Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Today
Duke Investigation; Pressure on Congress From Gas Prices; Singing and Swinging in New Orleans
Aired April 28, 2006 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: We're going to look at some videotape that was shot just a few minutes ago in the White House. President Bush is meeting today with the president of Azerbaijan. Let's see if he takes any questions. President Bush and the president of Azerbaijan.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Hey! Mr. President, welcome.
ILHAM ALIYEV, PRESIDENT OF AZERBAIJAN: Thank you.
BUSH: We just had a really interesting visit. And we talked about the need to -- for the world to see modern -- a modern Muslim country that is able to provide for its citizens, that understands that democracy is the wave of the future. And that I appreciate your leadership, Mr. President.
We obviously talked about Iran. I assured the president of my desire to solve this problem diplomatically and peacefully. I appreciate so very much the government's contribution of support and troops to the new democracy in Iraq.
I spent time describing to the president a meeting I had today via a video conference with our ambassador and General Casey. Very important for me to bring our ally up to date on the progress that's being made on the ground there. I shared with him my hope that the national unity government will help achieve the objective we all want, which is peace and democracy.
And we, of course, talked about energy. And I appreciate the vision of the government and the vision of the president in helping this world achieve what we all want, which is energy security. Azerbaijan has got a very important role to play.
And we discussed internal politics. And we discussed politics of the neighborhood as well, particularly relations with Armenia.
And I appreciate very much the candid discussion. I thank you for sharing your thoughts with me, and thank you for our alliance. And welcome.
ALIYEV: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I am very grateful for the invitation. I'm very glad to be in Washington and have an opportunity to discuss with you the issues of bilateral relations. I am sure that our relations of strategic partnership will strengthen in the future.
We covered all the aspects of our bilateral relations.
We are very grateful for the leadership of the United States in promotion of the energy security issues in the region, in assisting us to create a solid transportation infrastructure which will allow to develop full-scale Caspian oil and gas reserves, and to deliver them to the international markets.
We are allies in the war on terror. We have been from the very first day shoulder to shoulder with the United States in peacekeeping operations in various parts of the world and will continue to contribute to the creation of peace and stability in the region.
Of course, the issues of resolution of Armenian-Azerbaijan Nagorno-Karabakh were also in the center of our discussions. And I informed Mr. President with the latest status of the negotiations and expressed my hope that a peaceful settlement of the conflict will happen and would serve to the peace and stability in the whole region.
In general, I'd like to say that I am very satisfied with my visit. And I consider this as instrumental in the future development of Azerbaijan as a modern, secular, democratic country.
We share the same values. We are grateful for United States assistance in promotion of political process, process of democratization of our society, and very committed to continuing this cooperation in the future.
Thank you very much.
BUSH: One final word: I forgot to mention, I do want to congratulate the president and the first lady on the marriage of their daughter this weekend. It's a major sacrifice for the president to be here during the planning phases of the wedding.
And we wish you and the first lady all the best. And, more importantly, we wish your daughter all the best.
ALIYEV: Thank you, Mr. President.
BUSH: Thank you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: We're going to look at some videotape that was shot just a few minutes ago in the White House. President Bush is meeting today with the president of Azerbaijan. Let's see if he takes any questions. President Bush and the president of Azerbaijan.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Hey! Mr. President, welcome.
ILHAM ALIYEV, PRESIDENT OF AZERBAIJAN: Thank you.
BUSH: We just had a really interesting visit. And we talked about the need to -- for the world to see modern -- a modern Muslim country that is able to provide for its citizens, that understands that democracy is the wave of the future. And that I appreciate your leadership, Mr. President.
We obviously talked about Iran. I assured the president of my desire to solve this problem diplomatically and peacefully. I appreciate so very much the government's contribution of support and troops to the new democracy in Iraq.
I spent time describing to the president a meeting I had today via a video conference with our ambassador and General Casey. Very important for me to bring our ally up to date on the progress that's being made on the ground there. I shared with him my hope that the national unity government will help achieve the objective we all want, which is peace and democracy.
And we, of course, talked about energy. And I appreciate the vision of the government and the vision of the president in helping this world achieve what we all want, which is energy security. Azerbaijan has got a very important role to play...
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: We've been watching and listening in to videotape shot just a few minutes ago at the White House. That was President Bush and the president of Azerbaijan.
Now on to another developing story, this one out of North Carolina. It involves the Duke rape case.
New information coming to light that the woman who was the accuser in this case 10 years ago filed a separate report with police in another town alleging that she had been raped by three men when she was 14 years old. With that new information coming to light, the district attorney in Durham had these comments to make...
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIKE NIFONG, DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA, DISTRICT ATTORNEY: As you know, the Associated Press broke the story yesterday alleging that the victim in what has come to be known as the Duke lacrosse rape case had reported approximately 10 years ago that she had been sexually assaulted approximately 13 years ago. I will not comment specifically on either the facts of the current case or the circumstances of the previous allegations. But in light of that report having been made, I offer the following observations and explanations.
North Carolina, like most states, has in its rules of evidence what is commonly referred to as a rape shield law. That law makes the prior sexual behavior of the victim in a rape prosecution irrelevant unless it falls into one of four narrowly defined categories. It further provides that, before either side in such a case may offer such evidence at trial, they side must first request that the court conduct an in-camera hearing to determine the relevance of such evidence and the circumstances under which it may be offered. In short, the jury that decides this case may or may not hear "the evidence" -- in quotations -- reported by The Associated Press. The media, of course, are not bound by the same rules that govern our courts. Their decisions on what to report and how they report it can have a substantial impact on the ability of our system to effectuate justice.
That impact is often positive. Unfortunately, it can also be negative.
As you might imagine, I have received hundreds of letters, e- mails and telephone calls from across the country about this case since the beginning of April. They run the full gamut of reaction to what is happening and how I'm approaching it. But five of those letters are of particular significance to me because each comes from someone who was once herself the victim of a sexual assault and who chose not to report it to law enforcement.
Two of those letters are from former Duke students who were sexually assaulted by other former Duke students. The common thread of these five situations is that each of these young women believe that the cost of the public scorn she would receive for reporting such an event outweighed the benefit to herself and to society of pursuing justice.
Sadly, we are seeing exactly what they are talking about playing out in Durham today, as people who know none of the facts are standing in line to offer their condemnation. Much has been said about the presumption of innocence in conjunction with this case.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KAGAN: And that was Mike Nifong, the Durham, North Carolina, district attorney, responding to the information that The Associated Press has reported today that the accuser in the Duke rape case filed a charge 10 years ago alleging that three men had raped her previously when she was 14 years old. As you heard the district attorney explain, the way that the rules work in North Carolina, that information might or might not be entered into evidence when a trial comes to pass in that case.
We move on.
Checking the gas gauge today, it is a fraction up overnight, but still just below $2.93 for a gallon of regular unleaded. Fuel up in Wyoming, you paid just $2.60.
The price of crude continues to fly. It's now less than $71 a barrel.
President Bush wants the power to send new fuel standards for cars. The idea is simple: replace gas-guzzlers with gas-sippers. That authority, though, would have to come from Congress. So far, lawmakers are talking the talk, but talk doesn't fill up your tank.
Just listen to this. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), MINORITY LEADER: You have record profits, record CEO remuneration, $400 million retirement package for the head of Exxon. What's going on here? What is going on here?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(VOICE OVER):
SEN. BILL FRIST (R-TN), MAJORITY LEADER: Americans today are unfairly being asked to empty their wallets at the gas pump today, yesterday, and tomorrow, and there's no end in sight.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KAGAN: Well, members of Congress drive cars. Surely they understand that gas prices hit a family in the budget.
National Correspondent Bob Franken visits a few parking lots around the Capitol.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BOB FRANKEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice over): When the Federal Reserve chairman speaks, everyone listens, even when he states the obvious.
