Hi, all. Today's report features:
POTUS & VPOTUS Address Governors: The President and Vice President speak to the Nation's governors about their plans to work with the states to help advance the President's goal of winning the future.
FLOTUS & SLOTUS Address Governors: First Lady Michelle Obama and Dr. Jill Biden welcome the Nation's governors to the White House and talk about their campaign to support America's military families.
A Toast to the Governors: President Obama toasts the nation's governors, saying that they have a partner in the White House as they deal with difficult economic times. Washington State Governor Christine Gregoire offers a toast to the President.
Health Care Update:Secretary Sebelius discusses the President's proposal to allow states greater flexibility in implementing health care plans.
White House Press Briefing: Mr. Carney is joined by U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice.
America's Great Outdoors Live Chat: Submit video questions on the intiative for Thursday's live chat.
Energy Update: The Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy encourages the most advanced clean energy innovations.
Winning the Future Forum on Small Business:Behind the scenes at the Cleveland forum.
POTUS & VPOTUS ADDRESS GOVERNORS
White House, Feb. 28, 2011:
President Obama and Vice President Biden Address National Governors Association
The President and Vice President speak to the Nation's governors, talking about their plans to work with the states to help advance the President's goal of winning the future. The President also announces a proposal to move up the date when states are allowed to implement their own health care plans as long as they meet the standards for affordability and coverage under the Affordable Care Act to 2014.
Office of the Press Secretary, Feb. 28, 2011:
Remarks by the President and the Vice President to the National Governors Association
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. I’m Joe Biden -- Jill Biden’s husband -- (laughter) -- which is how I’m getting to be known around here. You’re about to -- we decided to bring in the second team now to talk to you all. (Laughter.) Folks, welcome back to the White House. And for those of you who -- this is your first visit as governor, welcome and congratulations on your elections.
You know, over the last two years the new governors -- the older governors will tell you, or at least the ones who’ve been around for two years, will tell you they probably got tired of hearing from me. I was on the phone with you all so often during the Recovery Act. I know none of you liked the Recovery Act much. (Laughter.)
But I just want to start off by thanking the governors who’ve been here for the last two years for the way in which you implemented it. I just wanted to give you a little fact. There were over 75,000 individual projects that went on in your states and a total of 250,000 awards, meaning a check had to be cut to 250,000 different entities. And a group of IGs and outside examiners pointed out there’s less than 1/100th of 1 percent of fraud in the entire operation. And that’s because of you. That’s because of all of you. (Applause.) And it’s because of the mayors.
The new governors, although there’s no Recovery Act, there will a be continued relationship between the federal and state and local government, and we plan on trying to use that as a template as to how to move forward so we save taxpayers money.
The recovery is underway, although I’m sure a lot of you, having to cut your budgets, don’t feel it. It’s a very difficult time for you all. And I just want you to know that I think we probably can all agree on the major initiatives. We may have a different prioritization, but we all know we have to do something about the long-term debt. We all know that we have to do something about preparing ourselves to compete in the future in terms of education, innovation and infrastructure.
But I want to remind you all that -- I know you all know but sometimes our constituents, you look at some of the polling, they think we’ve already lost the future to China. They think we’ve already lost the future to India. They already think we are behind the eight ball.
We are still better positioned than any country in the world -- any country in the world -- to own the 21st century economically. Our GDP is bigger than that of China, Japan and Germany combined. We’re in a situation where here in the United States of America the median income is close to $50,000. In China, it’s $4,500. We wish them better. But just to put this in perspective, it’s important to know where we stand now, the platform from which we now operate, and why if we do the right things we have an overwhelming prospect -- an overwhelming prospect -- of not only recovery here in the United States but leading the world in the 21st century.
The man I’m about to introduce to you shares your view. Americans have never settled for number two -- literally. This is not hyperbole. It’s not one of these chauvinistic things. We want other nations to do well. We’ll do better if they do well. But we are not -- we not -- prepared, nor are you, to settle for being number two in anything.
And so, folks, that's why we’ve laid out -- the President has laid out in his State of the Union speech the need for us to innovate. We have the most innovative economy in the world. We have the freest of free-enterprise systems. We know what we’re doing. We want to unleash the free-enterprise system.
