every American, and everyone who comes to this country on business and pleasure, to have a better flight experience. And they will have their statement and then there is a briefing at 2:45 p.m. -- meeting out here about 2:30 p.m. -- in order to provide more information on that.

With that, I'll take your questions. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: There are some specific things that can be done. For example, one of the things that Secretary Peters will do is head to New York. And she's going to bring together stakeholders to deal with what is one-third of all the major air traffic in the country -- those through the New York metro area. And we also had 30 percent of the flight cancellations last year and delays.

So there is a cascading effect of the problems that are happening in that area. And by bringing the stakeholders together to talk about solutions, the President believes that it's a better and more enduring way to help solve a problem. Demand is not going to slow down for air traffic. People want to have more business flights and more flights for vacations and pleasure, and so we have to address these with the stakeholders involved. And that's one of the things that she will announce, that she's going up there to bring those people together. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: That's true, they're going to deal with that. We also need to deal with this World War II-era system we have for air traffic control. It's out of date and it needs to be updated. We hope that Congress will work with us on that as well. But in addition, as I said -- and DOT could provide more information -- but this issue about taking and investigating complaints more aggressively is going to be another thing DOT can do, and they can do that pretty quickly.

Kelly. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, I think we'll let Secretary Peters come back and -- obviously, having that many fight cancellations and flight delays and missed flights and lost luggage -- it's too much for everyone. It's not good for business, it's not good for our economy, and it's really not good for passengers and consumers.

And so, we sent up the legislation last February. It hasn't been acted upon. The numbers came back to say that there's been a record this year of flight cancellations and delays. And so the President asked, "What can we do? Is there something that we can do now on our own, while we continue to try to work with Congress to get something done?" So that's why he wants to do it now, and he thinks by taking action today, in the end of September, we can get something in place so that next year's summer travel season can be much better. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Yes. I think that you will see today, hopefully, some action out of the Treasury Department making -- taking the next step on sanctions. I won't spell out individuals yet, I'll let Treasury make those announcements. But tightening the sanctions is very important and the people of Burma have been living in perpetual poverty for so long. And so it's not only the oppression and being brutally attacked or fired upon as a demonstrator, but it's the issue that they just have a terrible way of life. And the President wants the entire international community to live up to its obligations. And one of the things he can do is sanctions. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Sanctions have worked in the past in other places. We're going to try to tighten those and make them stronger and stricter so that they have to have -- so that they have some effect that will hopefully force an action.

In addition, what the President can do is use this podium and his bully pulpit in order to shine a bright spotlight on this problem, so that the rest of the world can help -- and can come along and try to help us. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I can't yet. Treasury is working on those. Obviously we don't like to telegraph what they are yet because it can help people hide assets. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q On that same subject, Dana, isn't it possible that the economic sanctions could further intensify

MS. PERINO: Well, two things on that. One is, the junta, the military leaders in Burma are living quite a wonderful lifestyle while the people are not. By tightening sanctions on them it's not going to make the people's life any worse. They are already living in, as I said, perpetual poverty.

The other thing is that one of the things the President said about the Olympics is that this is when the world is watching. And they're excited about the Olympics, but also this is a time when, as he said to President Hu, the world is going to be watching on a lot of different subjects, and he thinks that the Olympics is a time when people can pay attention to a lot of different issues. This would be one of them. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Obviously we're working through Mr. Gambari, the U.N. envoy, who is working with the international community at the U.N. He's on his way there; he'll be there tomorrow. And if there are updates on the President's schedule I'll let you know. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q On another topic? Earlier this year DHS conducted an experiment that showed how vulnerable a government

MS. PERINO: Well, I don't know who all would have seen the tape, but obviously, these are very important issues for the government to address. Malicious cyber attacks are a possibility, and it is only right and proper that the federal government, in conjunction with the private sector, which has a lot of responsibility over many critical pieces of infrastructure across the country, that we work cooperatively, plan for the worst, and expect the worst, and that way we can prevent it from happening.

So I don't know who all would have seen it, but obviously, I think it's a good thing that the government is checking into this, making sure that we know what could be possible so that we can all work together and make sure that it doesn't happen. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Well, what about the funding for this? According to OMB, next fiscal year, the Department of Homeland

MS. PERINO: Well, I think what we need to remember is that the issue of cyber security crosses many different agencies, and they all work cooperatively together. In fact, DHS, Department of Homeland Security, is tasked with making sure that everyone is coordinated across the agencies.

The other thing is, since 2004, the budget at that time for overall cyber-security issues was $4 billion. Now it's over $6 billion in the President's '08 request.

What you're talking about is a small part of something that DHS does. So it doesn't -- it's not reflective, in terms of the overall budget in terms of cyber security. And what that doesn't include -- and I don't have the number, but I can try to get it for you -- is the research and development monies that are going into funding experiments and things to make sure that we're preventing any sort of attacks. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: That's absolutely correct. The priorities should be shown that in the overall, cyber-security budget has gone up by over $2 billion. And we continue to do more coordination and cooperation, not only through the interagency process, to make sure that we're all hooked up and knitted up, but also with our state and local partners, but more importantly, the private sector, which, for example, with electrical grids, a lot of that security is handled by private sector.

Bret. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, we've had -- on the DOD authorization bill, there is a series of things that the administration's senior advisors would recommend a veto on. Our position on the hate crimes legislation has been very consistent. We believe that all violent crimes should be prosecuted vigorously, and that all people should be protected from violent crimes.

State and local districts have their own laws. A lot of them are stricter and stronger than ones in the federal hate crimes legislation proposal. We believe that local -- state and local law enforcement agencies are effectively using their laws to the full extent that they can. I don't know -- given that there are so many different things that a senior advisor might recommend a veto on, I'm not going to say specifically on this, but our position has been consistent. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q If I can change topics, there's a -- about the history of the Iraq war here. There's a transcript

MS. PERINO: Well, without commenting on the details or talking about a private conversation between two world leaders and whether or not that happened, if you think back to that time, there were a lot of rumors. There were a lot of people floating ideas around about what may or may not happen. Unfortunately, Saddam Hussein decided to defy the international community. All diplomatic measures ran their course. And what we are focused on now is making sure that Iraq can be a government that can sustain and defend itself and make sure it's an ally in the war on terror for that region. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q And one more thing on this. The President is quoted in this transcript saying, "No matter what

MS. PERINO: I wasn't there for the private meeting that the President had with President Aznar. I don't know what Ari said. I do know where we are now, which is in a position of trying to make sure that the Iraqis have what they need in order to be a democratic force in the Middle East region. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, we've not seen any legislation from the Hill, so I don't think that we're necessarily worried about more onerous legislation. But I think what -- I think our approach is the right one, which is to bring the stakeholders together. That includes the airlines.

