Press Briefing by Dee Dee Myers

The Briefing Room

1:25 P.M. EDT

MS. MYERS: Good afternoon. A couple of quick announcements. We have good news on a couple fronts. First, a statement from the President on the confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

"I'm extremely pleased at the swift and determined action by the U.S. Senate in overwhelmingly confirming Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the United States Supreme Court. I want to thank Chairman Biden, Senator Hatch and their colleagues on the Judiciary Committee, and the Senate as a whole for the prompt consideration of her nomination.

"As President, I am proud of having nominated such an outstanding jurist who demonstrated in the confirmation process tremendous intellect, integrity, comprehension of the law, and compassion for the concerns of all Americans. I am confident that she will be an outstanding addition to the Court and will serve with distinction for many years."

In addition, as you all know by now, the Senate passed the National and Community Service Trust Act by a vote of 58 to 41, with seven Republicans voting aye. That's obviously good news. We've again broken gridlock, one more step toward breaking gridlock, and that's very good news.

Q: When is she going to be sworn in?

MS. MYERS: I don't have the details on that yet. We'll let you know as soon as we have them.

Questions.

Q: It will be here at the White House?

MS. MYERS: I think we'll have something here at the White House, and as soon as we have the details we'll let you know.

Q: Are you still confident --

Q: On what? Question.

MS. MYERS: The question was, are you doing something here at the White House for Justice Ginsburg. And the answer was, probably, and as soon as we have the details we'll let you know.

Q: Senator Johnston says he's going to vote against the plan. Were you counting on his vote in order to get it passed in the Senate?

MS. MYERS: No. I don't -- we have not counted on his vote. But I think that our prognosis stands that we expect we will have the votes. When all is said and done, this will pass both the House and Senate.

Q: Well, that's one down. Whose vote are you counting on?

MS. MYERS: Well --

Q: Let's go down the list.

MS. MYERS: Yes, let's not. I think that -- you know, these things -- the sort of shifting dynamic that occurs, as you know. And we expect this will be extremely close. I don't know that we'll have it locked up before the votes are actually cast. But when the tally is taken, I think we'll have the votes we need.

Q: The 38 Democrats who voted against the budget before have asked to meet with the President, and I wonder if he's going to do that.

MS. MYERS: That's the first I've heard of it and we'll let you know as soon as we have an answer.

Q: I know it's sort of late coming.

MS. MYERS: Pardon me?

Q: I said it's late coming.

MS. MYERS: Okay. Yes, I'll check.

Q: Is the President going up to the Hill tomorrow morning? To the House Democratic Caucus?

MS. MYERS: I think there's -- excuse me -- a very good chance that he will. It's very likely.

Q: To the House Caucus?

MS. MYERS: To the House Democratic Caucus, yes. He's been invited.

Q: Dee Dee, what's your impression of why the United States got what it wanted on Bosnia this time when it couldn't get it a few months ago? Did the U.S. representative in Brussels go in with a tougher position to begin with -- we're going to do this, and you can do it with us or not?

MS. MYERS: I think it's a different set of circumstances. First, this is a slightly -- well, a different policy than the lift and strike policy which is still the preferred U.S. position. This was slightly different than that. I also think circumstances in Bosnia have changed. The strangulation of Sarajevo is of great concern to the United States and to our allies, and that is a situation which we're watching very closely. So I think these things together -- I also think that attacks on the peacekeepers there have certainly made a difference. And I think that this sends a clear statement, the agreement yesterday, that the lessons of Mogadishu ought not be ignored, that attacks on peacekeepers will be responded to.

Q: But did the U.S. go in with a tougher position?

MS. MYERS: Well, I think we were very committed to taking action. We always believed that our allies would come with us.

Q: More committed than last time around?

MS. MYERS: No, we were very committed last time, too. We went to this, though -- again, I want to emphasize that circumstances have changed. This is a different position --circumstances on the ground in Bosnia have changed and the tax on the peacekeepers, I think, all made for a different set of circumstances.

But we're very grateful for the agreement that happened in Brussels yesterday, and we're moving forward.

Q: Well, the allies changed then.

Q: How will the decision be made on when you actually strike? And will it be a U.S. decision or a joint decision? And what are the triggers for the actual strikes?

MS. MYERS: Well, as was made clear yesterday coming out of Brussels, it will be something that's done in conjunction and consultation with the U.N. As you know, the military authorities will meet to determine the command and control structure and work out some of the other details. And then we'll go forward from there. NATO will have to meet again at some point to consider this. But the next step is the recommendations from the military authorities.

