President Bush Visits Bucharest, Romania, Discusses NATO PODCAST VIDEO

President Bush Visits Bucharest, Romania, Discusses NATO FULL STREAMING VIDEO, National Bank of Savings Bucharest, Romania In Focus: NATO 2008 and Fact Sheet: 2008 NATO Summit 8:45 A.M. (Local) PODCAST OF THIS ARTICLE NATO Summit PHOTO GALLERY

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. Thank you, and good morning. I appreciate former Presidents Iliescu and Constantinescu for joining us today. I want to thank the President of Latvia and Mrs. Zatlere for joining us. Secretary Rice, ambassadors, members of the United States Congress, the President of the National Bank of Savings, members of the German Marshall Fund and the Atlantic Council, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen -- Bun. Ziua.

Laura and I are pleased to be back in Bucharest. The last time we were here, we stood with the people of this city in Revolution Square for a rally celebrating Romania's invitation to join NATO. Tens of thousands came out in the rain to rejoice in this achievement, and revel in the promise that, henceforth, no one would ever take Romania's freedom away. It was a moment I'll never forget. President Iliescu introduced me in the midst of the drizzling rain. And then the clouds parted, and a rainbow appeared in the sky -- heralding a new day for this nation, and the Atlantic Alliance she was about to join.

Since then, Romania has made strong contributions to the Alliance. Romanian soldiers have brought courage to NATO's missions. Romanian leaders have brought moral clarity to NATO's deliberations. And today, the Romanian people have brought their famous hospitality to this NATO summit. Laura and I are thrilled to join you for this historic occasion. And the American people are honored to call Romania a friend, an ally, and a partner in the cause of peace.

This is my final NATO summit. The coming days will be a time for hard work, as allies make important decisions regarding the expansion, and the missions, and the capabilities of NATO. The coming days will also be a time of reflection -- a chance to look back on how far we have come in the past seven years and what this tells us about the challenges ahead.

In June 2001, I came to Europe and spoke to students and faculty at Warsaw University. I reaffirmed America's commitment to a united Europe, bound to the United States by ties of history and trade and friendship. I said that Europe must overturn the bitter legacy of Yalta, and remove the false boundaries that had divided the continent for too long. I declared that "all of Europe's new democracies, from the Baltic to the Black Sea, should have the same chance for security and freedom -- and the same chance to join the institutions of Europe."

I spoke those words on the soil of a nation on the Baltic. Today, a nation on the Black Sea is where I have come to say those words have been fulfilled. The NATO Alliance that meets here this week now stretches from the shores of Klaipeda to the beaches of Neptun. And here in Bucharest, we will extend the circle of freedom even further, by expanding the NATO Alliance to include new members from the Balkans.

A decade -- the Balkans was a region wracked by war and fanaticism and ethnic cleansing. Today, it is a region growing in liberty and tolerance and peace. These changes are the result of determined actions by NATO, and the courageous choices by new Balkan leaders who have worked to overcome the violence and divisions of the past. In recognition of their progress, tomorrow NATO will make an historic decision on the admission of three Balkan nations: Croatia, Albania, and Macedonia. The United States strongly supports inviting these nations to join NATO. These countries have walked the difficult path of reform and built thriving free societies. They are ready to contribute to NATO -- and their citizens deserve the security that NATO brings.

As we welcome new NATO allies, we also affirm that the door to NATO membership remains open to other nations that seek it -- in the Balkans and beyond. So at this summit, we will also decide whether to accept the requests of two other Balkan nations, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Montenegro, to begin an Intensified Dialogue with NATO. It's a major step on the road to NATO membership, and it is a step that America fully supports for these two nations. And at our summit tomorrow, we'll also make clear that the door to closer cooperation with NATO is open to Serbia, as well.

This week, our Alliance must also decide how to respond to the requests by Georgia and Ukraine to participate in NATO's Membership Action Plan. These two nations inspired the world with their Rose and Orange Revolutions -- and now they're working to consolidate their democratic gains and cement their independence. Welcoming them into the MATO [sic] -- into the Membership Action Plan would send a signal to their citizens that if they continue on the path to democracy and reform they will be welcomed into the institutions of Europe. It would send a signal throughout the region that these two nations are, and will remain, sovereign and independent states.

Here in Bucharest, we must make clear that NATO welcomes the aspirations of Georgia and Ukraine for their membership in NATO and offers them a clear path forward to meet that goal. So my country's position is clear: NATO should welcome Georgia and Ukraine into the Membership Action Plan. And NATO membership must remain open to all of Europe's democracies that seek it, and are ready to share in the responsibilities of NATO membership.

The most important responsibility of NATO is the collective security of our citizens. On my 2001 visit to Warsaw, I said that the United States and Europe "share more than an Alliance -- we share a civilization." Less than three months later, that shared civilization came under a monstrous attack. Even now, with the distance of time, it's still difficult to fathom the enormity of what happened on September the 11th, 2001. Thousands of men and women woke up that morning, had breakfast with their families, and left for work -- never to return home. Tens of thousands more -- including citizens of many NATO nations -- still mourn the loss of moms and dads, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, friends and loved ones, who were taken from them in a horrific moment of violence and death.

NATO nations recognize that the attacks were part of a broader ideological struggle. The terrorists who struck America that day murder the innocent in pursuit of a violent political vision. They despise the principles of decency and humanity that are the very foundation of our Alliance. They want to impose their brutal rule on millions across the world. They attack our countries and target our people because we stand for freedom -- and because we hold the power to stop them from achieving their murderous ambitions.

NATO nations recognized that this unprecedented attack required unprecedented action. For the first time in the history of the Alliance, Article Five of the NATO Treaty was invoked. NATO aircraft were soon flying over the United States to provide early warning in case of a follow-on attack. Many NATO nations -- including the United Kingdom and France, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Norway, the Netherlands, Italy, and Turkey -- deployed forces to fight the terrorists in Afghanistan and to drive the Taliban from power.

Since then, NATO's role in Afghanistan has expanded significantly. In 2003, NATO took over the International Security Assistance Force. And over time, this NATO mission has grown from a small force operating only in Kabul to a force of 47,000 that is now leading operations across all of Afghanistan. Afghanistan is the most daring and ambition [sic] mission in the history of NATO. An Alliance that never fired a shot in the Cold War is now leading the fight on a key battleground of the first war in the 21st century. In Afghanistan, forces from NATO and many partner nations are bringing honor to their uniforms and pride to their countries.

As NATO forces fight the terrorists in Afghanistan they're helping Afghans take increasing responsibility for their own security. With NATO's help, the ranks of trained Afghan soldiers have grown from 33,000 last year to 55,000 today -- and these brave Afghan forces are leading many important combat operations. Thanks to their courage, and the skill of NATO personnel, a nation that was once a safe haven for al Qaeda is now a democracy where boys and girls are going to school, new roads and hospitals are being built, and people are looking to the future with new hope.

Afghanistan still faces many difficult challenges. The enemy has been driven from its strongholds, and no longer controls a single Afghan city. But as this enemy has been defeated on the battlefield, they have turned increasingly to terrorist tactics such as suicide attacks and roadside bombs. And if we were to let up the pressure, the extremists would re-establish safe havens across the country, and use them to terrorize the people of Afghanistan and threaten our own. And that is why we'll stay on the offense, and that is why we'll keep the pressures on these radicals and extremists, and that is why we'll succeed.

Terrorists used safe havens in Afghanistan to launch the 9/11 attacks. Since 9/11, al Qaeda terrorists around the world have succeeded in launching devastating attacks on allied cities such as Madrid and London and Istanbul. They planned more attacks on targets in Europe that never came to pass because of the vigilance of intelligence and law enforcement personnel from many of our nations. For example, in 2006 we stopped an al Qaeda plot to blow up passenger jets departing Europe for the United States. Earlier this year, Turkish authorities broke up an al Qaeda cell that was plotting a series of terrorist attacks in Turkey. This enemy remains dangerous. And that's why our Alliance is so important to protecting innocent people.

Two weeks ago, Osama bin Laden issued an audio recording in which he threatened Europe with new attacks. We need to take the words of the enemy seriously. The terrorist threat is real, it is deadly, and defeating this enemy is the top priority of NATO.

Our Alliance must maintain its resolve and finish the fight in NATO [sic]. As President Sarkozy put it in London last week, "We cannot afford to lose Afghanistan. Whatever the cost, however difficult the victory, we cannot afford it. We must win." I agree completely. To ensure that we do win, France is sending additional forces to Afghanistan. The United States is deploying an additional 3,500 Marines. Romania is adding forces, as are several other allies. We ask other NATO nations to step forward with additional forces, as well. If we do not defeat the terrorists in Afghanistan, we will face them on our own soil. Innocent civilians in Europe and North America will pay the price.

The struggle in Afghanistan cannot be won by force of arms alone. We must also help the Afghan government strengthen democratic institutions, provide essential services, create jobs and opportunity, and show its people that freedom can lead to a better life. But for this to happen, Afghanistan needs security -- and that is what NATO is helping to provide.