Airlines understand that they've got a serious problem, too. They have a supply and demand problem. They have complaints and they have unhappy customers. They have a reason to want to try to make this better. And so that's why we're going to make them a part of the discussion and a part of the solution.

Peter. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Bret asked you about a conversation that was behind the scenes. I'd like to ask you about the

MS. PERINO: Yesterday? We checked into that. That was not something that anyone in the Press Office or Communication Office or anyone in the WhiStenographers Office, and we asked for it to be changed back. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: If it hasn't, it had -- we made the request. I haven't gone back to check, but I had made the request to make sure that it was accurate. You know, the President -- it is no secret -- sometimes makes grammatical errors. And he also is somebody, though, that gives a lot of public comments. And I think in the grand scheme of things, if any of us were -- well, maybe now I am -- monitored for such things, that we would all have slip-ups from time to time. The point is he was very proud of the record that the -- the test scores that the students achieved. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: The integrity of the transcripts are very important to me and I've made that clear. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Can I just go back here?

Go ahead, Laurent. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'm not going to speculate. Obviously, the President told President Hu that he is looking forward to going to the Olympics, and I would refer you back to what I said just a minute ago.

Paula. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q On S-CHIP coverage, a very key Republican senator involved in this debate argued a couple of points

MS. PERINO: Well, we've been discussing S-CHIP. What the President wants is for every American to have access to affordable health care. There are some people who cannot afford that, that's why we have the Medicaid program. And then years ago they started the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which is for the children that fall in between. And that's what the President wants to focus on, the neediest children, for this program.

Many states have, over the years, have what I called mission creep, and increased the number -- the amount of income that a family can have before they can apply for S-CHIP. We don't think that's the right thing to do. There are more children who fall into that category that need to be covered, before we start covering adults or children that have higher -- that are of families of higher incomes. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I've not heard that, and I'd have to get back to you. But our focus is on the children, and let us look at the specifics. I haven't heard that proposal. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Paula, I have not heard about that. I would need to check into it, and we'll get back to you. Okay?

April. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Dana, on tonight at Morgan State. As you know, the four top Republican candidates are not going

MS. PERINO: I don't know the reasons for any of the campaign scheduling decisions. What I can tell you is that -- what President Bush believes is that we have a very strong record to run on in the Republican Party, in terms of lifting people up out of poverty, encouraging more entrepreneurial businesses, improving education as we saw yesterday with the test scores, improving home ownership; that they have a strong record to run on, and that they should reach out to every community. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Do you think this erodes what this administration has tried to work on -- especially pre-Katrina

MS. PERINO: Well, I would hope not. And I'm sure that the President would hope not. And I think what they'll see in this President is somebody who continues to push as much as he can in the next 16 months to make sure that those policies he has put in place are solidified and that they can continue to try to help every community, and especially the African American and Hispanic communities.

Yes. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Dana, I just wanted to follow up on the question that Bret asked a little bit earlier about the

MS. PERINO: There are some people who think we never should have gone into Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein. And there is nothing we are going to be able to do that's going to change their minds.

What we can do is work with the military and the State Department civilians and other department civilians in order to make sure Iraq is the best possible country it can be, one that is sovereign, that has good relationships with its neighbors, and that is a democracy.

So I don't -- I can't tell you how other people are going to feel about certain things and certain reports, but I just am not going to comment on that transcript. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: No, no. I think that the record of what happened along that way -- and this was Saddam Hussein's record, not the President's. The President's record is very clear, but also, look at Saddam Hussein's record: somebody who tortured his own people, killed children, tore apart families. Even Human Rights Watch said that this was a brutal dictator who had killed up to a million of his own people. This was his record. And I think the President followed every diplomatic measure, went to the United Nations, made a very strong case, and now we are where we are. And we have to focus on making sure that we can improve the situation, which we are doing.

Go ahead, Les. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Thank you, Dana. Two questions. Inspired in part by The New York Times best-selling book, "The

MS. PERINO: I've not heard of such legislation, but I think we are very comfortable believing that there can be Mexico, the United States and Canada as three separate countries all working together. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Okay. Republican Congressman and presidential candidate Duncan Hunter's Restoring Patriotism to

MS. PERINO: I haven't seen the legislation. And we have already said that Columbia University made its own decision. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: The President has been very clear that what he wants to accomplish is bringing together the major emitting economies so that we have over 80 percent of the world's emitters of pollution coming together, talking about establishing long-range goals within the context of the U.N. Climate Change Convention. And I think it will be a very good meeting. We're going to be having several different speakers -- Secretary Rice spoke today, and the President will address the meeting tomorrow morning at 10:15 a.m. in the morning. And he will talk about the need for new technologies in order to help solve this problem; of eliminating tariffs so that developing countries can better afford or be given technologies that allow them to have clean-burning energy without harming the economy and without having the harmful air pollutants that can result from some traditional means, like coal. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Good evening. I think we'll get started, since I'm sure everybody has things to do, things to write and places to go. I have brought with me Mike Kozak, who gave you the briefing last Friday. He was in the meetings this afternoon. He is the Senior Director for Democracy, Human Rights, and International Organizations at the National Security Council. So he's going to read those out for you, and then I'll do anything else that you have. MR. KOZAK: Thanks, Dana.

I think you had the readout from Steve on the morning's meetings. The afternoon we had the democracy roundtable, which involved leaders from I think approximately 16 countries that came. These are democratic countries, but ones who have been talking back and forth in different groupings with the President over the last couple years about how we can work together to try to help promote democracy throughout the world.

