22 January 2003
"Large Majorities" in U.S. Support Use of Force Against Iraq, Official Says
(Senior administration official responds to reporters' questions on recent polls) (1570) "Large majorities" of the American people continue to support the use of force against the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq, if that becomes necessary, a senior administration official said January 22. If the President goes to the country and says the use of force is necessary to disarm Iraq, "you can expect the strong majorities that currently exist to actually go up," the official said as he answered reporters'questions on Air Force One as they accompanied President Bush on a day trip to St. Louis, Missouri. The official was responding to questions about public opinion polls, notably Washington Post poll results published January 22 that showed some decline in public support in recent weeks for use of force against Iraq. "(W)hat you're looking at is the mood of the country and whether or not the country thinks that war is the right thing to do. That is the fundamental issue, if it gets to that point. And by every public poll, the country's opinions have been remarkably solid and strong over a rather sustained period of time, and I don't see that changing. Because I think history shows that in the event that the President makes his case to the country, the numbers have a tendency to actually go up," the official said. Following is a transcript of the official's remarks: (begin transcript) THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary (St. Louis, Missouri) January 22, 2003 BACKGROUND BRIEFING BY A SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL Aboard Air Force One En Route St. Louis, Missouri SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: The following portion is on background. Let's look at actual survey data on the fundamental question, which is, if it becomes a matter of war, what this will come down to, which is, do the American people support or oppose the use of force against Saddam Hussein. The Washington Post reported today, 57-41 support for using force. In December it was 62-35; in September it was 61-34. And you go back in time and find that the numbers in The Washington Post poll have fluctuated within that very narrow range of upper 50s to low 60s of support for use of force. That is a strong majority of the American people. Fox poll, January of '03, 67-25; October, 62-27; Pew poll, 68-25; October, 55-34. According to Pew, it's gone up dramatically. CBS, January of '03, 64-30; October, 64-25. CNN-USA-Gallup, January of '03, 56-38; October, 54-40. CNN-Time, 60-33 in January; 57-33 in November. So, according to CNN-Time, it's actually gone up. According to CNN-Time in January, does the discovery of the empty chemical warheads show that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction, 71-21. I can take the data back even farther, if you want to go back -- in August, the numbers remain the same. August in Newsweek, 62-31. January of Newsweek, 63-31. August of Fox, 69-22; January, 67-25. I could go on and on and on. The point remains the same, large majorities of the American people continue to support the use of force to disarm Saddam Hussein. Q: Why is that the key issue? Why isn't the key issue that inspectors need to get more time before use of force is called for? SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Because if and when -- if it gets to that point that the President says not only time is running out, but time has run out, and the President makes that case to the country, the real issue the country is going to ask itself is, do we or don't we support the use of force. If the President goes to the country, I think you can expect the strong majorities that currently exist to actually go up. Q: But he said yesterday Saddam has already had ample time. Why do we need more time? That's what he said yesterday. SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: The President has said that if the moment comes where he makes a different determination about action, he will go to the country with that. But I think what you're looking at is the mood of the country and whether or not the country thinks that war is the right thing to do. That is the fundamental issue, if it gets to that point. And by every public poll, the country's opinions have been remarkably solid and strong over a rather sustained period of time, and I don't see that changing. Because I think history shows that in the event that the President makes his case to the country, the numbers have a tendency to actually go up. Q: So you guys are betting essentially that if the decision is made to go to war, that those questions about timing the public has, will be answered by the President going to the people and making a case -- that's what you guys are betting on? SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Again, the fundamental issue is, does the country support the use of force to disarm Saddam Hussein. And the other issues such as timing et cetera, it really comes down to whether or not the country trusts President Bush's judgment, knowing that he knows a lot more than the country knows. And again, the President -- if zero percent of the country supported this and the President thought it was necessary to protect the country, he would make the judgments that he thought were in the country's interest. If 70 percent thought it was necessary, he'd make the same judgments. He won't be guided by the polls, but it is a relevant question and I can shed some insight for you, based on what the public polls show. There is a large database of public opinion surveys to look at, and to look at over a sustained course of time. So The Washington Post poll that's out today tracks with similar Washington Post polls which have had it in this relatively narrow range of upper 50s to low 60s. Virtually all the other polls have a similar range that moves narrowly in the low 60s to mid-60s. It's all reflections of large majority support. Q: We're those polls asking, do you support removing Saddam Hussein, or were they asking, do you support if there's U.N. approval? Acting with the United Nations, as opposed to acting alone. SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: CNN-Times: Regardless of whether you think the U.S. should or should not use ground troops to remove Saddam Hussein from power, do you think the U.S. would be morally justified or morally unjustified to send troops to Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein? Morally justified, 66; morally unjustified, 28. Newsweek: Would you support using military force against Iraq, or not? Fox: Do you support or oppose U.S. military action to disarm Iraq and remove Iraqi President Saddam Hussein? Pew: Would you favor or oppose military action to end Saddam Hussein's rule? All the polls that I cited, including The Washington Post poll, are similar formulations of the fundamental question, do you support or oppose the use of force to remove Saddam Hussein. And then there's, unarguably, there are follow-up questions that get into some of the nuances, U.N. approval or not; wait, more time, or not. I think these are important secondary questions, but they don't change the fundamental issue, which, again, is what I think, if it comes down to it, is the question the country will ask itself: Do we support or oppose the President's judgment about the use of force? If you look back, actually, at President Clinton's ratings and President Reagan's ratings -- in October of '84 for Reagan, and October of '96 for Clinton -- they had numbers identical to the President's 58 percent rating under -- Q: I'm sorry, which years? October -- SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: October of 1984 and October of 1996, former President Clinton and former President Reagan, on their way to smashing landslide victories, had numbers virtually identical to the President's today. Of course, the Gallup Poll that had the President going from 63 to 58 made it on the front page of one of the nation's newspapers. The Gallup Poll where the President's ratings went from 58 percent to 61 percent was barely a blip. We understand that's how it works. Q: But you don't pay attention to polls, right? (Laughter.) SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: August, august. But we don't pay attention to polls. (Laughter.) So the level of job approval for the President, if it's any indication, is identical to former President Reagan's and former President Clinton's in October of their reelection years when they won huge victories. Just to put it in some type of perspective. The other factor, too, when you look at polling, broadly speaking, is both President Reagan and President Clinton had job approval ratings that dipped down into the 40s in their first terms, on their way to overwhelming reelection. So, again, this President continues to enjoy unparalleled levels of high support on an unparalleled, long, sustained basis from the public. But we don't pay attention to polls. Q: When are we going to see those 40s? When are we going to see the 40s, then, Ari? (Laughter.) SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: In 4 years. (Laughter.) (end transcript) (Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
