Transcript: Interview With President-Elect Bush
Friday, January 19, 2001
On Thursday, Fox News Channel's Brit Hume interviewed President-elect George W. Bush. The following is a transcript:
Hume: Mr. President-elect, thank you for making this time available ... nice to see you, sir.
Bush: Thank you, sir.
Hume: Yesterday your nominee for attorney general said that he considered Roe v. Wade — the governing law on abortion in the country — settled law, and said he nor would you be seeking a opportunity to change that. Do you agree with that?
Bush: Well what I think that he was saying — I don't want to put words in the man's mouth — is that he wants to uphold the law. You see there are a lot of folks here in this town that were trying to defeat him because of views that he may have and a kit of people on the fringe were trying to derail his nomination. I knew once he had a chance to speak, a lot of people would hear him say he does not intent to politicize the department and secondly, he's going to enforce the law. That's the job of the attorney general. If the law were to change, he'd enforce the law. I am going to put judges on the bench who will strictly interpret the Constitution. There won't be the litmus test that some others have used, campaigned on. My litmus test will be strict constructionist. The attorney general will be a part of the vetting process, part of the process of collecting information on potential Supreme Court judges. But the decision will be made out of the White House.
Hume: Now, should the opportunity arise, perhaps with new members of the Supreme Court, or a particularly strong case that comes along, or that you see as a strong case, would you then seek an opportunity before the Supreme Court to get that decision reversed or at least changed?
Bush: We'll just have to see. As you know I campaigned as a pro-life candidate. I understand people disagree on this issue, but I think that it is very important for us to be conscious of the value of life in our society.
Hume: So, you would not rule out seeking a change in the law?
Bush: Well, I don't see the law being changed unless the Supreme Court were to make a decision to change the law. I mean, for example, I don't think we're going to get a Constitutional amendment passed — that's for certain.
Hume: But you would not rule out having your Justice Department argue for a change in law were the opportunity to arise?
Bush: Not at all, we'd just have to see what the case is.
Hume: Your treasury secretary-nominee seemed to say yesterday that where he favors a tax cut, as you do, he does not see that as the principal vehicle for avoiding a recession. Indeed, he said that federal interest rate cuts are the first line of defense on that — do you agree with him?
Bush: I do agree with that. I thought that was an important statement, but on the other hand I also think we need tax relief and believe it very strongly. As you know, the president is not involved with the Fed. The Fed gets to decide interest rates. We get to decide fiscal policy and I know part of the economic relief is going to involve tax relief. There are a couple of reasons for tax relief:
First, to make sure Congress doesn't spend all the money that may be available. I worry about the baseline of budgets increasing like they have been in the immediate past. Appropriators will appropriate. One of the jobs of the president is to set priorities and have a budget that reflects those priorities.
Secondly, we need tax relief as an insurance policy against an economic downturn. We may be in a downturn and tax relief is part of a recovery plan and Mr. O'Neill went on to say yesterday that it may be wise to accelerate the tax relief and that our administration will be open-minded to accelerate tax relief in recognition that a tax relief acceleration may have a pretty good effect, not as good as interest rates, but an effect.
Third, there is a lot of debt in our society, consumer debt, that is going to murder a lot of working families and I believe it is important to share some of the surplus, not all of the surplus, but some of the surplus with the people who pay the bills — to help them manage their own assets.
Hume: So, you feel there is no daylight between the one articulated on Capitol Hill and your view on tax cuts?
Bush: Absolutely no daylight. I know some tried to create daylight but there is not.
Hume: You have pledged your principal concerns will be to change the tone of Washington ... which almost everyone concerned has agreed has been politically poisonous in recent years. You have now had a sample of what that may be like with the confirmation process, the charges made against your attorney general-nominee, your nominee for the Interior Department, even your nominee for EPA ... have you begun to wonder at all if the tone in Washington can be changed unilaterally by the president?
Bush: No, I haven't wondered at all. I believe it can be by an administration. First, I think people are going to see that there are people in the fringes that won't be quiet.
Hume: Well there are some on Capitol Hill who are not being quiet either — the leaders of the opposing party which have a large minority.
Bush: Yes, yes they do. Significant, but I think you'll find though, when issues come in front of the Congress, that we're going to find ways to work together — either that or they can be left behind. I believe this and I believe most members agree with this — that in order to achieve a mission it's best to tap success, not failure, and I say that with legislation in mind. I believe I can, we can work together. First of all, I knew some of my nominees would come under fire. I came under fire. When I campaigned for office, I said we are going to have a reasonable explorations policy on public lands in order to make us less dependent on foreign sources of crude oil, for example, and I suggested it and believe strongly we should drill at Anwar and I came under huge fire from the Sierra and then I named Gale Norton who happens to agree with me and that shouldn't surprise anyone that she does agree with me and she came under fire and I am not a bit surprised.
Hume: Do you have any sense, when your nominees are under fire and very harsh things are being said about them — not just by pressure groups but by even members of Congress and prominent members of Congress — that you can succeed if you hold your fire? And that if you don't fire back strongly is that not a kind of unilateral disarmament that leaves you and your nominees at a disadvantage?
Bush: Because to fire back strongly is the vote. John Ashcroft will be confirmed and I think he will be confirmed in pretty good fashion.
Hume: So, you don't worry if your policies and nominees are strongly attacked, and that failure to respond strongly allows opposition to build when a strong response might stem it.