So the President set a little bit of an agenda at the beginning, based on the past meetings that this group had had here last year, and then the work in Prague, where they'd heard from NGOs and human rights activists what are the things that are most important to them. And they had indicated some things that really helped them in their work. And so the leaders had tried to say, what can we do about this? And I think the President laid it out at the beginning in a quick agenda.

One thing that all the NGOs had said was important to them is to have a high-level point of contact in democratic governments where they can go to that person, both if they see an impending problem -- a crackdown on free press or something like that -- that they can get attention quickly at a high level in the government, and then also to facilitate contact among the governments, that those points of contact could coordinate with each other.

So that was one of the recommendations last year. The President led by example and said that he was naming Under Secretary Paula Dobriansky at the State Department, who was there, and he introduced her to them as the U.S. point of contact, as his point of contact. And the others will presumably follow suit.

He also talked about -- and they all agree on -- the principles that democratic governments need to speak out when there's people being imprisoned for peaceful political activity; they need to speak out when NGOs are being repressed, and that kind of thing; that they should have contact with human rights activists, dissidents, democracy activists in other countries, not only deal with the governments in power.

So that was sort of the summary of the past meetings and the things they'd agreed on. And then they moved on and each of them started talking about what they were doing in the field and what had been done to help them. And there were some remarkable stories. I mean, it's one of these things where there's so many stories, with that many high-level leaders talking. But what's always interesting in this is that you have the President and his colleagues getting down to very practical cases and talking about what worked and what didn't and what might be transferable to another country.

Very interesting -- President Saakashvili was talking about how they used to be ranked almost at the bottom in terms of business environment for their country, and now they're one of the top countries in the world, just in a few years, having taken measures against corruption, and they've had a huge growth in their per capita GDP. And actually, President Karzai said that corruption thing, I could use some -- I want to talk to you afterwards about what you did. So there's a lot of exchange going on there about what one democratic government can help another to do, build institutions. And this is something that I think we've found very important, is that these new governments often have much better experience or more applicable experience with each other than does a long-established government -- somebody who just went through it five, six, ten years ago, they are much better postured to say -- how-to part than somebody who did it 200 years ago.

Also interesting stories like the President of Lithuania was talking about a measure that they'd taken. The Belarusians kicked out a university or closed down one of the last private universities in the country, so Lithuania said, why don't you come up and set your university up across the border? We'll give visas to all the students, and they can come up there. And he was saying, they've now got like 1,000 Belarusian university students studying in Lithuania, but in a Belarusian private university, and that that's where the next leaders of countries are made.

So I just give those as a couple of examples of the kinds of practical real-world experiences that get exchanged, and then they talk about how can we disseminate this out to other people.

So I think very, very productive meeting in that sense. And once again, it's a bonding of a club of democracies that really see what bringing democracy does for -- have seen what it did for their own countries and want to help others accomplish the same thing.

This afternoon -- later in the afternoon, at 3:00 p.m., the President attended the session of the Security Council chaired by the French President and presidency of the Security Council

-- he's both President of France and President of the Security Council. The focus was on Africa, so different -- the different leaders -- we had the leaders of the Security Council members, plus the Secretary General spoke at the beginning. I, frankly, missed that because our meeting ran a little over. So we came

-- Secretary Rice occupied the chair and we -- the President arrived probably ten minutes into the meeting. So we missed Secretary Ban's presentation. And then at the end, they had the Secretary General of the AU, Mr. Konar , make a presentation, as well.

But I -- you can look at the speeches that they all made and what they focused on, but I'd say a great part of it was how to move peacekeeping capacity into Africa to -- both how do you deal with conflicts that are already underway -- the President spoke very strongly about Darfur and congratulated that there's finally been some progress in terms of getting the U.N. authorization for a peacekeeping force in Darfur, and then most recently for a EU force to go into Chad that will also help to stabilize that Darfur situation. But there was also discussion of how you can make African institutions more effective to prevent conflict and that kind of thing.

So this is all on-the-record stuff that they did, and you can go back and look at it. But I think the important thing is that that kind of discussion is taking place and you have that -- the leaders of all the Security Council countries really calling attention to what's going on in Africa, and the need to deal with -- one very dramatic presentation by the Belgium -- for example, his adopted daughter is -- was a child soldier who was forced to kill her own uncle, I think he said, by the -- by Kone's people in the LRA, and then pressed into the army. And it was a really miserable story. But -- so you see a lot of different leaders saying, how do we bring an end to some of these practices in Africa and at the same time, strengthen the positive things there.

So it was quite a content-filled afternoon. And I think the President made very clear statements in both places as to where we stood, echoing what he had said this morning in the General Assembly -- quest for freedom.

I'll take questions. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q In the Security Council meeting, the President also talked about following up words with action

MR. KOZAK: Well, I think it's been -- as the President said this afternoon, that the AU force of 7,000 people trying to police an area as big -- as he said, bigger than France and bigger than Texas, which are two pretty big places, was insufficient to do that. And, yes, there's been a lot of frustration. We passed a resolution a year ago in the Security Council to deploy a force to Africa, and it was effectively blocked by actions of the Sudanese government. Then more recently we've gotten this hybrid force that the Sudanese say they are going to cooperate with.

And I think the President's -- it's those actions that he's talking about. We're pretty confident that the kind of sizeable, robust force that's authorized by that latest resolution will have an impact on calming the situation, and with this, an intensified political effort, as well.

But it's turning those resolutions into action, which means getting forces saddled up, getting the Sudanese to give them permission to enter the country and so on. And there's a lot going on at this point, but I think what you were seeing there was both a little bit of frustration over the past and trying to keep everybody's nose to the grindstone that it not slide off again. But there have been, I think what he was saying, is encouraging developments there with the two resolutions, and now this EU force going into Chad will also help. So it's going to take a lot of effort, but those are some significant efforts. And that's a change for the good. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. KOZAK: Well, you can have lots of different analyses of why the Human Rights Council behaves the way it is, but what he was talking about was the results; that the predecessor group, the Commission on Human Rights, which everyone said was discredited, at least used to be able to pass resolutions on calling out countries that did bad things. They weren't able to do it to all the countries that were doing bad things, but at least they were able to do significant numbers. They used to pass resolutions on Cuba, on Belarus. They had a process going on Uzbekistan.