We also know that we cannot rank tied with five nations for number nine in the world in the percentage of people we graduate from our universities. It’s not acceptable. It’s simply not acceptable. That's why by 2020, we will, in fact, be once again leading the world as we did in the past. That is a goal, a goal we will meet. As my wife you just heard from, a community college teacher, would say, any nation that out-educates us is going to out-compete us. It’s as simple and as basic as that.
And thirdly, we cannot have a 20th century infrastructure for the 21st century -- a 20th century infrastructure, as all of you know, that in fact is already in some areas teetering on needing major, major repairs. And by infrastructure, we not only mean ports, road, airports; we also mean modern infrastructure from broadband to the new changes that are going to have to take place for what reason -- to make American business more competitive, to make American employees more hire-able, if you will. There’s no such word, but able to be hired. (Laughter.) But the neighborhood I come from people understand what I say. (Laughter.)
And so, folks, look, I just want to introduce you to the guy who -- as I said, we’ll disagree in the details, but I’m sure you share this man’s view, there is no -- no, no, no -- acceptable rationale for America being anything other than number one in the world.
Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States of America. (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Please have a seat. Thank you so much. Well, thank you, Joe. Thank you to the members of my Cabinet and my administration who are here. Thank you, Governor Gregoire and Governor Heineman, for your outstanding leadership. And I also want to acknowledge Ray Scheppach. Where’s Ray? There he is -- who’s been NGA’s executive director for 28 years, and this is his final meeting. So, Ray, thank you for your extraordinary service. (Applause.) Thank you.
So I hope everybody had fun last night. I know that you had a wonderful time listening to Michelle and Jill. Joe’s main function is to provide a buffer between me and them so that I don’t have to follow them immediately -- (laughter) -- because they are really good and care deeply about what’s happening with military families.
I hope today, all of you, feel free to make yourselves at home. For those of you with a particular interest in the next election, I don’t mean that literally. (Laughter.)
We meet at a moment when all of us -- Democrats and Republicans, leaders at the national and the state levels -- face some very big challenges. Our country has come through a long and wrenching recession. And as we recover, the question we’re going to have to answer is: Where will the new jobs come from? What will the new sources of economic growth be? And how can we make sure that the American Dream remains a reality into the 21st century?
Now, in the short term, we came together here in Washington at the end of last year and enacted tax cuts that are already making Americans’ paychecks bigger and are allowing businesses to write off major investments. These are tax cuts and changes in the tax credit system that are going to spur job creation and economic growth, and I’m proud that Democrats and Republicans worked with each other to get it done.
In the long term, however, we need to address a set of economic challenges that, frankly, the housing bubble largely papered over for almost a decade. We now live in a world that’s more connected and more competitive than ever before. When each of you tries to bring new jobs and industries to your state, you’re not just competing with each other, but you’re competing with China, you’re competing with India, you’re competing with Brazil, you’re competing with countries all around the world.
And that means that we as a nation need to make sure that we are the best place on Earth to do business. We need a skilled and educated workforce, a commitment to cutting-edge research and technology, and a fast and reliable transportation and communications network. That’s how we’re going to bring new jobs to America, and that’s how we’re going to win the future.
Making these necessary investments would be hard at any time. But it’s that much harder at a time when resources are scarce. After living through a decade of deficits and a historic recession that made them worse, we can’t afford to kick the can down the road any longer. So the budget debate that we’re having is going to be critical here in Washington. And so far, most of it’s been focused almost entirely on how much of annual domestic spending -- what in the parlance we all domestic discretionary spending -- that we should cut. There’s no doubt that cuts in discretionary spending have to be a part of the answer for deficit reduction.
And that’s why, as a start, I’ve proposed a five-year spending freeze that will reduce our deficits by $400 billion. The budget that I sent to Congress cuts or eliminates more than 200 federal programs. And it reforms dozens of others, from health care to homeland security to education, so that rather than throwing money at programs with no accountability or measured results, we’re committed to funding only those things that work.
All told, the budget cuts I’ve proposed will bring annual domestic spending to its lowest share of the economy since Dwight Eisenhower. Let me repeat that. Under my budget, if it were to be adopted, domestic discretionary spending would be lower as a percentage of GDP than it was under the nine previous administrations, including under Ronald Reagan’s.