BEN BERNANKE, CHAIRMAN, FEDERAL RESERVE: Rising energy prices pose a risk to both economic activity and inflation.
FRANKEN: Those rising energy prices are fueled in part by ever- rising energy uses. The Fed chairman, for instance, is transported around town in the standard dignitary Cadillac limo, figure around 16 miles to the gallon. According to published reports, he sold his Toyota Sienna Minivan when he took the job. That got 21 miles per gallon.
The spike in energy prices has brought a spike in energy-related media events.
REP. DENNIS HASTERT (R), HOUSE SPEAKER: We've passed legislation time and time again with Democrats blocking it, but that was history. Now this is the future. And we need to move forward.
FRANKEN: But when House Speaker Dennis Hastert joined fellow Republicans at his news conference, he traveled there in an SUV. It gets approximately 15 miles to the gallon.
Congressional leaders are driven around in SUVs. The same goes for Democratic leaders, like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. When some of her fellow Democrats engaged in their own finger-pointing, the reporters had a snarky question, how had they gotten there?
REP. RAHM EMANUEL (D), ILLINOIS: Taurus -- Ford Taurus. A little two door -- four-door. It's a Ford Taurus. SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER (D), NEW YORK: Hey, we got you.
EMANUEL: OK?
SCHUMER: Every one of us drove -- drove fuel-efficient cars here.
EMANUEL: Right here? Wait a second. Hold on. Hold on.
No. No. I ain't doing this. You want to play that game?
Chicago CTA card, public transportation. Washington, D.C., public transportation. Any time you want, anywhere you want to go.
FRANKEN: Maybe so, but the fact is, the parking lots for members of Congress around the Capitol look like "Gas-Guzzlers Are Us," which look like parking lots just about everywhere else in this country.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KAGAN: That was Bob Franken reporting.
FEMA under fire today. The acting director defends his agency. A Senate report recommends abolishing FEMA. A new emergency response organization would take its place.
Acting FEMA chief David Paulison says Americans lost confidence after Hurricane Katrina, but FEMA's problems are not beyond repair. Paulison appeared on CNN's "AMERICAN MORNING".
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID PAULISON, ACTING FEMA DIRECTOR: The Federal Emergency Management Agency has been around for a long time. The name has at times been -- has been -- not been good in American eyes. And times has been good. And right now it's not. And all I'm asking is to give me the chance, if the Senate chooses to confirm me, to give me the chance to fix this organization and get it back on track.
And I think we can do that. We have good people here. We have a good organization.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KAGAN: Paulison says he's working with the Homeland Security secretary to strengthen FEMA. He says employees will get the tools that they need.
Top golfers, legendary musicians singing and swinging in New Orleans. The city is hosting a major golf tournament, and it carries on a musical tradition as well.
The stage is set for this weekend's Jazz and Heritage Festival. Organizers hope it's a symbol of the city's comeback.
CNN's Sean Callebs joins us from New Orleans. Sean, how about we start with a little golf, since it looks like they're teeing up behind you.
SEAN CALLEBS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: How about we -- they are.
That's Nick Watney. He shot six under yesterday in the opening round of the New Orleans Classic Zurich Open here. And here's something you haven't heard for about eight or nine months... it is a great weekend to be in New Orleans.
There are going to be about 150,000 people here at the English Turn Golf Course over the next three more days enjoying this golf tournament. And really the PGA had this one circled on its list of tournaments early on.
PGA president, Tim Finchem, as well as top players, like Phil Mickelson and David Toms, who is from Shreveport, went to college in Baton Rouge at LSU, they have been doing everything they could to try and get the top players in the world there. Four of the top 10 golfers in this tournament this weekend, and, really, it's great for the people along the Gulf area.
These are people who have been digging out, who have been gutting their homes, who have been wrestling with insurance companies and FEMA over the past eight months. And if the weather holds up like this, they're probably going to be in for a number of great days of golf.
And look at this course. It's hard to believe this is New Orleans.
Now, this was actually a staging ground for the military, as well as the New Orleans Police, right after Hurricane Katrina. Of course, just went to pot.
It was heavily damaged by wind. There was no flooding here. The greens were basically ruined, but they have done amazing work over the past eight months or so.
Greens keepers from around the country basically descended on this place to bring it back to life. But no public money was spent on this effort. It was all private, from either English Turn, a private foundation associated with this tournament, or the PGA itself -- Daryn.
KAGAN: Now, what about jazz fest? Is this all a sign that New Orleans is coming back to life?
CALLEBS: Well, you know, certainly, that's one of the things that they're really trying to get out this weekend, that this city is trying to come back to life. Tourism has always been an economic linchpin in this area. And they're trying to show that, yes, they can continue to hold world-class events.
We'll see how they do.
Hotels are pretty full. We know the restaurants are packed. I was down in part of the French Quarter last night at a charitable event for one of the agencies that's working to help musicians who have been displaced or lost their gear.
They're expecting about 200,000, 250,000 people at the jazz fest this week. We know Bob Dylan is going to play today, Bruce Springsteen is going to be there, Dave Matthews, and Dr. John is going to close down the set tonight.
And, Daryn, a little brush with greatness last night. I know you and your Bono connection. I've seen all that. But I got to see The Edge last night. Pretty cool.
KAGAN: Oh, you did? And?
CALLEBS: Well...
KAGAN: Share. You brushed with fame. Come on.
CALLEBS: I just kind of waved and kept to myself.
KAGAN: Had a little moment.
CALLEBS: But it was -- he's here. Yes, he's been actually working really under the radar with this -- with this charitable organization, trying to help out all of the artists in this area, because so many of these guys don't have insurance. And, you know, it's been as depressing on them as it has been everybody else. So it's -- you know, it's terrible.
KAGAN: It is. Maybe Nick Watney back there can give you a few tips on your game.
CALLEBS: You should see this guy. We've been watching him. He is chipping a host of golf balls, and they're all so close. And he makes it look effortless. And -- you know, he's not one of the big names on the tour. They're all so good.
KAGAN: Yes, but that's why they're the professionals. They've got the gift.
CALLEBS: Exactly.
KAGAN: Thank you, Sean.
A woman's life is turned upside-down by a prank. Your sex life could be someone's fantasy on the Internet. We have that story in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KAGAN: The pictures are extraordinary, and the Hubble space telescope gets the credit for these. Take a look.
You're taking -- you're seeing a comet break apart in space. Astronomers say it shattered into more than 33 pieces. They say the smallest chunk is probably the size of a house. The disintegrating comet will pass Earth on May 12th.
Don't worry. The pieces will still be about seven million miles away.
Just learning this at CNN. Senator John Kerry's former wife has died of cancer. She was 61.
The senator's office says that Julia Thorne passed away at a friend's home in Connecticut. Thorne turned her struggle with depression into a best-selling book and she founded a nonprofit foundation called Depression Initiative.
Thorne and John Kerry had two daughters, Vanessa and Alexandra. They describe her as a great friend to a lot of people and a phenomenal mother.
From the board room to the jailhouse, police arrested the chairman of the Hyundai Motor Corporation today in South Korea. Chung Mong-koo is accused of embezzling money from the company to create a slush fund. He as taken to a detention center outside of Seoul. Hyundai is South Korea's largest automaker and a growing force in the U.S. market.
Danger lurks on the mean streets of cyberspace. One woman found that out the hard way. A cyber-stalker posted her personal information on the Web. And before she knew it, men were knocking on her door, asking for sex.
Deborah Feyerick followed this report for "PAULA ZAHN NOW".
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Last September, out of nowhere, Claire Miller began getting obscene phone calls and sexually-explicit e-mails. She shrugged it off, but then strange men started ringing her doorbell.
CLAIRE MILLER, TARGET OF INTERNET STALKING: There were some scarier one that showed up very late at night.