The new commission, or council, has basically not said anything negative about any country, other than Israel. It's a full-time or almost full-time outfit now. It meets three times a year, I believe, rather than once. And all it's done is pass 13 resolutions condemning Israel. So it's -- you can go back and have different analyses as to why that is, but the fact is it's not working. And that's what the President is saying, we've got to put our thinking caps on again -- when we set out to improve the previous commission, we made reforms, and the performance of the new council is far worse than the one we said was discredited. So we need to take a look at that again.

So I think what you're seeing there, though, is the President saying -- when they set up the council there was a provision that said, we will review its workings in five years and make necessary adjustments -- it said within five years. And our action at this point is that we don't need to wait another three years, that two years of this is enough. You can see there's a problem and let's start talking about how to fix it. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. KOZAK: That it become effective. I mean, we and others, I suspect, as we get into this dialogue, will have different ideas on how to -- what might work. We had different ideas before. This is why we didn't vote for the thing, is we didn't think that they had built in enough safeguards. And I think we feel like we were vindicated, that it was not a prophesy that we really wanted to have come to pass.

But there's different ways of cutting it, and I wouldn't want to try to prescribe any here now. It's -- what he's trying to do is get people to say, we need to start talking about this again, and then we'll try to get people coming up with creative ideas and see if there's a consensus we can build on that will allow for some change. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. KOZAK: I think it's they tend to get together when they're able to. President Karzai, as I mentioned, was in the democracy roundtable this afternoon and had some good things. But there's just a lot on the agenda between the two countries. We're cooperating on a whole range of fronts. So I don't think -- I'm not the area expert, but I don't think there was any particular issue that generated it. It was just they were both going to be there, let's get together and talk. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. KOZAK: I used to be the head of our interest section in Havana, and at the risk of personalizing it, I will say the Cubans know how to dish it out, but they don't know how to take it. What we said wasn't particularly insulting, but they -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. KOZAK: Yes, it was that the democracy event. People were still speaking and the President didn't want to get up and walk out while they -- so he deployed Secretary Rice over there. And this was -- when we were organizing all of this, the potential conflict -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. KOZAK: She went and sat in our chair. And actually we had anticipated possible meetings going over in one direction or another, so that was why -- President Sarkozy had said it was important to them that the President be there at the end when he summed up, more than he be there at the beginning. So that was -- that went to our structure. We'd hoped to keep it on time, but we were a little off. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. KOZAK: I think I would leave that -- I think we had a statement -- MS. PERINO: The embassy did. MR. KOZAK: Okay, the embassy did. Okay, so we'll refer you to that. MS. PERINO: We expressed concern -- MR. KOZAK: What we do say -- we want to see a free and fair process in Pakistan, and anything that impedes that is not a good thing. MS. PERINO: Thank you, Mike.

Anybody have anything else? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q There's a Washington Examiner story that says -- using on-the-record quotes from both the President

MS. PERINO: I don't know. I didn't sit in on any of the interviews. Let me tell you what I do know in terms of how I know that the President thinks, which is heading into the last 16 months of the administration he realizes that there are going to be -- when you're out on the campaign trail, he knows just as well as anybody else that you're often asked very definitive questions, yes or no answers are demanded, people want to start establishing their policies and their views. And -- for example, one of the things he did on the FISA Court issue, on Terrorist Surveillance Program, is he knows that whoever becomes President next January -- January of '09, that when they sit down in the Oval Office, they are going to realize that that program is necessary. And in order to make it more -- for lack of a better word -- politically acceptable to have such a program that is extremely necessary for our security, as Director Hayden and McConnell have said, he said, well, let's move it to -- let's put it back over in the FISA Court area; we worked with them to do that. And that way, the President felt that anyone who is on the campaign trial, if they were asked about the surveillance program, that they wouldn't have to take such a definitive view on it and be locked into a position before they get into the Oval Office.

And to the extent that he's thinking about long-term needs, to have security -- for our own national security, to have us have a presence there in the Middle East, he is thinking about that. I don't know about back channels, in terms of communications. He has talked about that, somewhat more openly -- obviously, now, increasingly openly. And I think that anyone who will listen, I think that the President and the Vice President would make the case that we need to think very carefully, as you're headed into an election season, where the questions come fast and furious and answers are demanded, and to avoid people locking themselves into too rigid a position. I think that's what the point of those quotes are.

That's all? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, in case you missed it, did you see the National Assessment on Educational Progress scores that came out today? You could take a look back. The President issued a statement -- we issued a statement this morning. Tremendous achievement gains have been made. This is a five-year annual assessment, I believe, that the NAEP -- it's called NAEP,

N-A-E-P -- that looks at testing scores for math and reading for different age groups, and also looks at closing the achievement gap between blacks, whites and Hispanics. And they've had some real success.

And one of the reasons the President wants to meet with him is because Joel Klein, as the superintendent of that district -- they have gotten wonderful reviews and done a very good job of helping those students overcome some challenges, to be one of the best in the country. So the President is going to take some time to meet with him tomorrow. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, the statement is -- the statement is open. The meeting is closed. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Yes, they will. They'll be together, as well as Secretary Spellings and Mrs. Bush will be there, too.

All right? Yes? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I don't think so. I think -- well, you know where the President was. He was pretty busy. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: No, I -- I don't know, but I would sincerely doubt it.

Okay, well, I'll see you tomorrow. Bye. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I have National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley here. He has a limited amount of time, about 15 minutes; we can maybe push it to 20, but then he's got to get back upstairs. But he attended the meetings this morning. He can provide you a read-out on that and answer a few of your questions. And then I'll be back later today, probably with Mike Kozak, in order to talk about the U.N. Security Council meeting on Africa. MR. HADLEY: The President had about a 30-minute meeting with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. They talked about climate, global climate. They, of course, had both attended the dinner that the Secretary General had last night on that subject. The President made clear that the effort he is leading later this week, in terms of the emerging economies meeting, was something that is to support and feed into the U.N. process, and the Secretary General, of course, indicated his appreciation for that, and also his appreciation for the President's leadership on this climate issue.