Q: Is this something that could be carried out quickly, though? Or are we talking a long way down the road?

MS. MYERS: Well, again, the next step is the military authorities have to work out the details like the command and control structure and other things, then they'll go back to NATO. I think, obviously there is some urgency attached to this, but I don't have a firm time line.

Q: What is the difference in the situation on the ground and the political situation now that caused you to finally take some action? What's the difference between when they were killing people in smaller towns than killing people in Sarajevo?

MS. MYERS: Well, I think that --

Q: What's he talking about?

MS. MYERS: The question was, again, what's changed, what's the difference on the ground in Bosnia now, as compared to in May? I think that, certainly, the circumstances are much more dire --

Q: Dire, in what sense?

MS. MYERS: Well, Sarajevo, I think is threatened in a way that it wasn't previously threatened. I think that's a key strategic point in Bosnia. I think also that water supplies and power supplies have been cut off, humanitarian deliveries are being interfered with in a way that they weren't previously. U.N. peacekeepers are being attacked. And I wouldn't -- then there are things like the World Health Organization's report that with winter coming, if something isn't done the humanitarian consequences would be dire.

Q: They said that last winter. I mean, is it the number of people who are faced with harm or --

MS. MYERS: That, and the strategic importance of Sarajevo and the symbolic --

Q: Strategic to what?

MS. MYERS: For the Bosnian state. And I think the symbolic importance of Sarajevo is important as well. If we're going to have a negotiated settlement, it is our view that we have to protect Sarajevo. And we're continuing to press. Our goals remain the same, that -- to prevent further humanitarian deterioration and to do what we can to reach a negotiated settlement, which has always been our goal.

Q: Will you use force to break the siege before winter? Is that an unofficial deadline?

MS. MYERS: I think that we've made it clear that we're willing to use air strikes and other efforts to prevent further humanitarian deterioration, to prevent the strangulation of Sarajevo. Now, the specific details as to how and when are something that will be worked out. The next step is the military authorities have to come back to the U.N. with some recommendations on command and control. So I can't speak to the specifics, but I think the intent is clear -- that the allies are willing to take additional action, including air strikes, to stop the strangulation of Sarajevo, to stop the potential humanitarian disaster, and to continue to push for a negotiated settlement.

Q: Well, recognizing you can't put a deadline or a time line on it, the fact that you site the WHO report about the problems impending with winter, does that not suggest that force would be used to break the siege prior to the onset of cold weather?

MS. MYERS: I think clearly the onset of cold weather and the reports about the potential consequences were a factor here. But, again, I'm not going to comment specifically on what the time line might be.

Q: When is he going to consult with Congress?

MS. MYERS: Those discussions have been ongoing for months, as you know.

Q: No, no, just a little -- chairman in there. That's not Congress.

MS. MYERS: Oh, we've had a number of conversations with members and we'll continue that.

Q: But the full Congress in a formal way. He's supposed to do it -- go up there and get permission, according to the Constitution.

MS. MYERS: I don't believe that's necessary.

Q: That's right. And when he went into Baghdad he went in there without any permission or anything at all and he violated the Constitution.

MS. MYERS: I think we have made it clear that we intend to continue to act consistent with the War Powers Act.

Q: What's she saying, that Clinton went into Baghdad?

MS. MYERS: We went to Baghdad without congressional authority.

Q: Who went to Baghdad?

MS. MYERS: We had a little attack on there a while ago. (Laughter.)

Q: Oh, you mean the bombing. Oh, I thought there may have been a trip I missed. (Laughter.)

MS. MYERS: Oh, no.

Q: You didn't see the sign-up sheet for that trip? (Laughter.)

Q: It was a family pool. (Laughter.)

Q: It's nothing to joke about.

Q: Awwwww.

Q: -- go back to the North Atlantic Council.

MS. MYERS: Pardon me?

Q: You mentioned you have to go back to the North Atlantic Council to get a firm NATO go-ahead before actual strikes occur. Do you also have to return to the U.N. Security Council for a new resolution, or do you find the authority in the previous resolution having to do with all means necessary for delivery of humanitarian aid?

MS. MYERS: Yes, we believe that this action is consistent with existing U.N. Resolution 770, which authorizes any means necessary to protect humanitarian assistance.

Q: So you're not planning to go back to the Security Council for new authority?