FEYERICK (on camera): What are they telling you?
MILLER: That I'd set up a date with them online.
FEYERICK (voice-over): Only on a hardcore adult Web site. Someone had posted a personal ad pretending to be Claire Miller. It revealed where she lived and how to reach her and said she was into swingers, group sex and erotic e-mails. The phony ad invited men to stop by Miller's Manhattan apartment, promising, "I can make you very happy and satisfied in my den of love pad."
(on camera): Do you have any idea who might be doing this?
MILLER: No, I really don't.
FEYERICK: Have you thought possibly an ex-boyfriend? MILLER: Very unlikely.
FEYERICK: A stranger?
MILLER: Most likely.
FEYERICK (voice-over): Miller, a publishing executive, is being cyber-stalked. She has no idea who it is and why they're doing it and says she has never posted her personal details on any Web site. She agreed to speak with me only on condition she disguised herself so the stalker won't know what she really looks like.
MILLER: The thought that someone would spend countless hours online trolling for complete strangers to harass me is very strange.
FEYERICK: Strange, and yet it's happening more and more. These days, finding personal details online can be as easy as typing in a name.
(on camera): This might be frightening to look yourself up and see that somebody has put you on something like this.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, yes, I would be frightened.
FEYERICK (voice-over): After being victimized, Jane Hitchcock (ph) created the group Working to Half Online Abuse or WHOA for short.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I call it Internet road rage, where for whatever reason, just like off line road rage where somebody just snaps and starts chasing down the information superhighway.
FEYERICK: No one keeps official statistics on cyber-stalking, but Hitchcock (ph) says she gets about 50 calls a week. One of those calls came from Claire Miller, confused why this was happening.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Maybe she spurned somebody and somebody took something she said the wrong way. It could be any number of things, but somebody obviously got very, very angry with her for some reason, and they took it personally. And so they wanted to get back at her in the nastiest way possible.
FEYERICK (on camera): how difficult is it to get your identity back once it is posted on an adult Web site or someplace else like that?
KEVIN BARROWS, RENAISSANCE ASSOCIATES: Well to get it back, it's virtually impossible.
FEYERICK (voice-over): Former FBI agent Kevin Barrows investigates compute crimes.
(on camera): What is it about the Internet that makes people think they can do this and get away with it?
BARROWS: It's very easy. You don't have to have personal contact, you don't have to call someone on a phone and confront them that way. You don't have to sit in front of someone's house and watch them. All you do is type a few keys and hit send.
FEYERICK (voice-over): Which raises the question, who is doing it?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: These are normal every day people, they professionals. They are usually white collar, don't have criminal records. But for whatever reason, they just lose all sense of being a good person when they go online. It's like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.
FEYERICK (on camera): Do they see themselves as cyber stalkers?
BARROWS: I don't believe so. In my experience, I think that they see themselves as getting back, getting revenge.
FEYERICK: And getting revenge may mean destroying somebody's reputation.
BARROWS: That's right.
FEYERICK (voice-over): Cyber-stalking is now a crime in 45 states. And while stalkers may think what they're doing is harmless, even a prank, there's always a risk it can escalate into something more dangerous, even if they try to hide or change their Internet address, most stalkers can be traced.
But takes a long of time and effort and few are ever prosecuted. As for Claire Miller, she still doesn't know who is harassing her, though thinks it may be someone connected to an old high school friend.
(on camera): If you could say anything to this person, what would you say to them?
MILLER: Stop, stop now.
FEYERICK (voice-over): Miller says she's not frightened. But she has changed her phone number, taken her name off the door and disconnected her apartment buzzer just in case.
Deborah Feyerick, CNN New York.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KAGAN: Well, cyber-stalkers are often hard to catch, but recently in Canada one convicted cyber-stalker got hit with a year in jail.
"PAULA ZAHN NOW" will continue to keep an eye on cyber crimes. Watch weeknights at 8:00 p.m. Eastern, 5:00 Pacific.
It's a ride to remember, so America never forgets. We'll check in on our airline pilot friend who is honoring the flight crews of 9/11.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KAGAN: We go live now to the United Nations. Here is U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton talking about Iran.
JOHN BOLTON, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: ... council action just as soon as possible.
With that, maybe I'll stop and take a few questions.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
AMBASSADOR JOHN R. BOLTON, U.S. PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE TO THE UNITED NATIONS: ... council action just as soon as possible.
With that, maybe I'll stop and take a few questions.
QUESTION: Ambassador, do you believe -- the Security Council gave Iran 30 days the first time. How much more time are you prepared or do you want the council to give Iran this time around?
BOLTON: We've been discussing a very short turnaround period for compliance with the resolution. But as with many things in the Security Council, it will require discussions with the other members.
But our view is it should be a very short period.
QUESTION: The Chinese ambassador was here just a few minutes ago and essentially said, in no uncertain terms, that China would not want a Chapter 7 resolution. How are you going to bridge the differences with China, and presumably Russia, over Chapter 7?
BOLTON: I think that it's always important once you've got an actual text of a resolution or elements of a resolution that Security Council members can discuss and debate back and forth; when you get concrete, perspectives sometimes change.
So I don't really want to speculate on what China's position may or may not be, or anybody else's position.
We think there's a need to move forward. We're certainly hoping for unanimity among the five permanent members and the council as a whole. But unanimity or not, we're prepared to move forward.
QUESTION: Sir, you've talked quite often about the credibility of the U.N., and it seems that...
BOLTON: And so has Secretary Rice recently.
QUESTION: Yes, and Rice has, as well.
But that seems to work in your favor when they do what you want them to. But you violated the U.N. Charter when you went to war against Iraq, and you consistently lied to us about the reasons that we went to war. And this war was drawn up in Herzliya, Israel, in 1996 with the Project for a New American Century. And, you know, why do you have credibility other than that you've just got the biggest guns?
BOLTON: Can I ask what media outlet you're from?
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) Muslims Weekly.
BOLTON: I see.
We did not violate the U.N. Charter in the war to overthrow Saddam Hussein. And that plan was not drawn up at Herzliya at the Project for a New American Century.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
BOLTON: OK, well then perhaps you can refer them to somebody.
QUESTION: When you make the case for the Chapter 7 resolution, which requires threats to peace, what is the case you will make?
BOLTON: I think that the evidence of Iran's efforts to acquire a nuclear weapons, its extensive program to achieve a ballistic missile capability of longer and longer range and greater accuracy, constitutes a classic threat to international peace and security, especially when combined with Iran's long status as the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism.
The purpose of acting under Chapter 7 is to invoke the mandatory compliance features of Chapter 7, which, as a resolution of the Security Council under Chapter 7, would be binding on all U.N. members.
Therefore, it's not a matter of discretion for Iran. They have to comply or the Security Council is free to take other steps.
QUESTION: Sir, is the United States prepared to go down the road of diplomacy...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: ... nuclear weapons for the last...
BOLTON: I believe this lady's asking a question.
QUESTION: How long is the United States prepared to go down the road of diplomacy with Iran?
BOLTON: We have said for several years now that our priority is to achieve a resolution of the Iranian nuclear weapons program through peaceful and diplomatic means.
That's why the United States has made this case in the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency for over three years now -- over three years now -- and why we are pursuing resolutions in the Security Council, the body charged by the U.N. Charter with the maintenance of international peace and security.
So I think that's clear evidence of our intention of getting this resolved diplomatically.
QUESTION: Ambassador, Iran has already said that it would defy a Chapter 7 resolution because it would consider it illegitimate. Iran does not consider itself a threat to international peace and security.
So is Iran set on a collision course with the Security Council right now?
BOLTON: I think this remains entirely in Iran's hands. Its behavior recently indicates it's threatening to withdraw from the Non- Proliferation Treaty. It's obviously indicating it doesn't intend to comply with the U.N. Charter.