But we know that this kind of spending, domestic discretionary spending, which has been the focus of complaints about out-of-control federal spending, makes up only about 12 percent of the entire budget. If we truly want to get our deficit under control, then we're going to have to cut excessive spending wherever it exists -- in defense spending -- and I have to say that Bob Gates has been as good a steward of taxpayer dollars when it comes to the Pentagon as just about anybody out there, but we're going to have to do more -- in health care spending, on programs like Medicare and Medicaid, and in spending through tax breaks and loopholes. That’s going to be a tough conversation to have, but it’s one we need to have, and it’s one I expect to have with congressional leaders in the weeks to come.
Those of you who are in this room obviously are on the front lines of this budget debate. As the Recovery Act funds that saw through many states over the last two years are phasing out -- and it is undeniable that the Recovery Act helped every single state represented in this room manage your budgets, whether you admit it or not -- you face some very tough choices at this point on everything from schools to prisons to pensions.
I also know that many of you are making decisions regarding your public workforces, and I know how difficult that can be. I recently froze the salaries of federal employees for two years. It wasn’t something that I wanted to do, but I did it because of the very tough fiscal situation that we’re in.
So I believe that everybody should be prepared to give up something in order to solve our budget challenges, and I think most public servants agree with that. Democrats and Republicans agree with that. In fact, many public employees in your respective states have already agreed to cuts.
But let me also say this: I don’t think it does anybody any good when public employees are denigrated or vilified or their rights are infringed upon. We need to attract the best and the brightest to public service. These times demand it. We’re not going to attract the best teachers for our kids, for example, if they only make a fraction of what other professionals make. We’re not going to convince the bravest Americans to put their lives on the line as police officers or firefighters if we don’t properly reward that bravery.
So, yes, we need a conversation about pensions and Medicare and Medicaid and other promises that we’ve made as a nation. And those will be tough conversations, but necessary conservations. As we make these decisions about our budget going forward, though, I believe that everyone should be at the table and that the concept of shared sacrifice should prevail. If all the pain is borne by only one group -- whether it’s workers, or seniors, or the poor -- while the wealthiest among us get to keep or get more tax breaks, we’re not doing the right thing. I think that’s something that Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on.
Now, as we begin to get our budgets under control, the other thing we can’t do is sacrifice our future. Even as we cut back on those things that don’t add to growth or opportunity for our people, we have to keep investing in those things that are absolutely necessary to America’s success -- education, innovation, infrastructure.
On education, our approach has been to partner with you -- to offer more flexibility in exchange for better standards; to lift the cap on charter schools; to spur reform not by imposing it from Washington, but by asking you to come up with some of the best ways for your states to succeed. That was the idea behind Race to the Top: You show us the best plans for reform; we’ll show you the money.
We’re also working with you and with Congress to fix No Child Left Behind with a focus on reform, responsibility and, most importantly, results. And we’re trying to give states and schools more flexibility to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for bad teachers, because we know that the single most important factor in a child’s success other than their parents is the man or woman at the front of the classroom.
And I had a chance to see this recently. I went over to Parkville Middle School in Maryland, where engineering is now the most popular subject, mainly thanks to some outstanding teachers who have inspired students to focus on their math and their science skills. So we know teachers can make a difference, and we want to help you have the very best teachers in the classroom.
We also have to invest in innovation -- in American research and technology, in the work of our scientists and engineers, and in sparking the creativity and imagination of our people.
Now, a lot of this obviously is done in the private sector. But as much as the private sector is the principal driver of innovation it’s often hesitant to invest in the unknown, especially when it comes to basic research. Historically, that's been a federal responsibility. It’s how we ended up with things like the computer chip and the GPS. It’s how we ended up with the Internet. It’s also how a lot of your states are already attracting jobs and industries of the future.
I went to Wisconsin, for example, a few weeks ago, and I visited a small-town company called Orion that’s putting hundreds of people to work manufacturing energy-efficient lights in a once-darkened plant. They benefited from federal research.
In Ohio and Pennsylvania, thanks in part to federal grants, I saw universities and businesses joining together to make America a world leader in biotechnology and in clean energy. And if you have any doubt about the importance of this federal investment in research and development, I would suggest that you talk to the cutting-edge businesses in your own states. They will tell you that if we want the next big breakthrough, the next big industry to be an American breakthrough, an American industry, then we can’t sacrifice these investments in research and technology.
The third way that we need to invest is in our infrastructure -- everything from new roads and bridges to high-speed rail and high-speed Internet -- projects that create hundreds of thousands of private sector jobs. And I know that in some of your states, infrastructure projects have garnered controversy. Sometimes they’ve gotten caught up in partisan politics.