Bush: Strong response may be needed, but not in the case of my nominees. I made a strong statement when I first announced these competent, good people and through the ordeal that John has gone through I'm asked almost everyday at these press availabilities 'What about Ashcroft?' and every day I say this man is going to be a great attorney general and he will be a great attorney general, but the proof is going to be in when he gets in and does his job. People say there are going to be — there are going to be voices in Washington that will not concede that I made a good choice, but I'm not interested in those. The leaders of the special interest groups — the people whose job it is to scream the loudest so they can raise more money — I'm not interested in those people. The people inside the Beltway, the people throughout the country, they are going to say now I understand why President Bush named John Ashcroft.
Hume: Now let me ask you, you recall all the Hosannas that accompanied Sen. Lieberman on the campaign trial and you recall the skepticism that accompanied yours. Now, you've seen Sen. Ashcroft, a man of tremendously deep devotion and faith, have it suggested that his very faith should in some way make people afraid of him — what's your reaction to that?
Bush: There are a lot of folks in DC who aren't very consistent. I take it with a grain of salt, I really do. People can say anything, whatever it takes to defeat this man. And when it is all said and done, John Ashcroft will be the AG. And because of his faith, he will be a unique AG. I am not saying that the other AGs did not have faith, but John Ashcroft is rooted deeply in principle. He understands the job. I'll tell you something else. I take great comfort that he has run for office and won in a swing state. One of my favorite lines of all in politics is when Sam Rayburn turns to LBJ (and he was talking about the Kennedy administration when it first came into office) and says 'I wish just one of those fellahs had been elected sheriff.' I think there is a wonderful wisdom in those words. And I knew John Ashcroft would be under attack. I knew Gale Norton would be under attack. But because both of these two folks have run for public office and won statewide, I had great comfort and understanding of the depth of their sensitivity and the depth of the understanding of the job they would take.
Hume: Do you detect a whiff of anti-religious or particularly anti-Christian bigotry against Senator Ashcroft and his beliefs?
Bush: That is an awfully harsh criticism — I certainly hope not. I know what I said at the Iowa debate got quite a reaction — I did not pay any attention to it though. I never felt anybody was being anti-Christian though. I have read some things that have troubled me regarding John. And I would give people the benefit of the doubt — that would be the best thing to say.
Hume: There is a belief among many Dems that your election was not legitimate, that you were selected not elected president. And therefore you are not entitled to nominate such nominees of such controversial views as Gale Norton and John Ashcroft. How do you react to that?
Bush: Too bad. I am going to. First of all every time they recounted I won. It's just when they started to revote, that I got a little nervous. Secondly, the reason I sit here able to talk to you — soon to be sworn as president — is the positions that I took in the campaign. I was running against the incumbent — good economy going for him and the world basically at peace. And I wish I could say it was my charming personality — the truth of the matter is that I am sitting here because of my firm positions that I did not back off from. And I am not backing off — quite the contrary — those issues I campaigned on and campaigned hard for was the right thing for the country.
Hume: Let me ask you about California and the electricity crises they are having out there. It has been ascribed by the governor and the media as a problem brought on by deregulation. What are your thoughts?
BUSH: It was a problem brought on by bad deregulation. California needs to address a flawed law — it's a law that they deregulated one aspect of the market and did not deregulate the other aspect of the market. It's a law based on the premise that energy prices would go down. It was a law that prevented hedging in the marketplace. It is a bad piece of legislation and California needs to change it. But in the meantime, the federal government can help in the short term.
Hume: How?
Bush: For example, I am told, but I will know more after I am sworn in, that there are some federal regulations that prevent them from operating at maximum load. And if that's the case, we need to do something about it. Relax regulation. Secondly, we have been talking a lot about energy, because I worry that these situations happening in California may happen elsewhere. Demand is irrelevant and the demand for power is increased dramatically, a lot of it because of the Internet and because businesses have grown, a lot of it because people continue to move to California — and there needs to be an increase. And for my critics who say my policy — who say that we need to increase supply — I just say look at California and the consequences. You bet we can conserve, but you cannot conserve — we need to have an energy plan and that's exactly what the Bush-Cheney plan will bring for the country.
Hume: To some extent the current administration has asked and even caused neighboring states around California to bear some of the burden that they are facing by sharing energy supplies, by feeding energy into California. Is that a requirement that you would continue?
Bush: I think the market will work. I thought you were going to say that some people in Washington want to put price controls, cause power to be shipped across jurisdiction lines, under a price freeze. That would be wrong. That would be a bad policy. That is going to give somebody a bit of temporary relief from the polls when that's the problem. That's not going to fix the problem — this is a long-term issue. I am going to look at all options available. But — let me start with this premise. California must fix its system. And to the extent that the federal government can help California help itself, I will do that and my administration will do so. California passed a law and to the extent that that law needs to be corrected, California needs to correct it.
Hume: Give us a brief preview of your inaugural address — how long do you expect it to be and what do you hope to achieve?
Bush: Do you think anyone will clap? If they don't it will be about 13 minutes. I wanted to keep it short because I wanted to remind people that I am the kind of person that gets to the point pretty quickly. Secondly, this is a speech that is not going to be like a State of the Union speech ... that's for a different time. It is a speech that recognizes that we have problems in America — one of the issues facing us is that some people just don't think that America, the promise of America, the prosperity of America, is meant for them. I mention the fact that some are concerned about justice in America and I talk about how optimistic I am that we can be the single nation that our forefathers saw ...
Hume: Mr. President-elect, thank you for taking the time.
Bush: Thank you. |