Many NATO allies are also helping to bring security and stability to the other major front in this war against extremists and radicals -- Iraq. At this moment, 10 NATO nations have forces supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom -- including the "Black Wolves" of Romania's 151st Infantry. This battalion has given their base in Iraq a fearsome name: "Camp Dracula." Romanian troops are operating unmanned aerial vehicles, protecting critical infrastructure, conducting human intelligence missions, providing medical care, and carrying out combat operations in Iraq.

One Romanian soldier put it this way: "I've been here before and will come back for as many times as needed. I know that what we do is important." Our Romanian allies are serving the cause of freedom in Iraq with skill and honor -- and they have earned the respect of my countrymen.

Forces from 14 NATO nations plus Ukraine are also serving in Iraq as part of a NATO training mission. NATO has trained more than 7,000 Iraqi officers so far. The Iraqis have asked us to expand this mission, and we should do so. At our summit this week, we will also expand the NATO-Iraq partnership so we can allow more Iraqi officers to attend NATO schools and seminars. The purpose is to prepare Iraqi officers to lead their own troops in battle, so we can help them defend their democracy against the terrorists and extremists who murder their people.

Iraqi forces are fighting bravely in this struggle, and they're risking and giving their lives in the fight against our common enemies. To help them prevail, last year the United States launched the surge in Iraq. We deployed 30,000 additional soldiers and Marines, with a clear mission: Help Iraqi forces protect the people, pursue the enemy in its strongholds, and deny the terrorists sanctuary. The government in Baghdad has stepped forward with a surge of its own, adding more than 100,000 new Iraqi soldiers and police during the past year. And to ensure that military progress in Iraq is quickly followed up with real improvements in daily life, we doubled the number of provincial reconstruction teams in Iraq. These teams are helping to build up local economies and strengthen responsible leaders and help bring Iraqis together so that reconciliation can happen from the ground up.

The surge has produced results across Iraq. Compared to a year ago, violence is significantly down, civilian deaths are down, sectarian killings are down, and attacks on coalition forces are down. We've captured or killed thousands of extremists in Iraq, including hundreds of key al Qaeda leaders and operatives. With security improving, local citizens have restarted the political process in their neighborhoods and their cities and provinces -- and leaders in Baghdad are beginning to make the tough compromises necessary to get important pieces of legislation passed.

As they do, we will stay on the offense against the enemy. In the north, Iraqi forces backed by American troops are pursuing al Qaeda terrorists who are operating in and around Mosul. In the south, Prime Minister Maliki sent the Iraqi security forces to begin to root out extremists and criminals in Basra -- many of whom have received arms and training and funding from Iran. In retaliation, some of these extremist elements fired rockets into the center of Baghdad hoping to shake Prime Minister Maliki's will. They're not going to succeed. There's tough fighting ahead, but the gains from the surge we have seen are real. And working together with Iraqi forces, our coalition continue to pursue our enemies and seal their defeat.

The surge has done more than turn the situation around in Iraq -- it has opened the door to a major strategic victory in the broader war against extremists. In Iraq, we're witnessing the first large-scale Arab uprising against Osama bin Laden and his grim ideology and his terrorist network. Tens of thousands of ordinary citizens have stepped forward to join the fight against al Qaeda. And when Iraqi and coalition forces defeat this enemy, the effects will reverberate beyond Iraq's borders.

By defeating the enemy in Iraq, we will show people across the Middle East that millions share their revulsion of terrorists' hateful ideology. We will show that free men and women can stand up to the terrorists and prevail against them. We will show that America will not abandon our friends in the fight against terror and extremism. We will show that a hopeful vision of liberty can take root in a troubled region and yield the peace that we all desire. And we will show that the future of the Middle East does not belong to terror -- the future of the Middle East belongs to freedom.

As NATO allies fight terror and promote progress in Iraq and Afghanistan, our Alliance is taking on other important missions across the world. In the Mediterranean, NATO forces are patrolling the high seas to combat terrorism as part of Operation Active Endeavor. In Kosovo, NATO forces are providing security and helping a new democracy take root in the Balkans. In Darfur, NATO has airlifted African Union peacekeepers and provided them with training to protect the people of that troubled region. The Alliance stands ready to provide further assistance to the AU-African Union force. Each of these missions underscores the changing nature of the NATO Alliance. See, NATO is no longer a static alliance focused on defending Europe from a Soviet tank invasion. It is now an expeditionary alliance that is sending its forces across the world to help secure a future of freedom and peace for millions.

To meet the missions of the 21st century, NATO needs 21st century capabilities. So over the past seven years we've taken decisive action to transform the capabilities of this Alliance. We created a new NATO Transformation Command to ensure that NATO is preparing for the threats of the future. We created a new NATO Response Force, to ensure that our Alliance can deploy rapidly and effectively anywhere in the world. We launched a new Strategic Airlift Initiative to ensure that NATO members have a dedicated fleet of aircraft their forces need to deploy and sustain themselves over great distances. We've created a new NATO special operations coordinator -- coordination center in Belgium to increase the interoperability and effectiveness of our special forces.

One of the most important steps we can take is to protect our -- to protect our citizens is the deployment of new capabilities to defend against a ballistic missile attack. On 9/11, we saw the damage our enemies could do by hijacking planes loaded with jet fuel, turning them into missiles and using them to strike innocent people. Today, dangerous regimes are pursuing far more powerful capabilities, and building ballistic missiles that could allow them to deliver the world's most dangerous weapons to capitals of free nations.

To defend against this emerging threat, the United States has deployed missile defenses in the Pacific that can protect against threats emanating from Northeast Asia. And we're now deploying elements of this system to Europe, so we can defend against possible attacks emanating from the Middle East.

The need for missile defense in Europe is real, and in my opinion, it is urgent. Iran is pursuing technology that could be used to produce nuclear weapons, and ballistic missiles of increasing range that could deliver them. In 2006, Iran conducted military exercises in which it launched ballistic missiles capable of striking Israel and Turkey. Iranian officials have declared that they are developing missiles with a range of 1,200 miles, which would give them the capability to reach us right here in Romania. Our intelligence community assesses that, with continued foreign assistance, Iran could test an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the United States and all of Europe if it should choose to do so.

Today we have no way to defend Europe against such an emerging threat -- so we must deploy ballistic missile defenses that can help protect. The United States is working with Poland and the Czech Republic to deploy a system that could defend countries in Europe from a limited, long-range attack from the Middle East. We're working with NATO on developing allied capabilities to defend against short- and medium-range attacks from the Middle East. And as we do so, we're inviting Russia to join us in this cooperative effort so as to be able to defend Russia, Europe, and the United States against an emerging threat that could affect us all.

President Putin has raised the possibility of using radar facilities in Azerbaijan and southern Russia. We believe these sites could be included as part of a wider threat monitoring system that could lead to an unprecedented level of strategic cooperation between Russia and the NATO Alliance. We can only imagine the devastation that would be caused by a ballistic missile attack on one of our cities. So I believe strongly we have a responsibility to work together to ensure that such attack never comes to pass.

This week President Putin is planning to attend his first NATO summit, and later this week I plan to travel to Sochi, Russia, for further talks on this and other matters. In our discussions, I will reiterate that the missile defense capabilities we are developing are not designed to defend against Russia -- just as the new NATO we are building is not designed to defend against Russia. The Cold War is over. Russia is not our enemy. We're working toward a new security relationship with Russia whose foundation does not rest on the prospect of mutual annihilation.

In Warsaw seven years ago, I said that the Europe we envision must be open to Russia. During my presidency, we've acted to make that vision a reality. With our allies, we created the NATO-Russia Council to facilitate greater cooperation between Russia and the Atlantic Alliance. The United States and Russia signed the Moscow Treaty which commits our two nations to historic reductions in our operationally deployed strategic nuclear warheads. And as we look to the future, I believe we can build strong relations with Russia and a strong NATO Alliance at the same time.

Building a strong NATO Alliance also requires a strong European defense capacity. So at this summit, I will encourage our European partners to increase their defense investments to support both NATO and EU operations. America believes if Europeans invest in their own defense, they will also be stronger and more capable when we deploy together.

I have confidence that NATO is ready for the challenges of the 21st century because I have confidence in the courage of allies like Romania. The Romanian people have seen evil in their midst -- and they've seen evil defeated. They value freedom because they've lived without it. And this hard experience has inspired them to fight and sacrifice for the liberty of others.

That is precisely what Romanian forces are doing on behalf of this Alliance. We see their courage in soldiers like Second Lieutenant Aurel Marcu of Romania's 33rd Mountain Battalion. Last fall, Aurel's unit was in Afghanistan when it got word that an American soldiers -- American soldiers from the Arizona National Guard had been struck by a roadside bomb. Several were injured, one of them fatally. Aurel and his comrades swung into action, and responded to the call for assistance. As his unit sped to the scene of the attack, Aurel's vehicle was struck by a second roadside bomb, killing him instantly. Aurel gave his life rushing to the aid of wounded American soldiers. His example and his valor are an inspiration to all of us. I very much appreciate his wife joining us today, and I want her to know that she and her family have the gratitude and the respect and the prayers of the American people.