That's the kind of behavior that shows why Iran is as isolated as it is and why its behavior amounts to a threat to international peace and security.
So each of these statements that Iran makes simply enhances the evidence in support of our case that this matter belongs in the Security Council.
QUESTION: Could you comment on...
BOLTON: Can I just ask -- I mean, I'm happy to answer your questions, but you the press have -- if you want one person to stand here and ask all the questions, it's really up to you.
I'll recognize this gentleman.
QUESTION: Mr. Ambassador, thank you.
What measures do you think Iran should face under this new resolution? And is it too early to start talking about a military option, or would you ever rule out a military option?
BOLTON: The intention -- at least our starting position on this resolution that we're going to consider now, is it's very simple, very straightforward. It will simply make mandatory the obligations already imposed on Iran by previously existing IAEA resolutions.
In other words, what we're doing is invoking the mandatory provisions of Chapter 7.
And this resolution itself will not dictate or foreshadow future action.
That really puts the ball back in Iran's court. And it's up to them whether they will honor their obligations under the U.N. Charter, honor their obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and honor their obligations under a mandatory Chapter 7 resolution.
QUESTION: In terms of timetable, next Wednesday the Congo, the new president, tentatively slated in Wednesday after your Tuesday meetings in Paris -- or the delegation's Tuesday meetings in Paris, is that realistic in terms of thinking about when this might come up before the Security Council?
BOLTON: I have a rule, which I sometimes break, that I never predict the timing of Security Council action. And every time I break the rule, I'm wrong. So I'm going to try and stick with the rule, at least for 24 hours, and not predict on timing.
But what I can say, quite seriously, is that we view Iran's continued defiance of the IAEA and of the Security Council presidential statement as a matter of urgency, and we hope to proceed just as expeditiously as we can.
QUESTION: Before the action taken, what's the Iranian government supposed to do? And if you have message to Iran government about the ElBaradei report?
BOLTON: My message would be to the people of Iran -- since the government does not seem to want to hear, my message to the people of Iran would be, "It is not in your national self-interest to pursue a nuclear weapons capability."
We have no quarrel with the people of Iran. We do have a quarrel with a government that is seeking, in violation of treaty obligations, to acquire nuclear weapons and the ballistic missile capability to deliver them.
So Iran holds the key to this in its own hand. It can prevent the council from going further by giving up the pursuit of nuclear weapons, as other countries have done.
QUESTION: Mr. Ambassador, the Chinese, they still insist that the Security Council is not the right place to discuss this issue. And if they're still stopping any of the Americans' effort to take any action, are you going to consider any action out of the Security Council, like (inaudible) sanction on the Iranian government or anything out of the Security Council?
BOLTON: Well, you know, the government of China did vote in the IAEA Board of Governors in February to refer the Iranian nuclear weapons program to the Security Council.
That's not an action that we think displaces the International Atomic Energy Agency. Indeed, our view has consistently been that the Security Council should work to strengthen the hand of the IAEA. And we think that the IAEA will have an important role in the resolution of the Iranian program.
But it's precisely because of the Security Council's ability to take mandatory steps and to take other steps, if necessary, to ensure compliance with its resolutions, that it's entirely proper for the matter to be here in the Security Council.
QUESTION: Ambassador, May 9th, foreign ministers, is that on New York (ph) or not? BOLTON: Well, there's a meeting of the quartet scheduled for next week. And I don't know whether all the final arrangements have been made.
But I think this is a matter of high priority to my secretary of state and I think to the other permanent members. So if there's the occasion to have a meeting, I think that could be quite useful.
QUESTION: Ambassador, Ambassador Wang said that moving to Chapter 7, that would take it out of the realm of diplomacy. I assume that you disagree; that Chapter 7 is still a part of diplomacy.
BOLTON: A Chapter 7 resolution would be adopted by the Security Council, and I think what we do here in the Security Council is diplomacy.
The point -- and there's no question about this in our mind -- is to enhance international pressure on Iran, to show just how isolated they are, to show just how unacceptable is their pursuit of nuclear weapons. There's still time for the government of Iran to reverse the strategic policy that it is pursuing of trying to acquire nuclear weapons.
We're prepared to continue to work in the council, but certainly not for an unlimited period of time. A resolution under Chapter 7 that makes Iran's operations mandatory will be a clear signal to Iran of its continuing isolation.
QUESTION: Can Iran ever be isolated whilst they still have trading partners?
BOLTON: I think they clearly can. And I think that's one of the reasons that if they choose not to come into compliance, we will look at additional steps, including targeted sanctions.
But there's no doubt that ultimately Iran could resolve this problem, have a different relationship with the rest of the world, if it chose to give up nuclear weapons.
QUESTION: Just to double-check on the issue of the quartet meeting.
Sorry, did I...
BOLTON: Right, you did, but go ahead.
QUESTION: On the quartet meeting, I just want to double-check, are you saying that there will be a meeting of foreign ministers at the same time as the quartet meeting which will also discuss the issue of Iran?
And if that's the case, will there be foreign ministers, other than just the foreign ministers who are a member of the quartet to come and talk about that? And will there be any vote at that foreign minister meeting on an Iran resolution?
BOLTON: I don't think there's a question of a vote at a foreign ministers meeting. I think it's a question of discussion.
And I think the point was there would be a coincidence of a number of foreign ministers being in New York at about that time and it might be a good opportunity to have a meeting.
QUESTION: I know we're all obsessed with current events here, but I'd like to ask a historical question, because analysts and the Iranians themselves have brought this up.
You mentioned the Iranian people, and they say that the U.S. has a problem of credibility with the Iranian people, since you talk about bringing democracy there now. But they have long memories: 1953, the U.S. and Britain overthrew an Iranian democracy to install a monarchy, which then was overthrown in '79 by the Islamic government that we're all stuck with right now.
Had that never happened, would we be here today talking about this?
BOLTON: That is a question of deep historical significance on which, I believe, the United States government probably has no position. I have views, but I think I'll not express them.
QUESTION: Ambassador, the IAEA report says that there's no evidence that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons, just evidence of noncompliance. What makes you so sure that they are pursuing nuclear weapons?
BOLTON: I think it's clear from the scope and extent of the Iranian nuclear program that they're trying to achieve mastery over the entire nuclear fuel cycle indigenously. Their contention that this is for purely peace civil nuclear purposes is simply not borne out by the facts.
And I would note that the report itself contains a paragraph on the question of fabrication of uranium metal. Now, while there are some research purposes for having uranium metal, the principal reason to form and fabricate uranium metal is the formation of nuclear warheads.
And the documentation that Iran has, as revealed in the report, about the techniques needed for the shaping or uranium metal is consistent with a warhead-related purpose.
That is in addition to what we know about their ballistic missile program and the potential that that has for mating nuclear warheads with a delivery capability.
The fact that Iran threatens to withdraw from the Non- Proliferation Treaty is another piece of evidence their program's not peaceful. If it's a peaceful program, they can stay within the treaty.
The whole range of these activities, they're only explainable over time by their intention to seek nuclear weapons, such as the continued obstruction of IAEA efforts to get compliance. This report is filled with examples where the Iranians have repeatedly refused to cooperate with the IAEA. And the previous reports of the director general document extensive efforts to obstruct IAEA inspectors and to cover up and destroy evidence that would demonstrate the weapons- related purposes of the program.
Let me just take one or two more here.
KAGAN: We've been listening in to John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. This is the day that the IAEA has delivered its report on nuclear power and nuclear energy to the Security Council of the U.N. concerning Iran.
CNN's Liz Neisloss is standing by listening in.
First, Liz, briefly, if you could tell us, what does this report say about Iran?
LIS NEISLOSS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, the report doesn't surprise anyone here, Daryn. It essentially says that the Iranians have not complied with the Security Council demand, a demand made 30 days ago. The deadline is today. And they were supposed to answer open questions about their nuclear program.