They talked a bit about United Nations reform. The President gave a preview to the Secretary General of what he would say in his remarks -- about the importance for U.N. reform, and as part of an overall U.N. reform-U.N. Security Council reform and also reform of the Human Rights Council.

He also talked a little bit about Burma and the importance of supporting a political transition in Burma, and how important it was for all of us to urge the junta not to crack down on the peaceful protests that are clearly and currently going on in that country.

The President expressed appreciation for the Secretary General's leadership on Sudan, and the Secretary General indicated that he wanted to expand the U.N. role in Iraq.

The President then went and had about a 15-minute conversation and call with the President of the General Assembly. The discussion there was a little bit about background on where his country is in terms of his political evolution, and also a discussion of U.N. reform and U.N. Security Council reform.

The President then came back to the hotel. He had about an hour-and-a-quarter session with Prime Minister Maliki of Iraq. The President emphasized the importance of passing the outstanding legislation, that he saw it as part of the reconciliation process. He also wanted to talk to the Prime Minister about the security relationship between the United States and Iraq, and particularly defining a strategic relationship between the two countries over the long-term.

The Prime Minister talked about the liberation of his country first from Saddam Hussein, and now the need to liberate his country from terrorism and extremism. He talked about the enemy of a future Iraq being sectarianism and his struggle against sectarianism, and the need for support from all political groups in the Iraqi political context as part of reconciliation.

They, I think, had a good conversation. They talked about the need to move forward promptly defining this long-term security relationship, which the Iraqi leadership has requested and which the President wants to pursue, as he announced in his recent speech on Iraq. They talked about the need to respect Iraqi sovereignty, and that that will be one of the elements that will be addressed in the process of defining the long-term relationship between the United States and Iraq.

They also talked about the importance of a balance between the powers of the central government and the power of the provinces, and particularly in the context of Anbar province, for example, and Sunnis that are turning against extremists, fighting al Qaeda, and want to have a stake in the political process, that part of that will be to clarify the authorities of provincial and local governments as a way in which people can have more control of their localities. This is a principle that actually was endemic in our thinking for a post-Saddam architecture for Iraq. It is something that is in the Iraqi constitution. It is reflected in the creation of provinces and local authorities which did not exist under Saddam. And it's something that is now being addressed in the provincial powers law, which is pending and is being developed. And the two men indicated that getting this relationship between the center and the provinces right is an important element of the future of Iraq in getting buy-in to the -- buy-in from all communities in a unified future for the country.

I think that summarizes, really, the breadth and character of the discussions. And I'm glad to answer any questions.

Yes, ma'am. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: There was, as I mentioned, a general discussion of the importance of recognition of Iraqi sovereignty. It was -- Blackwater was something that, after the formal meeting, the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister talked about.

As you know, there is -- the United States and Iraq are working together to look at this incident and related incidents, and to talk about how to ensure that the sovereignty -- one, that there's better cooperation and coordination in these kinds of operations; two, that Iraqi sovereignty, of course, is reflected; and three, that also there is a way in which -- that the security can continue to be provided to our State Department personnel.

As you know, in addition, the Secretary of State has authorized her own internal review of the relationship and the rules of operation under which these contractors operate, and that is, of course, separate from what we are doing together, jointly, with the Iraqis. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: It came up as sort of something that -- one or the other referred to the Blackwater issue as raising these questions of sovereignty. But in terms of specifics, it was something that was addressed, part of the sort of, quite frankly, the ongoing conversations the Secretary of State has had with Prime Minister Maliki on this subject. And that came up after the meeting. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: This issue of recognizing Iraqi sovereignty and making appropriate adjustments as we go forward, as we start talking about adjustments in our mission of our forces and in our force presence, of course, is an issue that we've talked about for over a year or so with Iraqis. And it came up in that context because it is one of the issues that will need, of course, to be addressed as we define the long-term relationship between the United States and Iraq. And it gets its expressions in conducts of operation, cooperation with the police, obviously things like Blackwater. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: I've not heard that. And we'll obviously have to see what President Karzai raises. I'm not really aware that that is -- that the issue of private security companies has been an issue in Afghanistan. There have obviously been concerns about military operations and civilian casualties, as you would expect. And it's also, of course, in the context of an enemy in Afghanistan that makes attacking and killing civilians a key element of its strategy. So it's a complicated question and one that we have addressed, and I'm sure we'll continue to address with Afghan authorities. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: Well, one of the things the President wanted to try to do in this speech was to call the United Nations back to first principles, and of course, one of the first principles is freedom. And in the Declaration of Human Rights, that freedom is not only from freedom from terror, freedom from violence, freedom from tyranny, but also freedom from want and lack of education, disease, and the like. And the President thought it was important to remind the General Assembly that that is the essence of the charter of the United Nations.

Of course, part of that is the advance of freedom. I mean, it was founded after World War II as an institution to preserve the freedoms that had in some sense been won by that war. And obviously that's what's going on in Burma today. The Burmese people are making clear that they're tired of the junta and they want some say over their own future. And what better opportunity and location for the President to call attention to that? That's not new, it's something that he's been talking about, something that the First Lady has been very vocal and very visible on. You've seen what's happening in the streets now; the march of the monks -- and it was a very appropriate setting, very appropriate time for the President to come out very firmly on that issue, and he didn't want to miss that opportunity. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: Well, we've had an enormous amount of discussion of the Iraq war for most of the month of September. And in terms of the United Nations, of course, we had that very successful event yesterday that the Secretary General conducted, which was an opportunity for the United Nations and others to focus on the way forward on Iraq in terms of the International Compact. So that was really an opportunity to address the Iraq issue. And of course, the United Nations has recently expanded the mandate of their mission and appointed a new person there to head that mission.