Our troops are proud to fight alongside allies like this. We appreciate courage. We appreciate people who love freedom. We appreciate people who understand freedom will yield the peace that we all want. We value our friendship with Romania -- and we value the Atlantic Alliance that we share. America is united with our European allies by ties of blood that our soldiers have shed together. We're united by ties of conviction -- a shared belief that every human life is precious and endowed by our Creator with dignity and worth. We're united by ties of liberty, and by an abiding faith in the power of freedom to change the course of history. Strengthened by these convictions, tested in battle, and confident in our future, this great Alliance for freedom is ready for all that will come.

Thank you for your time. God bless. (Applause.)

END 9:14 A.M. (Local) For Immediate Release, Office of the Press Secretary, April 2, 2008

Tags: President Bush and NATO Summit or Bucharest+Romania

Secretary Rice Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas VIDEO PODCAST

Secretary Rice has press availability with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas FULL STREAMING VIDEO PODCAST OF THIS ARTICLE

PRESIDENT ABBAS: (Via interpreter.) Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Masterful. I have met today and yesterday with Dr. Rice. I would like to extend my thanks to the efforts that President Bush and Secretary Rice are extending to make the year 2008 a year of peace and a year to implement the Roadmap, as well as the international legitimate resolutions and the Arab Peace Initiative and President Bush’s vision to have two states. And I have discussed with Secretary Rice, here in Amman, a number of the issues of the final status.

I do extend my thanks to his – to President Bush for his invitation to me to visit Washington, where I will meet in the third month – in the third part of next month in April, (inaudible). We do assert our commitment to the peace process and we will extend every effort possible to implement our obligations and the Roadmap. And we hope that the American referee or judge will make sure that Israel will meet its obligation, in particularly, namely, to stop settlement activities, in particular in Jerusalem, and also to fix a comprehensive reciprocal or mutual truce and also to release the (inaudible) detainees as well as to ask for the return of the (inaudible) and to reopen the institutions in eastern Jerusalem and to reinstate the situation before 2000 – year 2000. And all of these are agreed under the Roadmap.

Dr. Rice, I recognize that we are striving to work for disarmament of our -- the weapons and we will spare no effort with the Israeli party and all (inaudible) to reach a peace agreement for all the issues of the final status. They are, in particular, Jerusalem, frontiers or borders, settlements, refugees, as well as water, security and other relationships in addition to the captives or detainees. We do support all efforts exerted to fix the – to remove siege on Gaza, and these efforts are being exerted by Egypt in particular. And we do support these efforts.

I have asked Dr. Rice to continue in delivery of pharmaceuticals, water, electricity to our people in Gaza with practical steps in order to relieve the siege and the closures at the Palestinian internal affairs level. I do reiterate our situation that Hamas should retreat or decline from throwing out of the authority in the Gaza and also, it should announce its obligations at the regional and international levels. And we should go together to early elections and this has been (inaudible) in the Yemeni initiative, which has been approved – which was approved yesterday during the Arab summit in Damascus. We are committed to this initiative if Hamas is committed to restore clearly the situation before the events in June last year and also, to have early elections.

Thank you, Dr. Rice, for your efforts and we would like to extend efforts to President George Bush. Thank you.

SECRETARY RICE: Thank you very much, Mr. President, and thank you for welcoming me twice on this trip. I have had the opportunity to spend time with you, with Prime Minister Olmert, and this morning, I had a very good and extensive meeting with Foreign Minister Livni and with Mr. Abu Ala, your negotiators. And I can say that these are serious people who are engaged in serious work. I know that your teams have a lot of hard work ahead of them, but I have to say that I find very impressive the work that is being done and the seriousness of the process, and I think it’s all moving in the right direction.

Thank you also for our conversations. They have helped me to understand better some of the challenges and opportunities before us. We will indeed continue to pursue the Annapolis tracks, each of them, the improvements on the ground. And in that regard, I want to thank Prime Minister Salam Fayyad for his meeting yesterday with me and with Defense Minister Barak to begin the process of trying to improve the lives of the Palestinian people. I want to thank General Fraser, who is here with me, who will return often to the region in his role in helping the parties to meet their Roadmap obligations and, of course, the third track of Annapolis, the political negotiations, which are aimed and focused at achieving an agreement by the end of the year that can lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state, subject of course, to Roadmap implementation, which is why we're working so hard on the Roadmap as well.

But that is our goal. I fully believe that it is a goal that we can reach. And so I look forward to seeing you in Washington, as does the President looks forward to inviting you there.

Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: (Inaudible) President, you were optimistic, especially after Annapolis, for the establishment of the Palestinian state within the tenure of President Bush. Are you still optimistic with that?

PRESIDENT ABBAS: (Via interpreter.) We said, actually, that we are interested in reaching an agreement, a comprehensive peace agreement, in 2008, and this was also said by President Bush. And it is apparent through the extensive efforts that are being exerted by the President and the American Administration, in particular, in order to reach such an agreement. I am confident, God willing, that we will reach comprehensive peace in 2008. And we are, and the Israelis as well as the Americans and all stakeholders, we do work (inaudible) in order to reach this goal.

SECRETARY RICE: We have a question here. Arshad.

QUESTION: Secretary Rice, this morning the Jerusalem municipal authority, just after you left Jerusalem, announced that it is going to proceed with building 600 additional housing units in (inaudible). What is your reaction to -- the latest announcement of settlement building by -- or additional housing units by the Israelis?

Secondly, Israeli officials are telling us that you are trying to get some kind of an interim agreement or interim document by the time the President is expected to come back in May. Is there any truth whatsoever to those reports?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, Arshad, on the second point, I'm not going to respond to comments by unnamed Israeli officials. I can tell you that what my work is focused on, and it is what the President said, our work is focused on achieving agreement by the end of this year that can establish a Palestinian state, subject to the Roadmap, which means we have to work hard on Roadmap obligations and we have to improve the lives of the Palestinian people. I don't see any purpose in talking about anything but getting to an agreement. And we need to, by the end of 2008, which is what Annapolis has set out, get to an agreement that will establish a Palestinian state. That's what we're focused on.

As to settlement activity, we continue to state America's position that settlement activity is - should stop, that its expansion should stop, that it is indeed not consistent with Roadmap obligations. That is why, nonetheless, we have a committee that deals with Roadmap obligations. And it is my very strong view that the best thing that we can do is to focus on getting this agreement, because then we won't have these discussions about what belongs in Israel and what belongs in Palestine; we will know. That is why we need a Palestinian state. But let me say very clearly that nothing that is undertaken under any guise from the point of the United States can prejudge a final status outcome. And that has been our position and continues to be.

QUESTION: Dr. Rice, reactions, Arab reactions, that you are not exercising any pressure on Israel. In contrast, when you want to say that or when you wish that other Arab leaders will not attend the Arab summit, don't you think that you will embarrass American friends? And this is an interference in the Arab affairs.

Another question to President (inaudible). Were there a dispute between you and Muammar Qadhafi in the Damascus summit, and what was your -- what is your comment on (inaudible) visit for you to visit Gaza?

SECRETARY RICE: First of all, on -- I think the first question was about what the United States does in getting the sides to meet obligations, and the United States is extremely active in doing that. I don't think that I've been hesitant in making very clear our views about activities, for instance, concerning settlements. The President was very clear about that as well. And I believe that you are seeing the results of the United States being very active in the kind of agreements that we had yesterday on improving life for the Palestinian people. It's a start. It is not the end of what must be done, but it is a start.

As to the Arab summit, Arab states make their own decisions about whether they will attend what summits.

PRESIDENT ABBAS: In the Arab summit, there was no dispute whatsoever, neither was discussion with (inaudible) Muammar Qadhafi. There was no dispute between me and them, and regardless of any problems or issues.

But for the other part of the question, there is no answer and it does not need an answer to it, in fact.

MODERATOR: (In Arabic.)

SECRETARY RICE: American, yes.

MODERATOR: Last question to Sylvie Lanteaume.

MODERATOR: American, American.

SECRETARY RICE: Yes.

QUESTION: Khaled Meshaal offered President Abbas to go to Gaza to have talks about reconciliation. I would like to ask both of you if you think it's a good idea. And also, Mr. President, when do you next meet Prime Minister Olmert?

PRESIDENT ABBAS: I have answered the first part of the question. But for Prime Minister Olmert and the meeting with him, this meeting will be in shortly, to be on the 7th of next month, so the 7th of April.

SECRETARY RICE: The President has answered the question. (Laughter.) Thank you.

2008/T11-5 Released on March 31, 2008

Tags: Secretary Condoleezza Rice and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas or Prime Minister Olmert

Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. on Blueprint for Regulatory Reform VIDEO

Remarks by Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. on Blueprint for Regulatory Reform FULL STREAMUNG VIDEO LINKS in PDF Format Press Release Report Fact Sheet

Washington, DC--Good morning, everyone. A strong financial system is vitally important - not for Wall Street, not for bankers, but for working Americans. When our markets work, people throughout our economy benefit – Americans seeking to buy a car or buy a home, families borrowing to pay for college, innovators borrowing on the strength of a good idea for a new product or technology, and businesses financing investments that create new jobs. And when our financial system is under stress, millions of working Americans bear the consequences. Government has a responsibility to make sure our financial system is regulated effectively. And in this area, we can do a better job. In sum, the ultimate beneficiaries from improved financial regulation are America's workers, families and businesses – both large and small.