The essence of the problem here, Daryn, is that Iran, according to international agreements, is allowed to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. But because of open questions, because of what the U.S. says, is 18 years of clandestine nuclear activities, a lot of concerns that they are diverting their nuclear program for military purposes.
They had been asked by the U.N. Security Council to stop that uranium enrichment, to answer the questions. They have not done so. You just heard the litany of problems from the U.S. Ambassador John Bolton, and it is his job now to get the Security Council to tighten the grip on Iran some sort of action -- Daryn.
KAGAN: I heard a lot of diplomatic jargon in those questions and answers. I heard the phrase "Chapter 7" brought up a lot. What does that mean?
NEISLOSS: Well, this is the land of diplomatic jargon.
KAGAN: And for you to interpret for us.
NEISLOSS: And for us and for me to tell you. And Chapter 7 is really something in the United Nations charter, that's basically the by-laws of the United Nations. And when a resolution, when an action from the Security Council, is made Chapter 7, it means that that issue is considered a threat to international peace and security. And a Chapter 7 resolution is the sort of thing you need if you want to impose sanctions and ultimately lead to military action.
But this very question is at the heart of the whole diplomatic dance that we're going to see, Daryn. China and Russia, leading members on the Security Council that have a veto just like the United States, say they don't want this Chapter 7 resolution. They know what happens. If you put Chapter 7 on a resolution, it means the train has left the station diplomatically, you are moving steadily on a path toward potential confrontation -- Daryn.
KAGAN: So what's the next thing we should look for? For that push for Chapter 7?
NEISLOSS: Well, there is a calendar shaping up now, and I think it gives us some sign posts as to when the Security Council will actually get to this piece of paper, whether it is or isn't a Chapter 7 resolution. On May 2nd, on Tuesday, the political directors of various countries, including Nicolas Burns for the United States, are going to meet in Paris, and that is when they really start hashing around some ideas. The United States will certainly lay down their ideas.
But this piece of paper that will be in the Security Council is being written in the lead by the British, the Germans and the French. They have some rough ideas, they say. And those will start to get hashed out in Paris. And then on May 9th, we have a meeting here in New York of foreign ministers of all those veto-holding members and Germany. So, Daryn, we would expect not until somewhat after that point we will have a firm picture of what the Security Council will do with Iran - Daryn.
KAGAN: All right. And you'll be watching it for us. CNN's Liz Neisloss. Liz, thank you for that.
We do expect to hear from the president in a few minutes. He will be speaking from the White House. You'll see those comments live here on CNN.
Also ahead, he usually pilots a plane. Now he's pedaling a bike. We're going to check in with Tom Heidenberger. He is riding across America to honor the flight crews of 9/11.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KAGAN: It's time to check in with someone we've been following here on CNN LIVE TODAY. You might remember his story. Thomas Heidenberger is on a 33-day bike trip across America. It started in L.A. Tomorrow he and other riders will stop in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, near where United Flight 93 went down. Each day the riders are honoring an airline crew member who died in the 9/11 hijacking. That list of victims includes Heidenberger's own wife. She was a flight attendant on the plane that crashed into the Pentagon.
Tom Heidenberger joins us today from Pittsburgh. He's more than three weeks into the trip, which I think the tan is telling the story there. And he's checking in with us along the way.
Tom, good morning.
TOM HEIDENBERGER, US AIRWAYS CAPTAIN: Good morning. How are you? So nice to be with you.
KAGAN: Good to have you with us. Want to talk to you before we have to go to the president here. How is the trip going? We haven't talked to you in about a week and a half.
HEIDENBERGER: Physically it's going rather well, but emotionally it's like the hills of Pennsylvania up and down. We have good days, we have bad days. But, physically, we're doing very well. We're now -- if you've been following this, for example, on our Web site in the daily updates, we've just now come into the 3,000 mile mark. And have the hard days emotionally ahead of us with a stop in Shanksville, later in the week at New York at the World Trade Center, and the finish at the Pentagon in Washington.
KAGAN: I would imagine that this day coming up, when you go into Shanksville, will be particularly hard. Talk about who you're honoring today.
HEIDENBERGER: Today we're riding for Captain Jason Dahl. Jason's wife Sandy is going to meet us tonight in Somerset and be with us tomorrow. Jason was the consummate dad. Their son Matthew -- he would trade trips for so he could be with his family. He had his upcoming wedding anniversary just before 9/11, and he wound up swapping a trip so he could have his anniversary with his wife Sandy. He was a great, great guy.
KAGAN: And he was on United flight 93, that crash there in Shanksville.
HEIDENBERGER: Right. Right. The crash into Shanksville.
KAGAN: Which brings to mind -- you know, this is the week that the movie "United 93" comes out. I wouldn't imagine -- have you had a chance to see it since you've been pedalling across America?
HEIDENBERGER: No, I've seen very, very little TV, but I've seen the trailers or the advertisements for it. I mean, a movie is exactly what it is. It is entertainment. It is not reliving the facts of the day. We know what happened. But, sadly, it's not going to bring Jason back. It's not going to bring Michelle back. It's not going to bring back any of the the other 3,000 victims back. For some families, it will bring them a sense of closure and allow them to move on. For many others, it will reopen the pain and the anguish of that one day.
KAGAN: As you've shared with us, the purpose of your trip and all this cycling is to get a memorial for these flight crew members, so they won't be forgotten.
HEIDENBERGER: Right. Well, here we are five years after 9/11. And where are we, as you know, with respect to funding for the memorials? The airline employees, the 33 that perished that day, they were, in many sense, the leaders of the sky. Why shouldn't they also be leaders on the ground insofar as spearheading the effort to get the three memorials completely built and funded?
Again, it's been five years since that day, and I don't think that the American public or the families want to wait another five years. We'd like to get this done in a reasonable amount of time. And you can do this by either donating online to the ride through the Web site, or directly to one of the three memorials. We would prefer to do it online to the Web site because we have no expenses, so to speak. Everything is fully funded and donated.
And we can then, in September, as we approach the five-year anniversary, present a check to the three sites, the Pentagon memorial, the Flight 93 memorial in Shanksville, and to the World Trade Center memorial, a check in the memory and in the honor and as a tribute to the 33 crew members who were the first of the first responders of that day.
KAGAN: Tom Heidenberger, we'll continue to check in on you and the crew as you make your way across America. Thank you.
HEIDENBERGER: We hope to see you in New York.
KAGAN: We'll see you then. Thank you.
HEIDENBERGER: OK, thank you, Daryn. Have a great day.
KAGAN: And standing by. President Bush will be coming out into the rose garden any minute now to make statements on the economy.
While we wait for him to show up, and we do think it will be about a minute -- let's welcome in our John King.
John, what have you heard about what the president will be saying?
JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Daryn, we'll wait for the door of the Oval Office to open. The president wants to come out and crow a little bit. New numbers out from the government today, showing the gross domestic product is showing, showing the economy growing at quite an encouraging clip. The president feels, his staff believes, he's not getting enough credit for what they appear to be an overall strong economy, despite concerns about gas prices, despite some other concerns. So he wants to say come out and say, in his view, things are going along. And of course it's an opportunity to maybe talk about gas prices, maybe talk about the diplomatic showdown with Iran. Here's the president walking out right now with some of his economic advisers.
All right, we'll go ahead -- as the president makes his way to the podium, we'll go ahead and listen in to what the president has to say.
John, we'll talk with you after we hear what the president has to say.
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Thank you very much for joining us today.
I'm joined by my two top White House economic advisers. The reason why is because we've had some very positive economic news today. The Commerce Department announced that our economy grew at an impressive 4.8 percent annual rate in the first quarter of this year. That's the fastest rate since 2003. This rapid growth is another sign that our economy is on the fast track.