So we think that that event, hosted by the Secretary General and which Prime Minister Maliki participated, to talk about the International Compact, talked about the way forward in Iraq and our mutual obligations to try and help the Iraqis to establish their own freedom, that was a good venue and a good opportunity to talk about the U.N.'s role and all of our obligations there. It seemed, therefore, given that plus all the conversation we've had on Iraq for the last three or four weeks, it was probably a good opportunity for the President to put some additional issues on the table that he feels very strongly about. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: We haven't worked out the details of that, and when we do -- I'm not ducking it, we just haven't worked through all the details of that. And when we will, we'll try and come back to you on it. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: Dana mentioned something to me about that, I don't -- as I was standing there, about to come here -- so I can't address that.

In terms of Burma, what really it is, I think is an example of us turning up the pressure and broadening the focus. So, for example, in terms of the sanctions, it will also talk some -- those who provide support to and financial to the regime. And in terms of the travel ban, it's going to be extended to those who have been abusers of human rights, but also to their families.

I think what we're trying to do is, in our own actions and by getting attention from the international community, to ratchet up the pressure on this regime, to get them to understand that there is a time now for a political transition and that they should be using the turmoil in the country as a vehicle for planning and achieving that transition, rather than trying to crack down on it and turn the clock back to a time that the Burmese people are no longer willing to tolerate. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: We've heard a lot of pretty remarkable statements from the Iranian President about the Holocaust, about Israel, about conditions in his own country. And I think I'll just let his words stand for themselves.

Thank you very much. Yes, ma'am. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q One more? Prime Minister Maliki has been described as saying he does not believe there is any longer

MR. HADLEY: No, they talked about the -- a little bit about the activities in Iran, and some of the things -- some of the concerns we have about Iranian support into Iraq for those elements that are attacking innocent Iraqis, attacking Iraqi security forces, and attacking our people. This is obviously a source of continuing concern, and will be something we'll continue to talk to the Iraqi government at all.

Thanks a lot. MS. PERINO: I'll be back at 5:30 p.m. Need anything right now? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: On the speech -- your question about the speech, the drafts are circulated, and there was an error made in trying to make sure that interpreters had what they needed. I don't know how the draft of the speech -- it was not final -- was posted, but it was, and it was taken down. There's really nothing more to say about it. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: That's not unusual. We do that for many speeches. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Hello, good afternoon -- evening. I have a senior administration official to talk to you about two meetings the President had today, with the Palestinians and then with the Quartet representative. And then I'll see if I can answer any additional questions beyond that, if you have any, and then we'll wrap it up. SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: The President met with Palestinian President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad for just under an hour, and then met alone with President Abbas in a one-on-one for about half an hour. Obviously I don't have a readout on the one-on-one.

In the larger meeting, the President reiterated his own commitment to the establishment of a Palestinian state, to the two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and expressed his hope that it would be possible to make progress toward the establishment of a Palestinian state.

President Abbas stressed the importance of U.S. support if progress is going to be made, and the President, of course, again reiterated, as he has done so many times publicly, his pledge to give that support.

President Abbas noted the importance of the meeting this fall here in the U.S., the international meeting, and talked about the work that he and Prime Minister Olmert are doing together in their bilateral track. He said -- President Abbas said that they've met five times, that the talks between them are serious, these are serious discussions of major issues, and that these would help -- these discussions would help prepare for the international meeting. He and the President agreed that a successful meeting would be of great value for Palestinians, for Israel and for the whole region.

The President said he was impressed with the effort that President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert are putting into this -- into their bilateral track, and complimented both of them on

the leadership they're showing. President Abbas noted that both Israel and the Palestinian Authority have appointed teams which will start to meet this week and are supposed to work on preparing something for the international meeting.

The President and President Abbas also discussed the security situation, and President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad briefed him on the work that they are doing on security reform, on efforts to reform -- recreate Palestinian security forces so as to bring law and order and fight terrorism.

The President then met with Tony Blair, who is now the Quartet representative, for about 45 minutes, and they talked about Mr. Blair's recent trips to the region. It was kind of a report by Mr. Blair on the people he'd seen and the impressions he'd formed from the meetings he's been able to have in the last month while he was out there.

Thank you. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: There was some discussion of Gaza -- of the situation in Gaza, from a law-and-order point of view; of the Palestinian public in Gaza and its views of its own situation: How does one judge that? How does one determine what the public reaction is in Gaza to the takeover, what the Palestinians have called a coup d'etat by Hamas? And there was some discussion of how -- since this is an extremely difficult problem, how they would solve it in the context of the broader effort at Palestinian statehood. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, the two-state solution doesn't come in a matter of weeks anyway. It's a process that requires, starting with the November meeting, further meetings, further negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians. And it requires implementation on the ground, too. That's why the Palestinians are working on the renovation of their security forces.

I think that it's fair to describe the Palestinian view this way: that what will help President Abbas, Prime Minister Fayyad and the PA most is a vigorous peace process that shows the people of Gaza that there is a political horizon ahead, but not through Hamas, through President Abbas -- and that also shows them real change on the ground in the West Bank, which they're not able to enjoy because of the way they're being ruled by Hamas. So the more progress we make in this track, the more opportunities it opens in the future to deal with Gaza. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, yes, because we -- in our view, the Palestinian state consists of two parts, the West Bank and Gaza, which nobody is talking about a permanent division of those two parts. In fact, it's very important for the Palestinians -- and they made this point yesterday in some of the broader meetings that were held, the Quartet meeting, for example -- very important that we all in the international community reiterate the Palestinian state does not consist of the West Bank, it will consist of the West Bank and Gaza. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: This meeting, it seems, is going to be built around an agreement that Abbas and Olmert are working on right now. They named their teams. They're trying now to put thoughts into words so that they would have something they could present in November. That's not a final status negotiation and there will not be a negotiation at the meeting in November. These are all steps leading toward an eventual final status negotiation.

We have not invited anybody to the meeting yet. No invitation has actually been issued. We've talked about kind of a variable geometry of groups. We've talked about and have made no decisions on, for example, just exactly how many participants do you want at this meeting? Is it better -- the smaller the better, or the larger the better? But no actual invitations have been issued to any country. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q The President said that his two-state solution is achievable, but when you described it, it doesn

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think he would say that it is. I think he would say it's very hard. I don't think anybody underestimates the challenge here, made much worse by the Hamas coup in Gaza. But the argument for optimism is that you have now a Palestinian and an Israeli leadership that is really dedicated to achieving this, because each one has decided that it is in the interest of his people, his nation to achieve the two-state solution. And they are really working hard at it. And of course, in past years a great deal of work has been done on it, so they are not starting from scratch.