MS. MYERS: We don't believe that's necessary.

Q: Wait a minute, you say consistent with that. Do you believe it's authorized by that or merely consistent with it?

MS. MYERS: No, we believe it's permissible under 770. It's allowed by 770.

Q: Will there be any mention of Bosnia tonight in his speech? How long will the address tonight be?

MS. MYERS: The address is approximately 20 minutes and will focus specifically on the economy.

Q: And then tomorrow his plan is to go to the Democratic Caucus at 8:30 a.m., the Urban League speech at 10:30 a.m., and what else is on his agenda?

MS. MYERS: The rest of the schedule is still sort of coming together. I think that we're fairly certain he's going to go up for the Democratic Caucus.

Q: What about the rest of the week?

MS. MYERS: Still unclear. We'll see how things develop. I think we're leaving a lot of flexibility on Thursday and Friday as the House and Senate considers the final package.

Q: Anything firmed up for next week?

MS. MYERS: Not yet.

Q: For those of us who have to write early addition stories, could you characterize the speech a little bit, what he hopes to accomplish, that kind of thing?

MS. MYERS: The speech is intended to lay out -- to talk about the economic plan, that it is consistent with his stated principles and what it will do, the benefits it will provide, for example, for -- he'll talk about how it will achieve $500 billion or roughly $500 billion in deficit reduction, that 80 percent of new taxes fall on people who make more than $200,000 a year, that the plan is very fair, that there will be an earned income tax credit that rewards work -- all the things you've heard us talk about --that 90 percent of small businesses will actually get a tax cut under this plan, that it will create jobs and get the economy moving.

At the same time, I think he'll emphasize the stakes here; there is no alternative, there is no other plan. And I think it is hard to imagine that a conference or some other budget deal would provide more deficit reduction, more investment, or more prospects for job growth.

Q: Why is that hard to imagine?

MS. MYERS: Because there's just no precedent for it.

Q: Well, he said this morning that you've got to come back anyway and do more.

MS. MYERS: Well, I think that's -- if this deal passes and you lock in $500 billion in deficit reduction, then you can move forward and talk about additional spending cuts. I think that's something the President indicated today and has said all along he would be willing to do. But I think since you have pressure on one side for additional spending cuts and pressure on another side for more investments, the thing that gets lost in the mix is potentially deficit reduction. And the President has said all along he wants $500 billion in deficit reduction; it looks like we'll get about 99 percent of the way there.

Q: Will all the major networks carry the speech?

MS. MYERS: I believe so. Yes, that's what we're told, that all four networks will carry it.

Q: Dee Dee, will there be an appeal by the President for people to call their members of Congress and ask them to support it? Will he be that specific?

MS. MYERS: I don't know that there will be a direct appeal, but I think I said yesterday we certainly wouldn't urge people away from that.

Q: Can you explain, Dee Dee, what the President meant this morning when he was talking about the retroactivity to January? He was somewhat apologetic that that was in there. What was that all about?

MS. MYERS: Well, I think that -- the President's original proposal was retroactive. It would have tax increases on wealthy income earners starting January 1st. The tax cuts are also retroactive under the President's plan. For example, the capital gains provision is retroactive, the expensing provision for small businesses is retroactive. But what the President was pointing out was that this was just something that was, as they tried to protect the President's investments and the $500 billion in deficit reduction, it became necessary to meet his objectives was a Congressional decision, one that was in his original proposal.

Q: He spoke as if he regretted it.

MS. MYERS: Well, I think it was taken out in the Senate proposal and then we had reached an agreement on that. I think he was comfortable with that; if you could meet the deficit reduction and the investment targets. But the conferees found that difficult to do.

Q: Let me see if I have this right. The President supported having it the beginning of January. He supported moving it to the middle of the year. And now he moved it back and he supports that, too.

MS. MYERS: He can live with it. I think it helps the package to meet his goals. It was something the conferees decided to do.

Q: Dee Dee, to follow up on that, what did he mean, then, when he said that he would hope to have some options to offset the retroactivity or was he referring to the underwithholding? It wasn't clear what he meant by that when he said he hopes to have some options to offset it.

MS. MYERS: I'll have to take that. But I think he partly was referring to the fact that a lot of the tax cut provisions are retroactive. And I will check and see if there's any other specifics that may be coming down the line.

Q: Dee Dee, you described the tug-of-war between the people who want more investment and the people who want more spending cuts. As the President tries to address that in his speech tonight, which side wins out?