The good news comes on the heels of two other important economic indicators reported earlier this week. New homes sales surged forward by nearly 14 percent last month. Consumer confidence reached its highest level since May of 2002.
This confidence is largely driven by the many jobs being created in our country: 5.1 million since August of 2003.
This good news cannot be taken for granted. With gas prices on the minds of Americans, we need to keep our foot on the pedal of this strong economy.
The surest way to put the brakes on our economic growth would be to raise taxes or spend too much of the people's money here in Washington. That's why I'm going to continue to work with Congress to make the tax relief that helped spur this economic growth permanent. That's why I'm going to work with Congress to restrain the federal government's appetite for spending. And that's why I'm going to work with Congress to make this country less dependent on foreign sources of oil.
I commend America's workers, small-business owners, innovators and educators for contributing to the strong economic health of our nation. I will continue to pursue pro-growth policies so that opportunity reaches every American neighborhood and every American family.
And with that, I'd be glad to take a couple questions.
Excuse me, please -- Jennifer?
QUESTION: Thank you, sir. The IAEA says that Iran is not in compliance with the Security Council. What sort of sanctions would you like to see and that could bring Russian and Chinese support?
BUSH: The IAEA statement is an important statement. It reminds the nations of the world that there is an ongoing diplomatic effort to convince the Iranians to give up their nuclear weapons ambitions.
It reminds -- should remind -- the Iranians that the world is united and concerned about their desire to have not only a nuclear weapon, but the capacity to make a nuclear weapon or the knowledge to make a nuclear weapon; all of which we're working hard to convince them not to try to achieve.
I will consult and continue to consult with our allies on this issue. I spoke to Chancellor Merkel this morning about this issue. She will be coming to Washington next week. We will continue discussions about how we can continue to maintain a united front.
It's very important for the Iranians to understand there's a common desire by a lot of nations of this world to convince them -- peacefully convince them -- that they ought to give up their weapons ambitions.
Steve?
QUESTION: Thank you, sir.
You mentioned gas prices. Would you go along with an effort by some Senate Republicans that could levee a significant tax on oil company profits? And does it bother you that the oil companies are racking up these record profits when people are paying $3 a gallon?
BUSH: My attitude is that the oil companies need to be mindful that the American people expect them to reinvest their cash flows in such a way that it enhances our energy security. That means pipeline construction for natural gas deliveries. That means expansion of refineries. That means exploration in environmentally friendly ways.
It also means investment in renewable sources of energy.
And that's what the American people expect.
They also expect to be treated fairly at the pump. And that's why the Federal Trade Commission is going to monitor the situation very carefully to make sure the American people are treated fairly.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
BUSH: Look, the temptation in Washington is to tax everything. And they spend the money; they being the people in Washington.
The answer is for there to be strong reinvestment to make this country more secure from an energy perspective.
Listen, these oil prices are a wakeup call. We're dependent upon oil. We need to get off oil. The best way is to do that through technology. And I've been traveling the country talking about the need to, you know, develop alternative sources of energy, such as ethanol and to spend money to advance technologies, such as a new battery technology that will enable us to have plug-in hybrid vehicles.
We signed a good energy bill a while ago, and that encouraged -- for example, one thing it's got in there is a tax credit to encourage people to purchase hybrid vehicles, so that the consumptive patterns of the American people change.
And the American people have to understand that we are living in a global economy and so, when China and India demand more oil, it affects the price of gasoline at the pump. And, Therefore, it's important for us to diversify away from oil.
But it's also important for the people to understand that one of the reasons why the price of gasoline is up is there's tight gasoline supplies. And one reason there's tight gasoline supplies is we haven't built any new refineries since the 1970s.
And, therefore, Congress needs to provide regulatory relief so people can expand their refineries.
So it's a combination of people investing the cash flows, as well as regulatory relief, to enhance the ability for people to achieve the objective, which is more gasoline on the market which will help our consumers.
Dick Kyle?
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President.
You have a meeting later today on Darfur. And the Sudanese government continues to thwart efforts by the U.N. and other multinational organizations to take a firmer control of the situation there.
Is there anything you can do to leverage the Sudanese government, and what's your message to them?
BUSH: My message to them is we expect there to be full compliance with the international desire for there to be peace in the Darfur region.
We have taken the situation to the United Nations Security Council.
My belief is that the A.U. forces that are on the ground -- by the way, we helped the A.U. forces get in there in the first place. We think that force needs to be expanded and blue-helmeted with a NATO overlay, with NATO help.
And so, therefore, the message to the Sudanese government is: We're very serious about getting this problem solved. We don't like it when we see women raped and brutalized. And we expect there to be a full effort by the government to protect human life and human condition.
We also recognize there's a parallel political track taking place and that we urge the rebels, as well as the government, to forge a consensus at Abuja so that there is a way forward from this -- from the impasse, political impasse, that has taken place thus far in Sudan.
There is a good go-by for people to look at, and that is the north-south agreement that this government helped fashion under the leadership of Secretary of State Colin Powell, as well as Special Envoy Jack Danforth.
The north-south agreement shows that political solutions are possible.
And so we expect the Sudanese government to be good-faith bargainers, we expect the rebels to be good-faith bargainers, but we also expect people to, particularly the Sudanese government, to make a more concerted effort to control the Janjaweed and protect human life.
And the meeting today and the rallies around the country are a clear signal that the United States is committed to peace in Darfur.
QUESTION: Let's come back to Iran, if we can.
QUESTION: The Iranians have said they're going to ignore what happens at the U.N. Security Council. Doesn't that mean the diplomatic options are dwindling?
BUSH: No, I think the diplomatic options are just beginning. And as you might recall, about six or seven months ago you were asking me questions about the United Nations Security Council, vis-a-vis Iran, and now we're headed to the United Nations Security Council.
And I look forward to working with all interested parties to make sure that there's a common voice, that -- listen, the first thing that has to happen diplomatically for anything to be effective is that we all agree on the goal. And we've agreed on the goal, and that is the Iranians should not have a nuclear weapon, the capacity to make a nuclear weapon or the knowledge as to how to make a nuclear weapon.
And now that we've got the goal in mind, we're working on the tactics. And today's IAEA report should remind us all that the Iranian government's intransigence is not acceptable.
David Gregory?
QUESTION: Mr. President, thank you.
We're seeing some turnover and some change within your administration, and I wonder what it says about what you think is necessary to turn your presidency around at this point.
BUSH: I think it's necessary to continue doing -- achieving results for the American people. We've got big challenges for this country, and I've got a strategy to deal with them.
The biggest challenge we face is winning the war on terror and to protect the American people. And we'll continue to keep on the offense to keep the terrorists off balance, to find them and bring them to justice. And at the same time, we'll continue to work to spread democracy, understanding that democracy is the best way to defeat an ideology of hatred.
At home, it's important to make sure this economy continues to grow. And that's why I'm working with Congress to make the tax cuts permanent.
I fully understand there are some here who would like the tax cuts to expire -- or raise taxes. In my judgment, that would be, you know, bad for the economy. It would hurt small business formation and hurt the entrepreneurial spirit.
So I will continue to work with Congress to make these tax cuts a real part of economic life for a long time coming.
And we've also got to be wise about spending. I issued a veto threat the other day because I was deeply concerned that the supplemental was getting out of hand.
And I recognized that, in order for us to cut the deficit in half, we've got to keep pro-growth economic policies in place, as well as control federal spending.
I talked about the need for this country not to fear the future, but to shape it. In other words, we shouldn't worry about competition from China and India because we can outcompete those companies if we're wise about what we do.
And one of the most wise things we can do is to make sure our children have got the skills necessary to fill the jobs of the 21st century.
I've been talking about energy independence for a long period of time. You might remember, last summer I was urging Congress to pass a comprehensive energy bill so that we could deal with conservation and new technologies and diversification.