Today I am pleased to release Treasury's Blueprint for Financial Regulatory Reform. Or, perhaps I should say – given the last few days' news coverage --- that I am pleased to provide additional details to accompany the release of this Blueprint for Regulatory Reform. It's been a long road, as we began the process leading to this final report a year ago, in March of 2007, after convening industry leaders and policymakers for a conference on capital markets competitiveness.

The conference participants concluded that our current financial regulatory system could more effectively promote stable and resilient markets and a more competitive financial services industry. So, in addition to our other capital markets initiatives, last June we began work on a Blueprint for a financial regulatory structure that would be more effective and more appropriate for modern financial markets.

When we announced that we would work on such a Blueprint, other than some enthusiastic academics, few noticed. Today, of course, capital markets and financial regulation are on everybody's mind. As recent events have demonstrated, investor protection and market stability are critical elements of competitiveness. Far from being at odds with one another, they are mutually reinforcing.

We have been undergoing a period of financial market stress since last August. Markets are pricing and reassessing risk and as we should expect, there are always difficulties during periods such as this. We know that a housing correction has precipitated this turmoil, and housing remains by far the biggest downside risk to our economy. As we work through this period, our highest priority is limiting its impact on the real economy.

I have the greatest confidence in the resiliency, flexibility and strength of our economy and our capital markets. We are focused on maintaining stable, orderly and liquid financial markets and ensuring that our banks continue to support the economy by making credit available to consumers and businesses.

Our regulatory community is working cooperatively through some very challenging times. Last week I reiterated my support for the important and consequential recent actions taken by the Federal Reserve. The Fed must have the necessary information to perform its role as it temporarily provides liquidity to non-banks. But it would be premature to assume these institutions should have permanent access to the Fed's discount window and permanent supervision by the Fed. We will learn lessons from the experience of this temporary facility, and those lessons will inform a path forward.

Our first and most urgent priority is working through this capital market turmoil and housing downturn, and that will be our priority until this situation is resolved. With few exceptions, the recommendations in this Blueprint should not and will not be implemented until after the present market difficulties are past.

Some may view these recommendations as a response to the circumstances of the day; yet, that is not how they are intended. This Blueprint addresses complex, long-term issues that should not be decided in the midst of stressful situations and should not be implemented to add greater burden to a market already under strain. These long-term ideas require thoughtful discussion and will not be resolved this month or even this year.

Let me also remind you that two weeks ago, the President's Working Group on Financial Markets released a series of recommendations addressing issues including ratings agencies, securitization, mortgage origination, and OTC derivatives. They are a policy response to the current market turmoil, designed to reduce the likelihood that we will repeat our current problems. We are focused on seeing these recommendations implemented, to improve the workings of our financial markets. But we will not seek to implement them on a pace or in a manner that interferes with our first priority of working through this current period of market difficulty.

Before I describe our Regulatory Blueprint, I will briefly outline why updating our financial regulatory structure is essential.

Evolution of our Financial Regulatory System

Our current regulatory structure was not built to address the modern financial system with its diversity of market participants, innovation, complexity of financial instruments, convergence of financial intermediaries and trading platforms, global integration and interconnectedness among financial institutions, investors and markets. Moreover, our financial services companies are becoming larger, more complex and more difficult to manage. Much of our current regulatory system was developed after the Great Depression and it has developed through reaction --- a pattern of creating regulators as a response to market innovations or to market stress.

We have five federal deposit institution regulators in addition to state-based supervision. We bifurcate securities and futures regulation. And regulation of one of our largest financial services industries, insurance, is almost entirely at the state level. The bulk of these regulatory responses made sense at the time they were created, but as we look at today's financial markets, the lack of a comprehensive design is clear.

The 1991 Bush Administration study, known as the "Green Book," made the case for many of the changes adopted in the last comprehensive financial regulatory overhaul, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. That Act made important changes to our financial regulatory structure by allowing broader affiliations of financial services firms through a Financial Holding Company structure. But, it also maintained separate regulatory agencies across the traditional securities, futures, insurance and banking industry segments. This functional division is at odds with the increasing convergence of financial service providers and products. It creates jurisdictional disputes among regulators, and it is a likely result that some financial services and products are exported to more adaptive foreign markets.

This complex structure can invite regulatory arbitrage, where business models are chosen based on regulatory structure, or even worse, based on the regulator itself. Regulators have adapted to keep pace with innovation, but they do so within a rigid structure that can not readily adapt as the financial services industry evolves. The current system fosters duplicative requirements and can allow important regulatory matters to fall through the cracks.

That said, I do not believe it is fair or accurate to blame our regulatory structure for the current market turmoil. As we work through this period, our regulators are cooperating to the extent appropriate, recognizing their different roles, responsibilities and authorities. They are also working cooperatively with their global counterparts. They share information when appropriate, minimize duplication and try to avoid jurisdictional conflict. We are very fortunate to have experienced professionals acting out of a shared sense of responsibility for the public good.

I am not suggesting that more regulation is the answer, or even that more effective regulation can prevent the periods of financial market stress that seem to occur every five to ten years. I am suggesting that we should and can have a structure that is designed for the world we live in, one that is more flexible, one that can better adapt to change, one that will allow us to more effectively deal with the inevitable market disruptions, one that will better protect investors and consumers, and one that will enable US capital markets to remain the most competitive in the world.

This is a complex subject deserving serious attention. Those who want to quickly label the Blueprint as advocating "more" or "less" regulation are over-simplifying this critical and inevitable debate. The Blueprint is about structure and responsibilities – not the regulations each entity would write. The benefit of the structure we outline is the accountability that stems from having one agency responsible for each regulatory objective. Few, if any, will defend our current balkanized system as optimal.

I also want to make clear that today's recommendations will not alter how we continue to set policy and coordinate the implementation of rules designed to protect the financial system from money laundering, terrorist finance and other illicit activities. Our challenge is to thoughtfully evolve to a more flexible, efficient and effective safety and soundness regulatory framework – and that is the purpose of this Blueprint.

The Optimal Financial Regulatory Model

We concluded we could only do justice to this topic by asking a rather theoretical question: If we could start over, which of course we can't, what regulatory model would we build? The idea here was to put forward an aspirational model, which could only be achieved after many years. But the model would serve as a beacon guiding us as we take necessary steps to modernize our financial regulatory structure to reflect today's market realities. Several difficult but unavoidable issues must be confronted, and we have put forward specific intermediate term recommendations to address these transitional issues over a two to eight year period. And we have a few recommendations for the near-term. But let's begin with the optimal or aspirational model.

We took a deliberative approach to developing this Blueprint. We met extensively with US and international financial regulators. We considered several models currently used in other global financial centers. We requested public comment on a broad range of issues and received hundreds of thoughtful and constructive comments. We interviewed thought leaders, industry, academics, and advocates of all political persuasion, including former Treasury leaders from both sides of the aisle. To a person, everyone agreed with two things: first, it was a difficult task and second, we must do this to retain our competitive advantage.

Our work led us to recommend a regulatory model based on objectives, to more closely link the regulatory structure to the reasons why we regulate. This model would have three regulators: a regulator focused on market stability across the entire financial sector, a regulator focused on safety and soundness of those institutions supported by a federal guarantee, and a regulator focused on protecting consumers and investors. A major advantage of this structure is its timelessness and its flexibility. It can more easily respond and adapt to the ever-changing marketplace because it is organized by regulatory objective rather than by financial institution category.

Market Stability Regulator

Given its traditional central bank role of promoting overall macroeconomic stability, the Federal Reserve is the natural choice for the important task of market stability regulator. In our model, the Federal Reserve's market stability role would continue through traditional channels of implementing monetary policy and providing liquidity to the financial system. In addition, the Federal Reserve would be provided with a different, yet critically important regulatory role with broad powers focusing on the overall financial system.

This role would replace the Fed's more limited role of bank holding company supervision because we recognize the need for enhanced regulatory authority to complement market discipline to deal with systemic risk. To do its job as the market stability regulator, the Fed would have to be able to evaluate the capital, liquidity, and margin practices across the entire financial system and their potential impact on overall financial stability. The Fed would have the authority to go wherever in the system it thinks it needs to go for a deeper look to preserve stability.

To do this effectively, the Fed will collect information from commercial banks, investment banks, insurance companies, hedge funds, commodity pool operators, but rather than focus on the health of a particular organization, it will focus on whether a firm's or industry's practices threaten overall financial stability. It will have broad powers and the necessary corrective authorities to deal with deficiencies that pose threats to our financial stability.

To illustrate, consider that our current regulatory system is almost solely focused above the ground at the tree level. But, the real threat to market stability is below the ground, at the root level where the health of financial firms is intertwined. Obvious root systems requiring the attention of our market stability regulator would include the interconnected OTC derivatives markets with their lack of a cohesive design for clearing, settlement, and novation protocols. Similarly, a market stability regulator would have the authority to review certain private pools of capital, such as hedge funds and private equity, which have the potential to contribute to a systemic event.

