===========================================================================
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Dana Perino
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary November 20, 2008

Press Briefing by Press Secretary Dana Perino James S. Brady Press Briefing
Room

˙ /news/releases/2008/11/20081120-2.wm.v.html ˙˙Press Briefings
˙˙Audio


11:05 A.M. EST

MS. PERINO: Hello, everyone. A special day here because our very own Terry
Hunt came back for his last briefing, thankfully. We miss you very much.
I'm glad you're here. Now that you're a big economic expert, I'm sure I'm
in for a grilling -- (laughter) -- on that topic.

But before we get there, a couple of comments. The President today is doing
a couple of pre-trip interviews with -- one with a Japanese television
station, one with a Peruvian television station, and one Peruvian print
journalist. And we'll get those for you later today.

Also a scheduling update: President Bush will host Israeli Prime Minister
Olmert at the White House on Monday, November 24th. The President looks
forward to discussing with the Prime Minister the strong bilateral
relationship between our two countries, the continuing efforts to bring
peace to the Middle East, and a wide range of regional and international
issues.

Also today, you've already seen we got the unemployment figures. And the
recent financial and credit crisis has slowed our economy dramatically.
It's having an impact on job creation. The President is very concerned
anytime somebody loses a job, and he wants an economy where anybody who
wants to find a job can find employment.

Because of the tight job market, the President believes it would be
appropriate to further extend unemployment benefits and he would sign
legislation that is now in front of Congress. We hope that they will be
able to pass that before they leave for their recess. And we will continue
to aggressively implement the rescue package that's being implemented by
Secretary Paulson so that we can improve the job market, improve our
economy, and get everyone back on a path to prosperity.

One other thing. As I mentioned yesterday, HUD announced new changes to the
FHA program called Hope for Homeowners. This program was designed and
implemented on October 1, 2008, to help seriously delinquent borrowers who
wouldn't have previously qualified for a HUD-backed mortgage, FHA-backed
mortgage. Lender participation was not as high as we had hoped, so we had
flexibility in the legislation, in the rescue package legislation, that
allowed us to make some changes to make the program less cumbersome for
borrowers and for lenders.

Among other things, the changes require less of a writedown by the lender,
and loosened some underwriting criteria to let in more borrowers. So we
hope that people who are in a position where they need a little bit of help
would find that they could find help in that program.

And with that, I'll take your questions.

Q As you look at the increase in jobless claims and the prospect that
General Motors is in trouble and could go bankrupt, is the economy prepared
to deal with the possibility of three million more people being added to
the unemployment ranks?

MS. PERINO: I wouldn't speculate on what the future employment numbers will
be. What I can tell you is that the program that we're -- the plan we would
support right now would be seven weeks in additional unemployment
insurance. That's on top of the 13 that you already get, plus an additional
13 weeks for states that have high unemployment.

Our position on the auto companies has been very clear. We want to find a
solution, and we put forward one. We think it's a very sensible solution
that could get bipartisan support if the Senator would just -- Senator Reid
would allow it to come up for a vote. Senators Bond and Voinovich have been
working very hard on legislation that would use monies that were already
authorized and appropriated for the auto industry, and they simply would be
able to take that money that we can't use now without a change in the law
to help them through this rough patch.

We would hope that they would allow that to come up for a vote, but
unfortunately, it looks like Senator Reid just wants to pick up his ball
and go home for the next two weeks -- two months for vacation. And if that
is the case, then one can only deduct that the Democrats don't believe that
the auto industry really needs help, and really needs help now. We
disagree. We think they need help. We have heard their calls for help, and
we have designed a plan in order to get it to them.

Q Well, if Congress does leave town without passing anything for the auto
industry, what's the -- is the administration going to do anything, can it
do anything, or where does it go from here?

MS. PERINO: Well, the intention of the rescue package that was passed for
the Treasury Department was to help financial institutions. There's a law
that was passed that would allow for the automakers to have access to funds
that was specifically for retooling their companies. What we're suggesting
is just a reasonable amendment that would change that and allow that money
to be used for other purposes for now.