And so I'm going to keep working hard for the American people to get results.
By the way, we're in the midst of implementing now a Medicare bill, which is helping our seniors a lot. And if a senior has not signed up, I urge you to take a look at the Medicare prescription drug program, particularly if you're low-income senior. It's an enormous benefit and it's a necessary benefit.
So there's a lot to do, David, and we'll continue to be results- oriented.
Martha Raddatz...
QUESTION: But I asked you about your internal changes, and what that says about how you think things need to be changed. They've been very public, your internal changes.
BUSH: Well, David, I'm a results-oriented person. And my job is to achieve things for the American people, positive results that make us more secure and more prosperous. And, of course, I will have people by my side that work toward that objective.
Thank you for your penetrating question.
QUESTION: Thank you.
BUSH: Plus, I'm not going to hire you, if that's what you were suggesting.
(LAUGHTER)
QUESTION: I was not suggesting that.
BUSH: OK. I would, except you can't pass the background check.
(LAUGHTER) OK, an unnecessary cheap shot. I take it back.
Martha?
QUESTION: You often say Iran is not Iraq.
BUSH: Yes, I do say that.
QUESTION: There are many people who fear that this will turn into a military confrontation. Why is Iran not Iraq? There's WMD?
BUSH: Iraq went through 16 different Security Council resolutions. There was resolution after resolution after resolution. Iraq had invaded its neighbors. Iraq was shooting at U.S. aircraft. Iraq had actually used weapons of mass destruction on its people before.
There's a difference between the two countries.
Iran's desire to have a nuclear weapon is dangerous ,in my judgment. The diplomatic process is just starting.
QUESTION: But when you talk about that, how many resolutions are you going to let go here? How far...
BUSH: We haven't had one yet.
QUESTION: I know. But how far can you let them go? If you really fear...
BUSH: Wait until we even get one resolution first, before you ask me about the second resolution.
The diplomatic process is just beginning. We're forming a strong coalition of like-minded countries that believe that the Iranians should not have a nuclear weapon. I've told the American people that diplomacy is my first choice, and it should be the first choice of every American president in order to solve a very difficult problem.
There are significant differences between Iran and Iraq.
QUESTION: Mr. President, a cultural question for you.
There is a version of the national anthem in Spanish now. Do you believe it will hold the same value if sung in Spanish as in English?
BUSH: No, I don't.
I think the national...
QUESTION: Why...
BUSH: Because I think the national anthem ought to be sung in English and I think people who want to be a citizen of this country ought to learn English and they ought to learn to sing the national anthem in English. Axelrod?
QUESTION: I just want to follow up one more time on Iran.
BUSH: OK.
QUESTION: And Mr. Ahmadinejad was quoted this morning as saying, "Those who want to prevent Iranians from obtaining their right should know that we do not give a damn" -- his words, sir -- "about such resolutions."
BUSH: OK.
QUESTION: So you're talking about diplomacy, sir, and a question of tactics at this point, not goals.
If you have, for instance, Russia saying they don't want a Chapter 7 Resolution, if you're dealing with a gentleman who uses this kind of rhetoric, what kind of tactics can you possibly come up with?
BUSH: I guess the first thing I would do is refer those comments to our partners and get their reaction to see what they say, see how they react to those kind of comments. And I haven't had a chance to do that yet since it just happened today. But I will continue to work with our friends and allies.
Listen, key -- step one is to have a common goal. I know that sounds simple to you, probably, but it was -- it wasn't always that way. The world wasn't always of like mind that the Iranians were, you know, headed for a weapon and that that would be a dangerous course of action. And now we are of like mind. And so we are in the stage now of formulating a strategy to achieve a diplomatic solution to this problem.
QUESTION: But, Mr. President, given everything you've been hearing from Mr. Ahmadinejad over the past several weeks and months, in your estimation, is this someone you can work with?
BUSH: It's going to be his choice, eventually, and it's going to be very important for Mr. Ahmadinejad to recognize the world is united in our desire, and it's his choice to make.
Carl Cameron?
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. Good morning.
BUSH: Thank you.
QUESTION: Back to gas prices -- just a moment ago -- insofar as you directed some of your Cabinets this week to look into the possibility of price gouging, do you have a suspicion yourself -- do you have evidence here at the White House, and should the American consumer believe, that you think they're being ripped off?
BUSH: I have no evidence that there's any ripoff taking place, but it's the role of the Federal Trade Commission to assure me that my inclination and instinct is right.
More importantly, it's up to the Federal Trade Commission to assure the American people that they're being treated fairly at the pump.
Let's see. Mark Smith?
QUESTION: Another one?
BUSH: Oh, you already asked one?
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) my colleagues.
BUSH: Did you ask one?
QUESTION: Yes, sir.
BUSH: Oh, you did ask one.
QUESTION: It was a memorable question...
(CROSSTALK)
(LAUGHTER)
QUESTION: Can I follow up on the energy question, Mr. President?
BUSH: No, you can't because I just embarrassed myself by calling on Smith twice.
(LAUGHTER)
That's right; it was that brilliant question. How could I forget?
QUESTION: In talking about gas prices, in 2001 when you did your first energy policy and gas prices were about a $1.50, a lot of people were saying you have to push CAFE standards higher for the entire fleet of vehicles, you have to scrutinize oil companies more closely, and you have to spend a lot more on alternative fuels than even you are proposing.
Do you have any regrets now that gas is $3, that you didn't do enough in your first term to prevent these prices?
BUSH: As you know, in order for there to be a CAFE standard increase on cars, it requires congressional action. I think it's a good idea to give the president, through the secretary of transportation, the opportunity to raise CAFE standards, just like I did on light trucks.
And we're spending I think it's about $10 billion since I've been president on alternative sources of energy. And we're making progress. We're close to some significant breakthroughs.
The point is, is that it's very important for us to diversify away from oil.
You might remember -- when I first came in, I think the price of oil was like -- I know it was below $20. And it's all of a sudden, now that the price of oil is up, alternatives become much more economically viable.
And, therefore, I think the American people are going to see a lot of technological development happen quickly, which will enable people to have different options and different choices.
Now, the hybrid vehicle has just hit the road recently, as you know. There's a big demand for hybrids. I think it makes sense to have tax credits to encourage people to buy hybrids. Increase in demand will cause producers to produce more.
And as you know, there's limitations on the number of -- the amount of tax credit issued per manufacturer. I think we ought to just make sure the tax credit is applied to all people purchasing hybrid vehicles.
Herman?
QUESTION: Thank you, sir.
BUSH: Yes?
QUESTION: Are there inherent...
BUSH: Glad to work you into a national press conference for the first time in a long time.
QUESTION: Proud to be here, sir.
Are there inherent and unavoidable risks in allowing the sale of a defense firm to interests owned by Dubai?
BUSH: That question has been looked at very carefully, has been analyzed by a CFIUS committee. I signed off on it this morning because I'm convinced at the recommendation of the CFIUS committee as well as our military that it's a sale that should go through.
Yes, April?
QUESTION: Mr. President...
BUSH: Yes.
QUESTION: ... some have questioned your efforts in having every vote count in this nation, especially after the April 22nd New Orleans elections.
Now with that, what are you looking to do with the three sections of the Voting Rights Act that are set to expire in 2007? How are you planning to enhance those sections, because we understand that you want to study it prior to any passing of a bill by the Senate? BUSH: I think I'm on record. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty clearly on record, particularly at the Rosa Parks -- signing of the Rosa Parks bill -- that I'm for the extension of the Voting Rights Act. Right?
QUESTION: Yes, you are on record.
BUSH: OK.
QUESTION: But there is word that you want to enhance it, or people within your administration want to look at it to tweak it.