The hard part is going to be implementation. But -- and we're not setting any deadlines, but we're also not willing to acknowledge or admit that it takes a set number of months and there is not enough time. I don't think the President would say that at all. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Did Mr. Abbas ask the President for anything specific, any particular help, any particular commitments

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Again, I wasn't at the one-on-one, so I can't answer that question. I would say, in the larger meeting he asked the President to continue with the commitment that he and Secretary Rice have shown and to maintain the level of activity the United States is now maintaining, which he thought was very important to make this a success. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: What she said was that it would be -- first, that it would be the most natural thing. After all, you have the Arab League plan, which is a peace plan for the Middle East; therefore, the most logical and natural thing to do is to invite the Arab League follow-up committee. There are, I think, 13 members, and the most natural thing is to invite all the members of the committee.

You know, I think diplomatically you would say that that is not quite a formal invitation yet, because a formal invitation is going to be just what it sounds like -- the Secretary of State will formally invite each of the member countries plus a number of other countries. Again, we haven't quite made -- we haven't made any final decisions yet on large or small, and how exactly do you want to do that? For example, do you want the Quartet? If you have the Quartet, how many other countries do you want? Do you want the -- how many people from the region, how many people not from the region? All of that is being studied and worked on right now.

Thanks. MS. PERINO: Anything else for me? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: It's in November -- right? Early November. But -- and in the States, but I don't know exactly where. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: It's probably going to be Washington. I just don't have a -- since the invitations haven't gone out, let me wait on confirmation of where. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: The speech is not about Iran, as much as many people are trying to make it out to be. It's about liberation. And I gave comments this morning -- well, we had a full briefing on it last Friday; I gave comments this morning on it in the gaggle; and Steve Hadley did it again in the gaggle on the way here. The speech is about liberation and how liberation from poverty, disease, hunger, tyranny, and oppression and ignorance can lift people up out of poverty and despair; and that the U.N.'s core mission is in align with that, and that that's what we should all be working towards. There's a brief mention in the speech, latest draft I saw, about Iran, but it's certainly not a focus. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: There's plenty of play. I don't understand why -- well, I would reject the idea that it would need to be about Iran. We talk about Iran constantly. U.N. Secretary -- Under Secretary Nicholas Burns was here last week; Secretary Rice is here all week. We're talking about it with our partners to press on those U.N. Security Council resolutions.

And the President wanted this speech to focus on many other issues that are facing the world; issues that people in Sudan and Zimbabwe and Burma are -- and many -- countless other countries are dealing with, in which the United Nations could bring its force and its weight in order to help those people. And that's what the President will be talking about, how the United States, working in conjunction with the United Nations on that core mission, can help millions of people -- billions of people, possibly. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: No. I'm going to leave the point-by-point refutation of anything that he said to commentators that you all can find. I think that I would just reiterate that obviously, we have -- we are fortunate to live in a free country and we obviously very -- feel very comfortable and confident in our democracy and our values to allow someone who rules as a dictator to come to this country and to be able to spout off on his ideas and to be questioned by an audience of people.

And I think that if any of us were in a position to offer such an invitation, we'd have to weigh that decision very carefully. I don't think the President would have extended it, but he doesn't think that our free speech rights should stop for people -- for other people who are going to be in this country. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I don't know if he'll be there. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: No. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Lost in the mail.

Wendell. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, we don't have diplomatic relations with them. I can't -- I think it would be pretty hard for the President of the United States then to extend an invitation for him to speak. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: What I mean by that, Wendell, is that people have choices -- here in the United States, because we have the free speech rights that we have, then you're allowed to invite people, anybody, to come and speak here. And that's one of the great strengths of our country. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Hello, everybody. We have a special guest, Steve Hadley, the President's National Security Advisor. He can give you some information about an element that will be in the speech tomorrow. We have limited time, but he'll take a couple of questions, and then we'll sit down. MR. HADLEY: The speech tomorrow is going to talk about the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights as a founding document for the United Nations and for our common commitment, as reflected in the United Nations, for freedom. And the President is going to talk about the need for advancing that agenda. He's going to talk about liberation from terror, from fear, and from oppression. He's going to talk about the need to liberate people from disease, from ignorance. It's going to be, I think, a fairly broad-ranging speech that will talk about the broad agenda that we and others in the United Nations are pursuing.

As part of that first category I talked about, he is going to talk about Burma; the importance to support the efforts of the various groups within Burma to advance the cause of freedom there. He is going to announce that there will be additional sanctions directed at key members of the regime, and those that provide financial support to them. He's going to talk about -- that there will be a visa ban to key individuals associated with the negative activities of the regime, including their families. He's going to talk about the importance of continuing to support the humanitarian organizations that are trying to deal with the needs of the people of Burma on the ground. And he will call for the United Nations and for other countries there to do all they can to support a process of political change in Burma.

And it's very interesting what is happening in the country with the Buddhist monks that have joined this effort. And our hope is to marry that internal pressure with some external pressure -- coming from the United States, the United Nations, and really all countries committed to freedom -- to try and force the regime into a change, and one that will give -- will release all political prisoners and permit an evolution towards democracy and freedom in Burma. And that will be one of the subjects of his speech tomorrow, and we just wanted to give you a little more texture.

Dana, anything you want to add to that? MS. PERINO: No, that'll do it. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: No, I really can't. One of the things you need to do is involve a little element of surprise on these sanctions so that people don't, quite frankly, hide their assets before the sanctions come into force. So we're going to be a little bit, intentionally a little vague on what is intended, so that they will have their intended effect. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: We haven't shopped them specifically, but I think you're going to see a number of countries speak out, and I think there has been an increasing awareness about the viciousness of this regime and the opportunity that we might have actually to get a transition. So I think you're going to see a number of countries joining in this effort. There's a real opportunity here. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: No, I think it'll be roughly along the lines I've just described here. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: Pardon me? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. HADLEY: A little bit, but it won't be a major focus. But I'd like to not get into more what will be in or not in the speech. We've given you a sense of sort of the framework and the thematic, and I'd like to save the rest of it for the President tomorrow. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Good afternoon. Happy Friday. Sorry I'm a little late. I have nothing to start with, so we'll go to questions. Does anyone have a question? (Laughter.) If not, I've got plenty of other things to do.