That doesn't mean we're going to change the standards. We do think that the
automakers need to become more fuel-efficient and more modern. But we also
have a condition on our bill, which is that we require that the company
prove viability. We think the taxpayers should not be asked to throw good
money after bad. They should be -- if we are going to help them get through
this rough patch, it should be a loan, but it should only go to companies
that are viable. We think this is a reasonable path forward and we hope
that they would take us up on it.

Q But my question is, if Congress does not act this week, is the
administration just going to watch GM sink?

MS. PERINO: If the Congress doesn't act this week and one of the companies
is in imminent danger of insolvency, we would suspect that they would want
to come back and finish the work that they didn't get done this week.

Q You would anticipate that Congress would come back?

MS. PERINO: We would -- I can't imagine a scenario where they wouldn't come
back, unless the answer is that they just don't care. And if that's the
case, then the American people ought to know that and hear it from them.

Q What are the chances that something is going to get done this week?

MS. PERINO: Well, we always remain hopeful. We believe the path that we've
set forward could get bipartisan support if it was allowed to come for a
vote. And so we would ask them to just think about taking a step back from
partisan politics and throwing up obstacles for the sake of throwing up
obstacles, and consider our proposal, and the one that Senators Bond and
Voinovich have put forward, because we do think that they would be able to
get help for the automakers in a way that would help them get through this
rough patch, but also help them restructure, make the hard decisions
necessary to restructure.

I think the key point is that the American taxpayer should only be asked to
help these companies if they're willing to make the hard decisions
necessary to be viable in the long run.

Q But why do you remain hopeful? I mean, are you hearing anything in the --

MS. PERINO: Well, they haven't left town yet. The gavel hasn't come down.
And presumably, given the rhetoric that they've used over the past week,
the Democrats believe that the automakers need help. Well, if that's the
case, then they should allow us to move forward to have a vote on something
that we think could get passed.

The truth is Senator Reid's idea could not get enough votes in the Senate
to get through the process. So the alternative would be to, well, could we
think of another way, a bipartisan way where we could get the automakers
help? Instead, he just wants to pull the plug and leave town. And we don't
think that that is a good way to help the auto industry, and we certainly
don't think it's a good signal for the bipartisanship that everyone pledged
over the past year.

Q Can I just ask you about Citicorps? They're obviously financially
strapped. They're going to lay off 50,000 people. Is there any work being
done for TARP funds to be used to help Citi?

MS. PERINO: I don't know. I'd have to refer you to the Treasury Department
for that.

Q I have a different subject.

MS. PERINO: Anybody else on this one?

Q Is there a thought in this White House that the economy can bounce back
shortly after the new President takes office? I mean, is that the going
thought, that this -- that there would be a turnaround in the first few
months?

MS. PERINO: I think it's impossible for us to say exactly when it will turn
around. We do believe that the actions that we're taking now will have an
impact sometime in the future. But it could be a while before we see that.
And what the President has asked us to do is to work to do everything we
possibly can to promote pro-growth policies so that when the next President
takes over they won't have to be dealing with the crisis situation, they
can be dealing with an economy that's on the road to recovery.

Q I have a different subject.

MS. PERINO: Okay, we'll stay on this.

Q On unemployment benefits, the extension. Before you had said that this
was something that had already been extended before, when you were asked
about this issue, and that you wanted to wait and see what Congress did.
Why now the change to say that -- a call for the extension yourself, or the
White House, and to say the President will sign it?

MS. PERINO: So in June of 2008, our unemployment rate in our country was
5.5 percent. And that is historically low for an unemployment rate. Just
five months later, the whole world has changed, and the President adapts to
conditions on the ground. And unemployment is now at 6.5 percent, and we
think the responsible thing to do is to try to help job seekers over this
hump until they -- we can get the country creating jobs again and get them
back to work. So that's why we changed the position.

Q Back on the automakers. Do you think that your insistence on the
viability of the companies that receive funds, is that really the sticking
point for a lot of the Democrats in the Senate?