BUSH: I wanted to make sure the Voting Rights Act is strong and capable. I'm not exactly sure when you're talking about, but my statement is my statement: The Voting Rights Act ought to be extended.
The Voting Rights Act is a very important part of the civil rights legislation. Everybody ought to be, you know, encouraged to vote. Voting is a valuable part of democracy. And we want people voting.
QUESTION: Do you think it was valuable for the April 22nd elections in New Orleans?
BUSH: I'm not going to second guess the federal judge. I was just down there yesterday. I didn't hear much complaining about it, though, when I was there.
And, obviously, it's a more difficult election with people scattered around. But the state works very hard to encourage people to vote.
And, you know, I was with Mayor Nagin and Governor Blanco, and the subject, frankly, didn't come up.
That's not to say it's not on their minds. It's on Mayor Nagin's mind because he wants to win. He wants people voting.
But the state bent over backwards to encourage people to participate in the mayoral election. And looked like the process, given the circumstances the city had been under, pretty smooth process, which was not necessarily a given.
Yes, sir?
QUESTION: Mr. President, yesterday Senators Lieberman and Collins said they want to see FEMA abolished. I'd like you to comment on that.
But also, with hurricane season only a month away, can you assure the American people that your government has learned the lessons of Katrina?
BUSH: Thanks for the question. That was on obviously on people's minds when I went down to New Orleans and Mississippi. The lessons of Katrina are very important. We've learned a lot here at the federal level:
One, there needs to be better coordination between local and state government; secondly, that there needs to be a communications package that will be available to help deal with the situation that happened last time, which was total destruction of communications capabilities; third, that there needs to make sure that there's a law enforcement alternative in case there's a breakdown of local law enforcement; fourthly, there needs to be a prepositioning of assets so that if a major storm were to come, we'd be able to move equipment in faster.
But, most important, there needs to be a coordination and an understanding of the evacuation and relief plans.
And I talked to the mayor and both governors that I met with yesterday about our seriousness in working with them to make sure that the plans are as effective as possible.
The communications, obviously, this time around are a lot better than last time around. And so the lessons are being learned.
And my attitude toward the recommendations by Fran Townsend, who's a part of my administration, or the Congress, is we ought to take them all seriously.
The objective is to respond to these natural disasters as well as we possibly can.
The other issue down there for New Orleans, of course, is the levees. And we've got money in the supp to make sure that these levees are pre-Katrina or better prior to June 1st.
I think we'll achieve that objective.
There's -- additional money will be spent so that the levees are improved significantly by September of '07. The levees are important to -- the rebuilding of the levees or improving of the levees are very important to assure the people of New Orleans that if there is a storm, they're built to pre-Katrina levels, at least in the initial stage.
But also it's important to convince people that it's OK to risk capital in New Orleans.
The amazing thing in the area down there -- I don't know if you all went with me, but it was -- there's -- it's a totally different attitude from when we were there before early on, obviously, after the storm.
I mean, people are coming back. The sales tax along the Gulf Coast of Mississippi are higher today than they were a year ago this date and that's positive.
But, look, there's still a lot of work to be done, a lot of reconstruction.
The CDBG money -- and it's very important for the Congress to pass the CDBG money I requested so that the housing issue can get -- people can get back to rebuilding their homes.
And Mississippi, the CDBG money will be coming out pretty quick. New Orleans, they still got a little work. The governor has proposed a plan that will be in front of the legislature I think this weekend. It's a very important step to getting this process moving.
And so we've got a lot of work to do.
But, yes, we're much more ready this time than last time and we're taking very seriously the lessons learned from Katrina.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
BUSH: No, I've looked at all suggestions. But, you know, my attitude, let's make it work. We're about six weeks away from -- yes, I mean, we're getting pretty close.
Who are you again?
(LAUGHTER)
QUESTION: I got a few more if you like, sir.
BUSH: You've had a big day.
QUESTION: That's three, sir. That's three.
BUSH: Butting in once and called on unnecessarily once.
Cooper?
QUESTION: Yes, sir.
BUSH: Yes.
QUESTION: Regarding FEMA, do you think that they're prepared for the season? And is there any way to measure that at this point?
BUSH: I think so.
I think preparation is -- Chris, preparation is preparation at all levels of government.
Most governors will tell you that the main responsibility for disaster relief is at the state level and the job of the federal government is to step in and help.
And so Chertoff's been down there -- Secretary Chertoff has been down there working with these local governments to review their plans and to analyze where the federal government can help, if there's any breakdown whatsoever. You know, one of the key issues, of course, again, in New Orleans is transportation. Remember those pictures of those buses. People looking to get out, and yet there were these buses in flooded areas.
And so one of the areas where Homeland Security Department is working with the state and local governments is to make sure there's a transportation plan that'll work.
You know, it's going to be interesting.
Let's, first of all, pray there's no hurricanes. That would be, like, step one.
Step two, if one's coming, I suspect people are going to take hurricane warnings very seriously and that evacuation orders will be heeded very seriously.
And so it's going to be -- there's a -- and, therefore, there's a need to make sure that the, you know, forecasting is accurate -- and that's pretty much the way it is these days; there's been very accurate forecasting -- and that the response by all of us is in a timely fashion to give people time to prepare.
But now is the time to put these plans in place, and we're doing it.
And I feel pretty good about the coordination and the sessions that have been taking place down there.
And as I understand, Secretary Chertoff will be going back down there again.
And, by the way, the plans are not just for New Orleans and Mississippi. They're for Alabama and Florida and Texas, as well. In other words, this is the Hurricane Alley.
Yes, the Dallas Morning News man?
QUESTION: Yes, Mr. President. On Monday, several million illegal immigrants, worried about some forms of immigration legislation in the Congress, are going to walk off the job and keep their kids home from schools. What is your view of this call for a national boycott on Monday?
BUSH: You know, I'm not a supporter of boycotts. I am a supporter of comprehensive immigration.
I understand how difficult this issue is for some people here in Washington and around the country. But there is -- my judgment that enforcing our border requires -- and, by the way, I think most Americans agree that we've got to enforce our border. I don't think there's any question about that.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
BUSH: Let me finish, please, Bob. Thank you. Thank you. That there needs to be interior enforcement, as well.
But I recognize it's hard to enforce the border and have interior enforcement if there is a smuggling network that's bringing people across and there's forgery -- a forgery network that's providing people with false documents.
And, therefore, I believe a temporary worker program will make it easier to enforce the border, as well as have interior enforcement.
Look, if somebody's coming across to a do a job on a temporary basis, they don't need to sneak across. They don't need a coyote to stuff them in the back of an 18-wheeler. They don't need to walk across the desert and risk their lives.
And so a rational way to make sure our border is enforced is to have a temporary worker program. And that's what I support.
You know, I think it's very important for people, when they do express themselves, they continue to do so in a peaceful way, in a respectful way, respectful of the -- you know, how highly charged this debate can become.
One of the things that's very important is, when we debate this issue, that we not lose our national soul. One of the great things about America is that we've been able to take people from all walks of life bound as one nation under God. And that's the challenge ahead of us.
And I look forward to working with members of both political parties to get a bill out of the United States Senate and into conference, which would then mean we have a chance to get a comprehensive bill to my desk.
And I want a comprehensive bill: one that enforces the border; one that makes sure that we've got interior enforcement procedures in place that actually work; one that provides a temporary worker process for people; one that does not provide automatic citizenship -- I don't think anybody really wants there to be automatic amnesty for people; one that allows somebody here to be able to get in -- if they want to be a citizen, to be able to get in line, but not the front of the line, but the back of the line.
And that's what I'm for, a comprehensive plan. I think we can get one done if people would set aside politics and focus on what's best for the United States of America.
Thank you for your time. I've enjoyed this. I will see you all tomorrow night, I guess. Looking forward to it.
QUESTION: Thank you.
BUSH: I hope you are as well.
Thank you.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