This market stability regulator's job sounds difficult and I assure you, it is. No regulator can prevent all instability and market turmoil, and this one won't either. I would expect that we will continue to go through periods of market stress every five to ten years. But hopefully with the proper tools and authorities, greater transparency and better information flow, we will be better able to avoid some problems and more effectively work through others. As a nation we have placed great faith in the powers of market discipline and this regulator is designed to better harness those forces.

Prudential Financial Regulator

Our second regulator combines all federal bank charters into one charter and consolidates all federal bank regulators into a single prudential regulator. For further regulatory efficiency, we recommend a federal insurance charter and put oversight of these guaranteed products within the jurisdiction of our federal prudential regulator. By its singular focus on prudential regulation that ensures the safety and soundness of institutions with federal guarantees, this regulator would serve a role similar to the current Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the OCC.

Conduct of Business Regulator

Third, we propose a dedicated business conduct regulator with the responsibility to vigorously protect consumers and investors, one which will focus on achieving greater consistency across product lines. This regulator would monitor business conduct regulation across all types of financial institutions and entities. Business conduct regulation in this context includes key aspects of consumer protection such as disclosures, business practices, chartering and licensing of certain types of financial institutions, and rigorous enforcement programs. This agency would assume many of the roles of the CFTC, the SEC, and the consumer protection and enforcement roles of our insurance and banking regulators. Having one agency responsible for these critically important issues for all financial products should bring greater consistency to regulation where overlapping requirements currently exist. Mortgages are an example of a consumer financial product that has suffered from uneven and inadequate treatment in our current regulatory and enforcement regime.

The premise of our optimal structure is that clarity of mission and objective will lead to strengthened regulation and improved capital markets efficiency.

We chose an objectives-based structure because we believe it provides a flexible framework that fosters and embraces innovation, helps ensure competitiveness and better manages risk. Such a structure would be better able to adjust to market and institutional changes. It would allow for clearer focus on particular goals – how do we prevent market failures – and provide a clear view across the financial landscape of functions, products, practices and institutions to meet those goals. Establishing regulatory lines by objective also has the potential for establishing and enforcing the greatest levels of market discipline by aiming regulation at the most vulnerable points.

An objectives-based model is substantially different from our current system and, realistically, will not and could not be implemented any time soon. However, we are anchoring our recommendations in a tangible, aspirational Blueprint even though it will take many years to evolve to this model. In the interim, the model can guide us as we consider and then take steps along the way.

Near Term Recommendations

I will now turn to our near term recommendations.

PWG Executive Order

I have a particularly high regard for the talented and dedicated professionals who today lead our regulatory agencies and, while recognizing their different roles, responsibilities and authorities, also collaborate to deal with current challenges. The President's Working Group on Financial Markets, the PWG, is a forum that is designed to help do just that. It was developed to coordinate across the current US structure, just as the Financial Stability Forum, the FSF, has developed as the means of facilitating international cooperation. We should formalize the current informal coordinating practice among the US regulatory community by amending and enhancing the Executive Order which created the PWG.

The new executive order will emphasize the importance of coordination and communication. It will clarify the PWG's mission of attempting to mitigate systemic financial risk, enhancing financial market integrity, promoting consumer and investor protection, and supporting capital markets efficiency and competitiveness. It will also increase the PGW membership to include all federal financial regulators so that information is shared in an appropriate, timely and efficient manner.

One thing that the PWG will work on immediately is determining whether the government has all the tools and powers it needs to deal with a financial crisis. As part of this, as I mentioned in my remarks last week, the PWG should examine the lessons of the current temporary liquidity facility the Fed has established for investment banks, and examine a number of issues regarding the proper level of oversight that should apply.

Mortgage Origination Process

Another issue that needs attention is the mortgage origination process. Simply put, that process was broken. We are aggressively addressing the immediate problem, working to increase the availability of affordable mortgage financing, prevent avoidable foreclosures and to minimize the economic disruption of the housing downturn. We concluded that it was also appropriate to put forward a proposal to address the policy issues arising from the current turmoil, to avoid a recurrence of recent events and to respond to the fact that a very large percentage of the problematic subprime mortgages originated in the last four years were originated by state-regulated entities.

Mortgage origination is one of the best case studies for the importance of regulatory structure. It raises the question of proper balance between federal and state oversight, and requires a balancing of innovation, consumer choice and expanded access to credit with protecting consumers from predatory lending and deceptive or incomplete disclosure practices. I have reviewed and analyzed a number of ideas to deal with this process. We thought quite seriously about federal preemption of enforcement authority but concluded in this case it was best to focus on the immediately achievable.

We are recommending retaining state-level regulation of mortgage origination practices, but we are also recommending creating a new federal-level commission, the Mortgage Origination Commission. This commission, the MOC, would be led by a director appointed by the President. The Commission membership would include federal banking regulators and appropriate state representation. Legislation should set forth or task this Commission to establish minimum standards which should include personal conduct and disciplinary history, minimum educational requirements, testing criteria and procedures, and appropriate licensing revocation standards.

In addition to the standards, the MOC would provide important information to the marketplace about the strength of each state's mortgage compliance standards. The MOC would evaluate, rate, and report on each state's adequacy for licensing and regulation of participants in the mortgage origination process. These evaluations would grade the overall adequacy of a state system by descriptive categories, indicating a system's strength or weakness. These evaluations could provide further information regarding whether mortgages originated in a state should be viewed cautiously before being securitized. This powerful Commission, coupled with the Federal Reserve's strong regulatory proposal regarding the HOEPA rules, should go a long way in preventing recent issues from recurring.

Intermediate Term Recommendations

Now, as these near term steps are taken, we also recommend action on a number of intermediate steps after the current market stress has passed. We should focus on a critical part of our economy: payment and settlement systems. Also, there are two areas where our regulatory structure severely inhibits our competitiveness – futures and securities, and insurance. Our recommendations in each area also call for fundamental change that move us toward the longer-term, objectives-based structure and, consequently, will take a number of years to complete.

Payment and Settlement Systems

Payment systems are critically important for overall market stability. On a typical business day, US payment and settlement systems settle transactions valued at over $13 trillion. Every American relies on a payment system in one way or another, everyday. Yet, our government is behind the curve in payment system oversight. I am not intending to raise an alarm here. There is no crisis, but we should be proactive and address this issue. In our Blueprint, we recommend the creation of a federal charter for systemically important payment and settlement systems and that these systems should be overseen by the Federal Reserve. This will allow the Federal Reserve to guard the integrity of this vital part of our nation's economy.

Merge SEC and CFTC

When the topic of regulatory structure comes up, people often rush to the assumption that the SEC and the CFTC should be merged. We agree that the realities of the current marketplace for securities and futures products make it increasingly difficult to rationalize a separate regulatory regime. And, we believe that we should pursue moving our regulation in the direction that the markets are taking us.

As you will see in the Blueprint, in this case process is just as important as substance. The market benefits achieved in the futures area should be preserved and we do not want to lose the CFTC's principle-based process for market exchange oversight. Accordingly, instead of simply recommending merging the SEC and CFTC with the expectation that all will work out, we recommend a number of steps and an evolutionary approach to shape the merger process so as to preserve the best aspects of each regulator. In fact, the SEC and the CFTC have recently signed a mutual cooperation agreement that embodies the spirit of what the Blueprint is trying to achieve.

Optional Federal Charter for Insurance

Insurance presents a clear need for regulatory modernization. States have been the primary regulator for insurance for over 135 years. While a completely state-based regulatory system for insurance may have been appropriate at one time, insurance market changes have put increasing strains on the system.

A state-based regulatory system is quite burdensome. It allows price controls to create market distortions. It can hinder development of national products and can directly impact the competitiveness of US insurers. There have been numerous attempts to modernize the regulatory structure for insurance. At this time, it seems clear that the way forward is to give insurers the ability to elect for federal regulation. Therefore, in the Blueprint we recommend the establishment of a federal insurance regulatory structure to provide for the creation of an Optional Federal Charter for insurance companies, similar to the current dual-chartering system for banking. This system would be built on a proven model and we recommend, as in the banking sector, that this federal agency be housed within the Treasury Department. This is the most effective way to address these issues and we outline the critical elements to this legislation.

Revocation of the Federal Thrift Charter

In some cases, the market develops so quickly as to render parts of our regulatory structure relatively obsolete. This is the case with the federal thrift charter and the Office of Thrift Supervision, the OTS. The thrift charter is no longer necessary to ensure sufficient residential mortgage loans availability for US consumers. In the Blueprint, we have concluded that the thrift charter has run its course and should be phased out. With the elimination of the federal thrift charter, the OTS would be closed and its operations would be assumed by the OCC.

Conclusion

We recognize that these ideas will generate some controversy and healthy debate. This is not unlike the circumstances surrounding the 1991 "Green Book," which after a period of constructive discussion resulted in the passage of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, modernizing our financial services industry some eight years later.

One of the most constant aspects of American life is change – and nowhere is it more evident than in our financial markets. If private sector institutions don't change, they become obsolete. Our regulatory structure also needs to change and evolve to one which will stand the test of time. Once we are through this period of market stress we need to begin the serious work of modernizing and reforming the structure, which will require a great deal of discussion and many years to complete.