MS. MYERS: I think a good balance of deficit -- you have $500 billion in deficit reduction, investments that will help create jobs and get the economy moving again.

Q: Well, I guess -- let me rephrase it then. Not that you'll answer it, but I'll try to rephrase it. What does the President determine to be a more effective way of winning support for this in the next few days? I mean, assuming you have other votes, as you say, maybe this isn't as important, but if you don't have --there are still some votes wavering, which one of those two competing interests is more important for the President to articulate?

MS. MYERS: What? Investment of deficit reduction?

Q: Investment or spending cuts.

MS. MYERS: Well, I think people want to make sure there's a good balance of both. Obviously, I think some members of the Senate have said that they're problem is that it doesn't include enough spending cuts, although there are $254 billion in spending cuts. Others have said, and particularly members of the House have said that they're worried that there's not enough investment. We believe that this strikes a balance that will allow it to pass both Houses and maintain the President's commitment to deficit reduction.

Q: What do you say, for instance, to Senator Lieberman, who said this morning that he still didn't think there were enough investment cuts?

MS. MYERS: Enough spending cuts?

Q: I'm sorry, enough investment incentives.

MS. MYERS: Well, I think that there are a lot of investment incentives, things that the President has talked about continually throughout this process. Obviously, the President proposed more in his original plan, but through the congressional process, ended up with a package that he thinks will create jobs, does invest in our future in a way that's productive.

I think that democracy is an inherently sometimes messy process, but I think the President believes that the final package, it contains both an adequate number of spending cuts -- $254 billion -- plus enough investments to create jobs and get the economy moving again. I think he believes that this package provides a fundamental shift in direction away from trickle down and away from tax and spend, perhaps, of the '70s, toward a new direction that is more investment and growth oriented. I think he feels good about the results of this.

Q: Which House and Senate conferees has the President spoken with last night and today? And can you tell us is he zeroing in on a certain number or a certain -- specific names that you can tell us to try and win them over to the package?

MS. MYERS: No, I don't have a list, and I think the President is going to continue to talk to a number of members over the course of the next few days, starting with the House Democratic Caucus tomorrow.

Q: You don't know who he spoke with today?

MS. MYERS: I don't have a list.

Q: What's he doing today?

MS. MYERS: He's spending some time working on his speech. He's had several meetings this morning. He's meeting with the -- some of the opinion leaders from Oklahoma and then doing regional media from Nevada.

Q: Will we get a text tonight before --

MS. MYERS: I hope so, but I can't guarantee it. I mean, we'll do the best we can.

Q: What time?

MS. MYERS: As soon as it's ready.

Q: Will there be any excerpts released in advance?

MS. MYERS: Depends on when it's ready. I think that's possible, but if we have a text in advance. But it just depends on how the process goes.

Q: What about Shirley Chader? Is there any concern about her failure to pay Social Security taxes?

MS. MYERS: No, and let me get -- I'm glad you asked that. She apparently had -- between 1969 and 1975 had a number of different domestic help people that would come in, did not pay Social Security taxes on them since she had a number of different ones. From 1975 on, she had a full-time person for whom she paid Social Security taxes. Nonetheless, she's gone back, calculated what they owed in back taxes, and paid those recently. That is consistent with the administration's position on the Social Security tax issue, which is that people have to be current. They have to be up-to-date. Certainly there is a precedent for people who have made that mistake and gone on to be confirmed.

Q: How recently did she pay them?

MS. MYERS: I don't have a date. I think within the context of the last few months.

Q: When do they have to be current?

Q: Since she was nominated?

MS. MYERS: I don't know.

Q: What does current mean?

MS. MYERS: They have to be current before they're nominated. She's expected to be nominated later -- officially nominated later today. In order to be nominated, you have to have --

Q: Do you have to have been current, or do you have to get current before the nomination?

MS. MYERS: You have to get current.

Q: In other words, you have to pay up, then you can be nominated?

MS. MYERS: Essentially. I mean -- and I think in the context of this -- this, again, was for a brief period from 1969 to 1975. It's not that brief -- six years. But -- (laughter) -- but I think it's important to note that she voluntarily -- she complied with the law from 1975 on when she had a single person --

Q: Did she find everybody in those six years?

Q: Are any of them still alive?

MS. MYERS: I don't think it matters. You don't have to pay them any money; you have to pay the government money. But I think her records reflect --

Q: In other words, this is not for the benefit of the help; it's for the benefit of the government?