Wendell. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I think you're going to have to ask the State Department in terms of if there was anything different about their resumption of duties today. I think Tom Casey did some on-the-record speaking this morning about it.

In addition, just remember that we have just set up a joint inquiry commission with the Maliki government, and so we're going to have to take some time to figure out what happened at that event, and then also look at the policy recommendations to see if there's anything that needs to be changed. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I don't know. You're going to have to ask the State Department. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'm not, I'm not going to comment on it. I think that this joint inquiry will be able to look into that -- not only that incident, but if there are others that are alleged to have happened, that they'll be able to look at them, figure out those recommendations to see if they -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, and they'll take a look at it and see. But obviously it's important for the people who are there -- the State Department employees and other civilians who are there trying to do the work to help the Maliki government achieve reconciliation -- they need some protection. And Blackwater and other companies are there to help provide it. The loss of life was deeply regrettable. That's why Secretary Rice and Prime Minister Maliki have decided to set up this joint commission, and we'll see where it takes us. And I'm sure if there are policy recommendations, that the State Department and others will be willing to take a hard look at them and probably make them. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: It could be. I don't know. Although I would ask you to call the State Department because there's a lot of legal issues surrounding that and I don't know if immunity is the exact right word.

Jennifer. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Oh, I'm sure we're going to see much more discussion and continued debate about the war. I think there's no doubt about that. We're pleased with the votes this week. I think, especially in regards to the question about the Webb amendment, I think Secretary Gates made it very clear that that amendment would have put our troops in harm's way and would have been a bureaucratic nightmare for the Defense Department. I think people who -- members of Congress who heard from him were able to make their own determination, and that's why that amendment failed.

But I'm sure that we're going to see continued debate on Iraq, and we should. We have 160,000 troops over there now; the President has announced, based on conditions on the ground and based on success that our troops have started to have, that 5,700 troops would come home by Christmas. He's directed General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker to come back in March. So I think that between now and then you're going to continue to see debate. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Dana, the White House is very dedicated to setting the record straight, as we all know, on reporting

MS. PERINO: David, I'm not able to comment, as much as -- I don't know, and I'm not able to comment. I don't know. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: As much as I'd like to be able to -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: -- let some air out of the balloon on this story, I don't know and I just can't comment. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'm not saying one way or the other whether it's accurate. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Do you think that this administration has been naive about the North Koreans while pursuing an

MS. PERINO: No, I think we've been very clear-eyed about the North Koreans, and I think that Ambassador Chris Hill, who has helped shepherd the six-party talk process, has brought some accountability to them. I think we've started to see some success.

But we're clear-eyed about the situation and the dangers. And that's one of the reasons the President set up the Proliferation Security Initiative, not just in regards to North Korea, but other countries. We need to continue to push on that. Many countries are participating now. One of the things the President talked about in many of these bilateral meetings is more and continued participation in that, so we can stop proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I'm not going to comment, and I don't know.

Let's go over here. John. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I don't know. I think what we need to wait for is the joint inquiry to be able to do its work and come back and report. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I don't know. I don't know, I'd have to look. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Well, I think that there is because -- I think that is because there is a need. I don't know why it was originally set up that way. Our troops are -- obviously have a different mission and are helping train Iraqi security forces. And their missions are different. It could be that in the inquiry somebody would suggest using the military to do those functions, but I have not heard talk of that.

Jeremy. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Remember, they just met three weeks ago in Australia. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: So I don't know if they needed to have another meeting. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: You know what I would do, I'd point you to Under Secretary Burns. He met with his counterparts today, and I think he'll have an update for you later today on those discussions regarding sanctions against Iran. But the President just met with Hu Jintao and President Putin -- was it less than three weeks ago? I can't remember. I don't have jet lag anymore, but -- so it must have been at least three.

Suzanne. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q I want to revisit a subject, because Dan Rather, obviously back in the news, suing CBS. He told

MS. PERINO: Look, I'm not going to go back and revisit all these questions that have been asked and answered. There was an independent panel set up by CBS and led by former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh and Louis Boccardi, the retired president and CEO of AP. They determined that there was misconduct on the part of CBS in their authentication of the documents and the production of the story in general.

And I think that story speaks for itself. It was a sad day for that particular network in terms of -- and a sad day for journalism in general. And we are not going -- I'm just not -- I'm just going to let that stand for -- let that independent panel stand. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I refer you to all the previous public comments that we've made on this before. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Not that I'm aware of. I mean, I could find out. I have no idea. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I think that the independence -- independent panel, led by a former Attorney General and former -- and retired

CEO of Associated Press, when they come down, when they make their decision and they come out with a report, I think that that speaks for itself, in addition to the remarks that we've made before.

And look, if one of the -- look to the motivations about where this is coming from. This is a person who has filed a $70 million lawsuit. I'm just not going to comment any further on it. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Look, I'm going to refer you to all the previous statements on this. Obviously, I'm not steeped in all the history of this issue, and many other people have been at the White House. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Look, I'm not going to comment any further. I think you need to look at the motivations of why someone would say these things.

Roger. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: Let us get you a readout, or a -- I'm sorry, a preview of that speech a little bit later today as things develop. Obviously, he's going to be talking about the need for Congress to start passing some appropriations bills. We're almost at the end of the fiscal year, September 30th.

He said yesterday, you heard him say that he wanted to get a clean S-CHIP bill to him, to his desk, that one that he could sign. And CR is probably going to have to be in the works. And so you can bet that he would talk about that. But we would prefer to have Congress actually pass some appropriations bills.

Olivier. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MS. PERINO: I don't know. I've heard that that could be a concern, but that's mostly from news reports. And so I don't know, and I think the most important thing we can do is wait for this commission to come back. Read more Comment (0), Email this.