This will not be a small or easy effort -- transformative efforts rarely are. But this is a subject we must debate, and ultimately address, for our long-term economic growth and prosperity. Thank you. -30-

Tags: Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr and Blueprint for Regulatory Reform or Federal Reserve

Freedom Calendar 03/29/08 - 04/05/08

March 29, 1885, Birth of U.S. Rep. Frances Payne Bolton (R-OH), first woman to serve as U.S. Delegate to United Nations General Assembly.

March 30, 1868, Republicans begin impeachment trial of Democrat President Andrew Johnson, who declared: 'This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government of white men'.

March 31, 1806, Birth of U.S. Senator John Hale (R-NH), early leader of Republicans’ anti-slavery movement in Congress.

April 1, 1846, Born into slavery on this day, Jeremiah Haralson (R-AL) served in state legislature before being elected to U.S. House in 1874.

April 2, 1855, Republican John Langston becomes nation’s first African-American elected official, in Brownhelm, OH; later served as U.S. Rep. (R-VA) and as diplomat in Republican administrations.

April 3, 1944, U.S. Supreme Court strikes down Texas Democratic Party’s “whites only” primary election system.

April 4, 1887, Republican Susanna Salter of Argonia, KS is first woman elected mayor in nation.

April 5, 1839, Birth of African-American U.S. Rep. Robert Smalls (R-SC), who escaped slavery by commandeering a Confederate gunboat.

“I believe the time will come when the sense of justice of this nation, when the enlightenment of this century, when the wisdom of our legislators, when the good feeling of the whole people will complete this grand work by lifting up out of degradation a race of men which has served long and faithfully by placing it, so far as the laws are concerned, upon an equal footing with all other classes. I have faith in this country.”

Rep. Joseph Rainey (R-SC), the first African-American in the U.S. House of Representatives (1870-79)

Technorati Tags: President Bush and Freedom Calendar or Booker T. Washington and Republicans or African-Americans and Brown v. Board of Education or Ronald Reagan and Condoleezza Rice or Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass or 40 acres and a mule or Martin Luther King and Voting Rights Act of 1965 or Dred Scott

Presidential Podcast 03/29/08

Presidential Podcast 03/29/08 . Subscribe to Our Podcast feed or online podnova Podcast Channel and receive the weekly Presidential Radio Address in English and Spanish with select State Department Briefings. Featuring full audio and text transcripts, More content Sources added often so stay tuned. In Focus: Economy

Tags: President Bush and White House radio address or Economy

Bush radio address 03/29/08 full audio, text transcript

bush radio address 03/29/08 full audio, text transcript. President's Radio Address In Focus: Economy

Subscribe to Our Podcast feed or online podnova Podcast Channel and receive the weekly Presidential Radio Address in English and Spanish with select State Department Briefings. Featuring real audio and full text transcripts, More content Sources added often so stay tuned.

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. It's not every day that Americans look forward to hearing from the Internal Revenue Service, but over the past few weeks many Americans have received a letter from the IRS with some good news. The letters explain that millions of individuals and families will soon be receiving tax rebates, thanks to the economic growth package that Congress passed and I signed into law last month.

Americans who are eligible for a rebate will get it automatically by simply filing their taxes. If you are not a tax filer, you should visit your local IRS office to fill out the necessary paperwork so you can get your rebate on time.

The growth package also contains incentives for businesses to invest in new equipment this year. On Wednesday I visited a printing company in Virginia that has decided to use these incentives to purchase new software. As more businesses begin taking advantage of these incentives, investment will pick up and so will job creation. And together with the individual tax rebates, these incentives will help give our economy a shot in the arm.

For many families, the greatest concern with the economy is the downturn in the housing market. My Administration has taken action to help responsible homeowners keep their homes. In October, we helped bring together a private sector group called the HOPE NOW Alliance. HOPE NOW has helped streamline the process for refinancing and modifying mortgages, and it runs a national hotline to connect struggling homeowners with mortgage counselors.

On Friday, I visited an impressive mortgage counseling center in New Jersey. At the center, I met with homeowners who have been able to get help, thanks to HOPE NOW. One of them is Danny Cerchiaro. Danny owns a home in New Jersey that also serves as a studio for his movie production company. When Danny and his wife learned that their adjustable rate mortgage was resetting to a higher rate this past summer, they became concerned about their financial security. So Danny called HOPE NOW for help. Less than two months later, he was able to get a more affordable fixed-rate mortgage. And today Danny calls the mortgage counselor who helped him, "the magic lady."

Theresa Torres from Kansas City is another homeowner who has been helped. Theresa called HOPE NOW after she and her husband fell behind on their mortgage payments in December. A mortgage counselor helped Theresa modify her mortgage. Today she no longer worries about losing her home.

There are hundreds of thousands of homeowners like Theresa and Danny who could benefit from calling HOPE NOW. If you're a homeowner struggling with your mortgage, please take the first step toward getting help by calling the hotline at 888-995-H-O-P-E. That's 888-995-H-O-P-E.

HOPE NOW can help homeowners find the right solution for them. One solution for some homeowners is a new program we launched at the Federal Housing Administration called FHASecure. This program has given the FHA greater flexibility to offer struggling homeowners with otherwise good credit histories a chance to refinance. So far this program has helped more than 130,000 families refinance their mortgages. And by the end of the year we expect this program to have reached nearly 300,000 homeowners in all.

This is a good start, and my Administration is committed to building on it. So we're exploring ways this program can help more qualified homebuyers. The problems in the housing market are complicated and there is no easy solution. But by supporting responsible homeowners with wise policies, we'll help them weather a difficult period, we will help get our economy back on track, and we will ensure America remains the most prosperous Nation in the world.

Thank you for listening.

END For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary March 29, 2008

Tags: President Bush and White House radio address or Economy

Discurso Radial del Presidente a la Nación 03/29/08

forre el audio de la dirección de radio 03/29/08 por completo, transcripción del texto. (nota de los redactores: ninguna lengua española mp3 lanzó esta semana, apesadumbrada) PODCAST

Suscribir a nuestro canal de Podcast de Odeo o del podnova y recibir la dirección de radio presidencial semanal en inglés y español con informes selectos del departamento del estado. Ofreciendo transcripciones audio y con texto completo verdaderas, más fuentes contentas agregaron a menudo así que la estancia templó.

Buenos Días.

No es todos los días que los estadounidenses esperan ansiosamente noticias del Servicio de Impuestos Internos, o IRS por sus siglas en inglés. Pero en las últimas semanas muchos estadounidenses han recibido una carta del IRS con unas buenas noticias. Las cartas explican que millones de personas individuales y familias pronto recibirán reembolsos tributarios gracias al paquete de crecimiento económico aprobado por el Congreso y sancionado por mí el mes pasado.

Los estadounidenses que sean elegibles para un reembolso lo recibirán automáticamente con simplemente presentar su declaración de impuestos. Si usted no presenta declaración de impuestos, deberá visitar a su oficina local del IRS y llenar los papeles necesarios – para que pueda recibir su reembolso a tiempo.

El paquete de crecimiento también contiene incentivos para que negocios inviertan en nuevos equipos este año. El miércoles visité una imprenta en Virginia que ha decidido usar estos incentivos para adquirir nuevo software. A medida que más negocios empiecen a aprovechar estos incentivos, las inversiones crecerán así como la creación de empleos. Y junto con los reembolsos tributarios individuales, estos incentivos ayudarán a estimular a nuestra economía.

Para muchas familias la mayor inquietud con la economía es la baja en el mercado de la vivienda. Mi administración ha tomado medidas para ayudar a dueños de casa responsables a quedarse con sus casas. En Octubre ayudamos a juntar un grupo del sector privado llamado Hope Now Alliance. Hope Now ha ayudado a hacer más eficiente el proceso de refinanciar y modificar hipotecas. Y opera una línea telefónica nacional directa para conectar a dueños de casa en dificultades con asesores hipotecarios.

El viernes visité un impresionante centro de asesoramiento hipotecario en Nueva Jersey. En el centro me reuní con dueños de casa que han logrado obtener ayuda gracias a Hope Now.

Uno de ellos es Danny Cerchiaro. Danny es dueño de una casa en Nueva Jersey que también sirve como estudio para su compañía productora de cine. Cuando Danny y su esposa supieron que su hipoteca de tasa ajustable iba a reajustar a una tasa más alta este verano pasado, se preocuparon por su seguridad financiera. Por lo tanto Danny pidió ayuda a Hope Now. En menos de dos meses, logró obtener una hipoteca de tasa fija más económica – y hoy Danny llama a la asesora hipotecaria que lo ayudó, y cito, “la dama mágica”.

Theresa Torres de Kansas City es otra dueña de casa que recibió ayuda. Theresa llamó a Hope Now después de que ella y su esposo se atrasaron en los pagos de su hipoteca en Diciembre. Un asesor hipotecario ayudó a Theresa a modificar su hipoteca. Hoy en día, ya no se preocupa de que pueda perder su hogar.