Q: It's for deficit reduction.

MS. MYERS: I don't make the rules.

Q: -- democracy is inherently messy.

Q: So it's more than one person? It was not a single baby-sitter?

MS. MYERS: I don't know on whom -- she had a -- the distinction here is that they had a number of people who worked for short periods of time or at the same time. They didn't pay Social Security taxes until they had a full-time person. Now I can go back if you want to know how many that she owed back taxes on. But the point is she's current, she paid Social Security taxes on her household help from '75 -- oh, it's only one person I'm informed.

Q: And secondly, is it a problem on the Hill, given the particular job that she's up for, because it is --

MS. MYERS: We don't believe so. We don't believe it's an obstacle to her nomination. Again, this is something that happened nearly 20 years ago and she is current.

Q: What is the President doing after his speech tonight? There's a private event at the Hyatt. What is that?

MS. MYERS: It is an event for Jack Brooks.

Q: Is there any expectation that this speech tonight will change any specific Senate votes? And if that's not the expectation, then why do you need to do it?

MS. MYERS: I think the expectation is that the speech will help as the President continues to build support for this plan, and he continues to let the American people know what's in it. As people -- over the course of the past couple of weeks, I think, the President and others have done a particularly good job in explaining what's in the package, what's at stake, how it will benefit them, who pays, who benefits. And as that has happened, I think that there's been an increase in support. I think this is one more step in that direction. It's an opportunity for him to talk directly to the American people about what's at stake in this package. And we do expect that to build support for it.

Q: Dee Dee, any new word on the Vince Foster investigation? When it will be wrapped up, that sort of thing?

MS. MYERS: Nothing new from yesterday.

Q: Are White House people still being questioned?

MS. MYERS: Not that I know of, but I'll take that. I don't think so.

Q: The President keeps mentioning, though, there's more to come in the way of spending cuts down the line, and one example he keeps giving is the National Performance Review when it comes out next month. Do you have a ballpark figure of how much in the way of savings?

MS. MYERS: Not yet, but we will. Obviously something that the National Performance Review set out to do was to find ways to make government operate more efficiently. And we'll have an announcement on that soon.

Q: Anything on travel next week?

MS. MYERS: No, other than I think we will travel one, perhaps two days.

And I don't have any details on that yet.

Q: You've got one -- two days plus Thursday and Friday, right?

MS. MYERS: Yes, I'm sorry. Before we leave for Denver.

Q: So, in other words, some travel four days?

Q: Two day trips?

MS. MYERS: Yes. Well, the President -- before he leaves Washington for the period which we talked about yesterday, which is the 12th through the 26th. So, in other words, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday he could travel one or two of those days next week. And then, of course, he leaves on Thursday to go to Denver and doesn't come back to Washington until the 26th.

Q: Dee Dee, what effect do you think the President's showing a resolve in Bosnia will have as he negotiates with members of Congress on a domestic budget plan?

MS. MYERS: That's -- I don't have any idea what effect that will have. I think, though, that this has been a very good week for the President -- or it's shaping up to be a good week, put it that way. Obviously, I think he's very pleased with the results yesterday in Brussels. We have the Supreme Court nominee confirmed today as well as a couple of other nominees -- Tom Payzant over at the Department of Education and Sheldon Hackney at NEH; Louis Freeh passed out of the Judiciary Committee. Obviously, we're very pleased about the national service results. So it's shaping up to be a very good week, and I think all of it together is having an effect on Congress.

Q: A related question if I might, and that is everybody on the Hill seems to say that you do have the votes on both sides of the House, and yet you continue to low-ball it down here. What's the purpose of low-balling it?

MS. MYERS: I don't think we're trying to -- I think we're very determined not to take any votes for granted. We're not going to take one vote for granted. We're going to continue to work it up until the time that the last vote is counted.

Q: But you're not in doubt about the outcome?

MS. MYERS: I think we've said we're going to work very hard. We expect it to be close, but ultimately we expect it to pass in both the House and Senate.

Q: Dee Dee, related to that, Congressman Stenholm is talking about maybe getting together with a handful of conservative Democrats in the House and opposing the bill and hoping to come back with another bill that doesn't have an energy tax at all. Has the President spoken to him? Are you confident that Stenholm will vote for the package in the end?

MS. MYERS: I think we'll have to wait and see how Congressman Stenholm votes. We certainly wouldn't take his vote for granted. The President believes that this is a good package, that it's fair, that the energy tax in it is reasonable, that it comes at a very low cost to middle class voters -- about $30 a year -- and that it's inherently a good package and that Congress ought to pass it.