MS. PERINO: It's hard to say. I actually think that a lot of their
disagreement has to do with environmental issues, that the monies that
we're suggesting be allowed to be freed up so that the auto companies could
use it is specifically meant for retooling factories so that they can be --
produce more fuel-efficient vehicles.

What I have understood, some of the concern up on the Hill is that if you
divert any of those funds to deal with the immediate crisis at hand, that
they won't become more fuel-efficient in the future. I don't think that
that's true. We're not going to relax the standards. In fact, the President
called for the standards, and it took a while for Congress to actually pass
them, and we're in the process of implementing them. These companies need
to make the hard choices necessary to become more viable in the future.
Part of that has to do with the management of the companies, but another
part is, how do they become the company that will produce vehicles that
people want to buy in the energy environment that we're in.

So I think that has to do with it. And on viability, it would be hard for
me to believe that people would not support -- they would support taxpayer
dollars going to a company that could not prove viability. But in the
legislation that Senator Reid put forward they do not call for a company to
have to be viable, which doesn't make sense to any of us.

So we're going to continue to push for the support that we think that we
can get the auto companies, to get it to them quickly, not play a game of
chicken with the Congress. We proposed something that is bipartisan. We
think it could get the votes if they just would let us have a vote on it.

I'm sorry, if I could just mention one thing, John, on the unemployment
numbers. We did sign an extension, also, in August of 2008. So as
conditions have changed, the President has been willing to address that.
And in addition, I believe that UI extensions in the past, when I've been
asked about it multiple times every week, they weren't always in a clean
bill. This is a clean bill.

Mark, did you have one? No. In the back, go ahead.

Q Dana, thank you. You have said that the TARP program should only be for
helping out financial companies, and yet Secretary Paulson has shifted
direction on what he thinks the TARP should be used for. Is it possible
that the White House can also shift direction and say, well, maybe using
some of the TARP funds for the automakers isn't such a bad idea, after all?
Are you still sticking to your guns that TARP is not to be used --

MS. PERINO: Especially when it comes to the capital injections, that's
exactly what the TARP was designed for, was financial institutions. So
there was never an intent of Congress to help a specific industry or a
specific company, and that hasn't changed -- unless Congress decides to
change it, which it doesn't seem like they're going to get anything done
this week.

Q Well, in a way, the automakers are big financial institutions -- I mean,
their financing arms are a big portion of the company.

MS. PERINO: They're a portion of it, but they're not the full company. And
any company -- if one of those financing arms of one of those companies
wants to apply as a bank-holding company for capital injections, they would
go the Fed or to the Treasury Department, depending on what they're
seeking.

Q So you're saying a portion of those companies, a portion of GM or Ford in
fact could apply for TARP money then?

MS. PERINO: They could apply to see if they would qualify as a bank-holding
company. I don't know if they would qualify. That's not a decision we make
here.

Jon.

Q A clarification on the unemployment extension. Is it a possible total of
13 additional or 20 additional?

MS. PERINO: Let me just read what I have here. So it's seven weeks on top
of 13 that you already get, plus an additional 13 weeks for high
unemployment states.

Q So it's not seven plus another six; it's seven plus another 13 --

MS. PERINO: Right.

Q -- a potential total of 20.

MS. PERINO: It's 13 plus seven, is the way I would look at it.

Q What's the cut-off on high unemployment states?

MS. PERINO: Is that right?

MR. FRATTO: Seven on top of the existing 13, and it's -- in high
unemployment states, it's 13 on top of the existing 13.

Q And what's the state cut-off -- like 6 percent, 7?

MS. PERINO: I think it depends on the state.

Q Okay, so it's not a potential 20 on top of the 13, but a potential 13 --

MS. PERINO: What he said is you get 13 -- so it's an additional seven on
top of that, and then if you're in a high unemployment state -- it's 13,
you could get another 13. We'll get the details for you, but obviously
that's not my strong suit.

Q One other thing. How do the automakers demonstrate viability? Can you
just review that?