Hay cientos de miles de dueños de casa como Theresa y Danny que podrían beneficiarse llamando a Hope Now. Si usted es dueño de casa luchando con su hipoteca, por favor tome el primer paso hacia obtener ayuda llamando a la línea directa al 8-8-8…9-9-5…HOPE…esto es 8-8-8…9-9-5…HOPE.

Hope Now puede ayudar a dueños de casa a encontrar la solución apropiada para ellos. Una solución para algunos dueños de casa es un nuevo programa que hemos lanzado en la Administración Federal de la Vivienda, o FHA por sus siglas en inglés, llamado FHA Secure. Este programa le ha dado a la FHA mayor flexibilidad para ofrecer a dueños de casa en dificultad pero con buenos historiales de crédito la oportunidad para refinanciar. Hasta el presente este programa ha ayudado a más de 130,000 familias a refinanciar sus hipotecas. Y para fines de este año, esperamos que el programa haya alcanzado a cerca de 300,000 dueños de casa en total.

Este es un buen comienzo – y mi Administración está comprometida a apoyarse en él. Por lo tanto estamos explorando formas en que este programa pueda ayudar a más dueños de casa calificados.

Los problemas en el mercado de la vivienda son complicados, y no hay solución fácil. Pero al apoyar a dueños de casa responsables con políticas acertadas, les ayudaremos a superar un periodo difícil. Ayudaremos a que nuestra economía vuelva sobre el buen camino. Y aseguraremos que Estados Unidos siga siendo la nación más próspera del mundo.

Gracias por escuchar.

Etiquetas De Technorati: Discurso Radial del Presidente a la Nación, y Presidente Bush

Earth Hour VIDEO

On Saturday, March 29 at 8pm millions of people around the world will turn off their lights for one hour - Earth Hour - symbolizing the need to take action on climate change. Tags: Earth Hour and World+Wildlife+Federation

AEI Address by Newt Gingrich VIDEO PODCAST

AEI Address by Fmr. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich - FULL STREAMING VIDEO ,Fmr. Speaker of the House & current AEI Senior Fellow Newt Gingrich gives an address on "The Obama Challenge: What Is the Right Change to Help All Americans Pursue Happiness and Create Prosperity,"

a response to Sen. Barack Obama's speech on change in government. Washington, DC : 1 hr. 5 min. PODCAST OF THIS ARTICLE a warning of the destructive cost of bad government and bad culture, how it leads to poverty, decay, and destroys lives. FULL TEXT TRANSCRIPT

Tags: Newt Gingrich and American Enterprise Institute

Ronald Reagan's "Evil Empire" Speech PODCAST

STREAMING AUDIO Ronald Reagan's "Evil Empire" Speech PODCAST - Address to the National Association of Evangelicals (Soviets as "Evil Empire"), Sheraton Twin Towers Hotel, Orlando, FL, (WHTV, 30:00); Audio in mp3; text - Evil Empire Speech; source: Reagan Library. March 8, 1983 DOWNLOAD MP3

Reverend Clergy all, Senator Hawkins, distinguished members of the Florida congressional delegation, and all of you:

I can't tell you how you have warmed my heart with your welcome. I'm delighted to be here today.

Those of you in the National Association of Evangelicals are known for you spiritual and humanitarian work. And I would be especially remiss if I didn't discharge right now one personal debt of gratitude. Thank you for your prayers. Nancy and I have felt their presence many times in many years. And believe me, for us they've made all the difference.

The other day in the East Room of the White House at a meeting there, someone asked me whether I was aware of all the people out there who were praying for the President. And I had to say, "Yes, I am. I've felt it. I believe in intercessionary prayer." But I couldn't help but say to that questioner after he'd asked the question that - or at least say to them that if sometimes when he was praying he got a busy signal, it was just me in there ahead of him. [Laughter] I think I understand how Abraham Lincoln felt when he said, "I have been driven many times to my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go." From the joy and the good feeling of this conference, I go to a political reception. [Laughter] Now, I don't know why, but that bit of scheduling reminds me of a story - [Laughter] - which I'll share with you.

An evangelical minister and a politician arrived at Heaven's gate one day together. And St. Peter, after doing all the necessary formalities, took them in hand to show them where their quarters would be. And he took them to a small, single room with a bed, a chair, and a table and said this was for the clergyman. And the politician was a little worried about what might be in store for him. And he couldn't believe it then when St. Peter stopped in front of a beautiful mansion with lovely grounds, many servants, and told him that these would be his quarters.

And he couldn't help but ask, he said, "But wait, how-there's something wrong - how do I get this mansion while that good and holy man only gets a single room?" And St. Peter said, "You have to understand how things are up here. We've got thousands and thousands of clergy. You're the first politician who ever made it." [Laughter]

But I don't want to contribute to a stereotype. [Laughter] So I tell you there are a great many God-fearing, dedicated, noble men and women in public life, present company included. And yes, we need your help to keep us ever mindful of the ideas and the principles that brought us into the public arena in the first place. The basis of those ideals and principles is a commitment to freedom and personal liberty that, itself, is grounded in the much deeper realization that freedom prospers only where the blessings of God are avidly sought and humbly accepted.

The American experiment in democracy rests on this insight. Its discovery was the great triumph of our Founding Fathers, voiced by William Penn when he said: "If we will not be governed by God, we must be governed by tyrants." Explaining the inalienable rights of men, Jefferson said, "The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time." And it was George Washington who said that "of all the disposition and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supporters."

And finally, that shrewdest of all observers of American democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville, put it eloquently after he had gone on a search for the secret of America's greatness and genius - and he said: "Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the greatness and the genius of America . . . America is good. And if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great."

Well, I'm pleased to be here today with you who are keeping America great by keeping her good. Only through your work and prayers and those of millions of others cans we hope to survive this perilous century and keep alive this experiment in liberty, this last, best hope of man.

I want you to know that this administration is motivated by a political philosophy that sees the greatness of America in you, her people, and in your families, churches, neighborhoods, communities - the institutions that foster and nourish values like concern for others and respect for the rule of law under God.

Now, I don't have to tell you that this puts us in opposition to, or at least out of step with, a prevailing attitude of many who have turned to a modern-day secularism, discarding the tried and time-tested values upon which our very civilization is based. No matter how well intentioned, their value system is radically different from that of most Americans. And while they proclaim that they're freeing us from superstitions of the past, they've taken upon themselves the job of superintending us by government rule and regulation. Sometimes their voices are louder than ours, but they are not yet a majority.

An example of that vocal superiority is evident in a controversy now going on in Washington. And since I'm involved I've been waiting to hear from the parents of young America. How far are they willing to go in giving to government their prerogatives as parents?

Let me state the case as briefly and simply as I can. An organization of citizens, sincerely motivated and deeply concerned about the increase in illegitimate births and abortions involving girls well below the age of consent, some time ago established a nationwide network of clinics to offer help to these girls and, hopefully, alleviate this situation. Now, again, let me say, I do not fault their intent. However, in their well-intentioned effort, these clinics have decided to provide advice and birth control drugs and devices to underage girls without the knowledge of their parents.

For some years now, the federal government has helped with funds to subsidize these clinics. In providing for this, the Congress decreed that every effort would be made to maximize parental participation. Nevertheless, the drugs and devices are prescribed without getting parental consent or giving notification after they've done so. Girls termed "sexually active" - and that has replaced the word "promiscuous" - are given this help in order to prevent illegitimate birth or abortion.

Well, we have ordered clinics receiving federal funds to notify the parents such help has been given. One of the nation's leading newspapers has created the term "squeal rule" in editorializing against us for doing this, and we're being criticized for violating the privacy of young people. A judge has recently granted an injunction against an enforcement of our rule. I've watched TV panel shows discuss the issue, seen columnists pontificating on our error, but no one seems to mention morality as playing a part in the subject of sex.

Is all of Judeo-Christian tradition wrong? Are we to believe that something so sacred can be looked upon as a purely physical thing with no potential for emotional and psychological harm? And isn't it the parents' right to give counsel and advice to keep their children from making mistakes that may affect their entire lives?

Many of us in government would like to know what parents think about this intrusion in their family by government. We're going to fight in the courts. The right of parents and the rights of family take precedence over those of Washington-based bureaucrats and social engineers.

But the fight against parental notification is really only one example of many attempts to water down traditional values and even abrogate the original terms of American democracy. Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged. When our Founding Fathers passed the First Amendment, they sought to protect churches from government interference. They never intended to construct a wall of hostility between government and the concept of religious belief itself.

The evidence of this permeates our history and our government. The Declaration of Independence mentions the Supreme Being no less than four times. "In God We Trust" is engraved on our coinage. The Supreme Court opens its proceedings with a religious invocation. And the members of Congress open their sessions with a prayer. I just happen to believe the schoolchildren of the United States are entitled to the same privileges as Supreme Court justices and congressmen.

Last year, I sent the Congress a constitutional amendment to restore prayer to public schools. Already this session, there's growing bipartisan support for the amendment, and I am calling on the Congress to act speedily to pass it and to let our children pray.