Q: What is your answer to the Republican charge that this is the biggest tax increase in history?

Q: Of the world. (Laughter.)

MS. MYERS: It's the biggest deficit reduction package in the history of the world. (Laughter.)

Q: So it could be both.

Q: So you don't have an answer for it, then? You let it stand -- that charge stand?

MS. MYERS: I'll have to check. I think that the 1990 package still stands as the biggest tax increase in history, but --and that was one, I would point out, Senator Dole supported.

Q: Do you mean to say they got more revenues out of the 1990 package than you're going to get out of this one?

MS. MYERS: I think we can make that case.

Q: I don't think you want to make that case, Dee Dee.

MS. MYERS: I said I'd have to get back to you, Brit, but --

Q: Please do.

MS. MYERS: I'd be happy to.

Q: Whatever happened to the Travel Office five? A couple of weeks ago you said the White House was working quickly to get new jobs. Do they have jobs? Are they still on administrative leave?

MS. MYERS: No, they're -- I think what we said was they're on administrative leave pending the results of the FBI investigation. So they're still on administrative leave. And I don't know what the status of other employment is.

Q: You were going to find them jobs elsewhere in government.

Q: They had held meetings with the White House Counsel's Office in the last three weeks, and they were told that they would be given jobs. It had nothing to do with the investigation.

MS. MYERS: They're still on administrative leave and being paid. And I will take the question of the exact status of that. But they're still being paid.

Q: Were you able to ascertain whether Vince Foster was, in fact, working as the private lawyer for Mr. and Mrs. Clinton and whether he was being paid separately --

MS. MYERS: Yes, he did handle -- made sure that -- he did handle business for the First Family, made sure that they were in compliance with necessary laws, and he was not compensated outside of his White House salary for that.

Q: Is that proper, Dee Dee, under ethics regulations?

MS. MYERS: Is what proper?

Q: His acting as a private lawyer at the same time he served in the job --

MS. MYERS: He wasn't acting as a private lawyer. It's within his responsibilities in the White House Counsel's Office that he was acting.

Q: The question you were asked is whether he was advising them about private matters apart from presidential matters.

MS. MYERS: Well, private matters would be things like putting their assets into a blind trust, which was one of the things --

Q: He was involved in that, too?

MS. MYERS: Somewhat, yes. But those are things -- I mean, it is within the purview of the Counsel's Office to handle those kind of issues -- issues dealing with the residents, issues dealing with the First Family within the context of the White House Counsel's Office.

Q: The question is whether he was doing for them things that they would otherwise have had to engage private attorneys or a private lawyer to do. Now, is it your position that these are actually job-related and presidencyrelated and, therefore, followed in the legitimate purview of the Counsel's Office, or is it your view that these things fall outside that, but he was doing them anyway?

MS. MYERS: He handled some matters for the First Family. I think that you probably need to talk to somebody who is more steeped in the law, and I'm happy to help you, provide that, as I told you a little while ago, today. So when this is over I can put you in touch with the right person to talk about the specific legal issues. I'm not a lawyer.

Q: Changing the subject, Senator Nickles put a hold on Dr. Elders for Surgeon General. Does the White House think this is just a symbolic gesture? What do you think?

MS. MYERS: I'm unaware of any action he might have taken. I will have to take that question. I don't know what's happened up there.

Q: Do you think there's any chance of getting her through this week?

MS. MYERS: I don't know.

Q: Are you doing anything to try to get it?

MS. MYERS: Again, that's the first I've heard of Senator Nickles taking any --

Q: He put a hold on it until after the recess.

Q: Well, I mean, you know that there's only three days left in the session and you know they haven't voted on her yet. I mean, are you expecting a vote?

MS. MYERS: I'd be happy to take the question, Mike. I don't know.

Q: Assuming that the budget passes, what kind of events would happen here over the weekend or next week? Would there be some sort of a ceremony with Democratic members of Congress. Would Senator Dole be invited? (Laughter.) What

would happen?

Q: How about Senator Boren? (Laughter.)

MS. MYERS: As soon as we have schedule details I'm happy to provide them.

We don't have any for Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday of next week.

Q: -- invite Senator Boren just so --

MS. MYERS: Absolutely, and Senator Dole.

Q: We'll be at the stakeout.

END 1:53 P.M. EDT