MS. PERINO: If you go to the 136 regulations that we put out that govern
the program, it has -- the viability definition is in that for you.

Q Can you -- are you able to hit sort of --

MS. PERINO: I don't have it with me and a lot of details went into that.

Is this still on the economy?

Q Yes.

MS. PERINO: Okay, and then I'll come to you, Elaine.

Q Back on your previous answer to my previous question -- (laughter) --
would the White House be willing to support adding more money now that
would provide funds for retooling? Or do you really just want to --

MS. PERINO: Well, one way that you might be able to do it is -- that
they're working on on Capitol Hill -- is can you -- when the money -- since
it would be a loan, when it is paid back, instead of going to the general
fund in the Treasury, could it go back into the program to help with the
retooling. That would be one way that it could be fashioned that we could
possibly support.

Q Dana, do you know what the extra benefits will cost?

MS. PERINO: Which benefits -- the UI benefits? I don't, but we'll get them
for you.

Elaine.

Q I have two topics.

MS. PERINO: Okay.

Q The first one is the Endangered Species Act. Could you just clarify what
the administration is seeking by way of a rule change? Would it, in fact,
eliminate the requirement that agencies consult with independent scientists
before moving forward with --

MS. PERINO: I don't have it with me, Elaine. I mean, I know conceptually
what we support, and I know that the Endangered Species Act is a tangled
web that doesn't actually help support any species, including our own. So
I'll refer you to Interior Department for that. (Laughter.)

Q So you're proposing eliminating the agency? (Laughter.)

MS. PERINO: No.

Q All right. And I know this was touched on yesterday in the briefing about
APEC, but if you could just talk about the idea that APEC, this tour of the
President, is it sort of a -- is there a farewell component to it in any
way, shape, or form? I know there's serious business that's being dealt
with.

MS. PERINO: Every meeting or foreign trip the President has gone on this
year has been called his farewell tour. And some people thought they would
never see him again and then look what happened at the G20 -- we had
everybody here where the President saw all those leaders again. So we've
long -- the President's gone to APEC every year. He thinks it's a very
important meeting, that we continue to be engaged with all those Asian
Pacific countries. And so he's looking forward to the meeting. It's a quick
trip. We leave tomorrow morning and we're back Sunday night so that we can
get ready for another week here.

Bret.

Q Member of Congress are talking about the CIA Inspector General report
that has been finished, about an incident in April 2001, where a plane was
shot down in Peru because it was suspected of being drug traffickers;
instead, it was a family of missionaries inside that plane. And the
Inspector General's report said that CIA personnel misled and even lied to
Congress about what happened. Do you have anything on this?

MS. PERINO: I don't. I'd have to refer you to the CIA. I'm aware of the
report, that it was coming out and aware of the issue, but I'd have to
refer you to them for comment.

Roger.

Q Back to APEC, did you say the transcripts from the interviews today were
going to be available later today?

MS. PERINO: They will be -- well, it depends on, as soon as they -- as soon
as those outlets can get -- can use them first, and then we'll put them
out. So that's usually the way it works.

Q So it may or may not --

MS. PERINO: It depends on when they use them, and as soon as they do, we'll
get them to you.

Q Are there any -- I didn't see any press avails at APEC at all.

MS. PERINO: No, there's a couple of bilats that the President has and a
trilat here and there.

Q All closed press --

MS. PERINO: No, some of them are pool.

Q One is Peru and that's at the bottom.

MS. PERINO: Yes, I think that's the only one at the bottom, and I think he
has pool at the top with China. But I wouldn't expect a lot of news to be
made on this trip, but the President is going to continue to talk about the
economy. They just -- a lot -- several of the leaders were here just last
week for the G20 summit. He'll be able to follow up on that, but expand
that conversation with many other countries who are not part of the G20.

Q Would you expect any readouts from the bilats?

MS. PERINO: Yes, sure. I'll be there and be able to provide that.

Q Thank you.

MS. PERINO: Thank you. Good job, Terry. (Laughter.)

END 11:24 A.M. EST
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/11/20081120-2.html