Perhaps some of you read recently about the Lubbock school case, where a judge actually ruled that it was unconstitutional for a school district to give equal treatment to religious and nonreligious student groups, even when the group meetings were being held during the students' own time. The First Amendment never intended to require government to discriminate against religious speech.

Senators Denton and Hatfield have proposed legislation in the Congress on the whole question of prohibiting discrimination against religious forms of student speech. Such legislation could go far to restore freedom of religious speech for public school students. And I hope the Congress considers these bills quickly. And with you help, I think it's possible we could also get the constitutional amendment through the Congress this year.

More than a decade ago, a Supreme Court decision literally wiped off the books of fifty states statutes protecting the rights of unborn children. Abortion on demand now takes the lives of up to one and a half million unborn children a year. Human life legislation ending this tragedy will someday pass the Congress, and you and I must never rest until it does. Unless and until it can be proven that the unborn child is not a living entity, then its right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness must be protected.

You may remember that when abortion on demand began, many, and indeed, I'm sure many of you, warned that the practice would lead to a decline in respect for human life, that the philosophical premises used to justify abortion on demand would ultimately be used to justify other attacks on the sacredness of human life - infanticide or mercy killing. Tragically enough, those warnings proved all too true. Only last year a court permitted the death by starvation of a handicapped infant.

I have directed the Health and Human Services Department to make clear to every health care facility in the United States that the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protects all handicapped persons against discrimination based on handicaps, including infants. And we have taken the further step of requiring that each and every recipient of federal funds who provides health care services to infants must post and keep posted in a conspicuous place a notice stating that "discriminatory failure to feed and care for handicapped infants in this facility is prohibited by federal law." It also lists a twenty-four-hour, toll-free number so that nurses and others may report violations in time to save the infant's life.

In addition, recent legislation introduced in the Congress by Representative Henry Hyde of Illinois not only increases restrictions on publicly financed abortions, it also addresses this whole problem of infanticide. I urge the Congress to begin hearings and to adopt legislation that will protect the right of life to all children, including the disabled or handicapped.

Now, I'm sure that you must get discouraged at times, but you've done better than you know, perhaps. There's a great spiritual awakening in America, a renewal of the traditional values that have been the bedrock of America's goodness and greatness.

One recent survey by a Washington-based research council concluded that Americans were far more religious than the people of other nations; 95 percent of those surveyed expressed a belief in God and a huge majority believed the Ten Commandments had real meaning in their lives. And another study has found that an overwhelming majority of Americans disapprove of adultery, teenage sex, pornography, abortion, and hard drugs. And this same study showed a deep reverence for the importance of family ties and religious belief.

I think the items that we've discussed here today must be a key part of the nation's political agenda. For the first time the Congress is openly and seriously debating and dealing with the prayer and abortion issues - and that's enormous progress right there. I repeat: America is in the midst of a spiritual awakening and a moral renewal. And with your biblical keynote, I say today, "Yes, let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream."

Now, obviously, much of this new political and social consensus I've talked about is based on a positive view of American history, one that takes pride in our country's accomplishments and record. But we must never forget that no government schemes are going to perfect man. We know that living in this world means dealing with what philosophers would call the phenomenology of evil or, as theologians would put it, the doctrine of sin.

There is sin and evil in the world, and we're enjoined by Scripture and the Lord Jesus to oppose it with all our might. Our nation, too, has a legacy of evil with which it must deal. The glory of this land has been its capacity for transcending the moral evils of our past. For example, the long struggle of minority citizens for equal rights, once a source of disunity and civil war, is now a point of pride for all Americans. We must never go back. There is no room for racism, anti-Semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country.

I know that you've been horrified, as have I, by the resurgence of some hate groups preaching bigotry and prejudice. Use the mighty voice of your pulpits and the powerful standing of your churches to denounce and isolate these hate groups in our midst. The commandment given us is clear and simple: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."

But whatever sad episodes exist in our past, any objective observer must hold a positive view of American history, a history that has been the story of hopes fulfilled and dreams made into reality. Especially in this century, America has kept alight the torch of freedom, but not just for ourselves but for millions of others around the world.

And this brings me to my final point today. During my first press conference as president, in answer to a direct question, I point out that, as good Marxist-Leninists, the Soviet leaders have openly and publicly declared that the only morality they recognize is that which will further their cause, which is world revolution. I think I should point out I was only quoting Lenin, their guiding spirit, who said in 1920 that they repudiate all morality that proceeds from supernatural ideas - that's their name for religion - or ideas that are outside class conceptions. Morality is entirely subordinate to the interests of class war. And everything is moral that is necessary for the annihilation of the old, exploiting social order and for uniting the proletariat.

Well, I think the refusal of many influential people to accept this elementary fact of Soviet doctrine illustrates a historical reluctance to see totalitarian powers for what they are. We saw this phenomenon in the 1930s. We see it too often today.

This doesn't mean we should isolate ourselves and refuse to seek an understanding with them. I intend to do everything I can to persuade them of our peaceful intent, to remind them that it was the West that refused to use its nuclear monopoly in the forties and fifties for territorial gain and which now proposes a 50-percent cut in strategic ballistic missiles and the elimination of an entire class of land-based, intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

At the same time, however, they must be made to understand we will never compromise our principles and standards. We will never give away our freedom. We will never abandon our belief in God. And we will never stop searching for a genuine peace. But we can assure none of these things America stands for through the so-called nuclear freeze solutions proposed by some.

The truth is that a freeze now would be a very dangerous fraud, for that is merely the illusion of peace. The reality is that we must find peace through strength.

I would agree to freeze if only we could freeze the Soviets' global desires. A freeze at current levels of weapons would remove any incentive for the Soviets to negotiate seriously in Geneva and virtually end our chances to achieve the major arms reductions which we have proposed. Instead, they would achieve their objectives through the freeze.

A freeze would reward the Soviet Union for its enormous and unparalleled military buildup. It would prevent the essential and long overdue modernization of United States and allied defenses and would leave our aging forces increasingly vulnerable. And an honest freeze would require extensive prior negotiations on the systems and numbers to be limited and on the measures to ensure effective verification and compliance. And the kind of a freeze that has been suggested would be virtually impossible to verify. Such a major effort would divert us completely from our current negotiations on achieving substantial reductions.

A number of years ago, I heard a young father, a very prominent young man in the entertainment world, addressing a tremendous gathering in California. It was during the time of the cold war, and communism and our own way of life were very much on people's minds. And he was speaking to that subject. And suddenly, though, I heard him saying, "I love my little girls more than anything -" And I said to myself, "Oh, no, don't. You can't - don't say that." But I had underestimated him. He went on: "I would rather see my little girls die now, still believing in God, than have them grow up under communism and one day die no longer believing in God."

There were thousands of young people in that audience. They came to their feet with shouts of joy. They had instantly recognized the profound truth in what he had said, with regard to the physical and the soul and what was truly important.

Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in that totalitarian darkness - pray they will discover the joy of knowing God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the supremacy of the state, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world.

It was C.S. Lewis who, in his unforgettable Screwtape Letters, wrote: "The greatest evil is not done now in those sordid 'dens of crime' that Dickens loved to paint. It is not even done in concentration camps and labor camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do no need to raise their voice."

Well, because these "quiet men" do no "raise their voices," because they sometimes speak in soothing tones of brotherhood and peace, because, like other dictators before them, they're always making "their final territorial demand," some would have us accept them as their word and accommodate ourselves to their aggressive impulses. But if history teaches anything, it teaches that simpleminded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly. It means the betrayal of our past, the squandering of our freedom.

So, I urge you to speak our against those who would place the United States in a position of military and moral inferiority. You know, I've always believed that old Screwtape reserved his best efforts for those of you in the church. So, in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride - the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.

I ask you to resist the attempts of those who would have you withhold your support for our efforts, this administration's efforts, to keep America strong and free, while we negotiate real and verifiable reductions in the world's nuclear arsenals and one day, with God's help, their total elimination.

While America's military strength is important, let me add here that I've always maintained that the struggle now going on for the world will never be decided by bombs or rockets, by armies or military might. The real crisis we face today is a spiritual one; at root, it is a test of moral will and faith.

Whittaker Chambers, the man whose own religious conversation made him a witness to one of the terrible traumas of our time, the Hiss-Chambers case, wrote that the crisis of the Western world exists to the degree in which the West is indifferent to God, the degree to which it collaborates in communism's attempt to make man stand alone without God. And then he said, for Marxism-Leninism is actually the second-oldest faith, first proclaimed in the Garden of Eden with the words of temptation, "Ye shall be as gods."

The Western world can answer this challenge, he wrote, "but only provided that its faith in God and the freedom He enjoins is as great as communism's faith in Man."

I believe we shall rise to the challenge. I believe that communism is another sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages even now are being written. I believe this because the source of our strength in the quest for human freedom is not material, but spiritual. And because it knows no limitation, it must terrify and ultimately triumph over those who would enslave their fellow man. For in the words of Isaiah: "He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might He increased strength . . . But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary . . . "

Yes, change your world. One of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Paine, said, "We have it within our power to begin the world over again." We can do it, doing together what no one church could do by itself.

God bless you, and thank you very much.

Tags: Ronald Reagan and Evil Empire Speech