This hasn’t traditionally been a partisan issue. Lincoln laid the rails during the course of a civil war. Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System. Both parties have always believed that America should have the best of everything. We don’t have third-rate airports and third-rate bridges and third-rate highways. That’s not who we are. We shouldn’t start going down that path.
New companies are going to seek out the fastest, most reliable ways to move people, goods, and information -- whether they’re in Chicago or they’re in Shanghai. And I want them to be here, in the United States. So to those who say that we can’t afford to make investments in infrastructure, I say we can’t afford not to make investments in infrastructure. We always have had the best infrastructure. The notion that somehow we’d give up that leadership at this critical juncture in our history makes no sense.
Just ask the folks that I met up in Marquette, Michigan -- I was talking to Rick Snyder about this -- up in the Upper Peninsula. This is a town of 20,000 people far away from the hustle and bustle of places like Detroit or Grand Rapids. But because of the wireless infrastructure that they have set up, they’ve now got -- the local department store, third generation family-owned department store, has been able to hook up with the university and have access to wireless, and they are now selling two-thirds of their goods online. They’re one of the 5,000 fastest growing companies in America -- up in the Upper Peninsula because the infrastructure was in place to allow them to succeed.
And you’ve got kids in schoolhouses in even more remote areas who are able to plug in to lectures and science fairs anywhere in America because of the infrastructure that was set up. That’s a smart investment for every state to make. And the federal government wants to be your partner in making those investments.
These are the kinds of investments that pay huge economic dividends in terms of jobs and growth. They are the fundamentals that allow some states to weather economic storms better than others. They’re the fundamentals that will make some states better positioned to win the future than others. These investments are not just critical for your state’s success; they’re critical for America’s success. And I want to be a partner in helping you make that happen.
Which brings me to the final topic that’s going to help determine our ability to win the future, and that’s getting control of our health care costs. Now, I am aware that I have not convinced everybody here to be a member of the Affordable Care Act fan club. But surely we can agree that for decades, our governments, our families, our businesses watched as health costs ate up more and more of their bottom line. There’s no disputing that. That didn’t just happen last year. It didn’t just happen two years ago. It’s been going on for years now.
We also know that the biggest driver of the federal debt is Medicare costs. Nothing else comes close. We could implement every cut that the House of Representatives right now has proposed and it would not make a dent in our long-term budget, wouldn’t make a dent in our long-term deficits -- because of healthcare costs. We know it’s one of the biggest strains in your state budgets -- Medicaid.
And for years, politicians of both parties promised one thing: real reform. Everybody talked about it. Well, we’ve decided to finally do something about it -- to create a structure that would preserve our system of private health insurance; would protect our consumers from the worst abuses of insurance companies; would create competition and lower costs by putting in place new exchanges, run by the states, where Americans could pool together to increase their purchasing power and select from various plans to choose what’s best for them -- the same way that members of Congress do, the same way that those who are lucky enough to work for big employers do.
And the fact is, that the Affordable Care Act has done more to rein in rising costs, make sure everyone can buy insurance, and attack the federal deficit than we’ve seen in years. And that’s not just my opinion; that’s the opinion of the Congressional Budget Office -- nonpartisan -- the same one that puts out numbers that when it’s handy to go after me, people trot out and say, boy, these are -- look at these numbers. So they’re saying we’re saving a trillion bucks because of this act on our health care costs. Otherwise, we’d be a trillion dollars more in the red. That’s something that we should build on, not break down.
Now, that doesn’t mean that the job of health care reform is complete. We still have to implement the law, and we have to implement it in a smart and non-bureaucratic way. I know that many of you have asked for flexibility for your states under this law. In fact, I agree with Mitt Romney, who recently said he’s proud of what he accomplished on health care in Massachusetts and supports giving states the power to determine their own health care solutions. He’s right. Alabama is not going to have exactly the same needs as Massachusetts or California or North Dakota. We believe in that flexibility.
So right now, under the law, under the Affordable Care Act,
Massachusetts and Utah already operate exchanges of their own that are very different -- operate them in their own way. And we made sure that the law allowed that. The same applies for other requests, like choosing benefit rules that meet the needs of your citizens, or allowing for consumer-driven plans and health savings accounts.
And this recognition that states need flexibility to tailor their approach to their unique needs is why part of the law says that, beginning in 2017, if you can come up with a better system for your state to provide coverage of the same quality and affordability as the Affordable Care Act, you can take that route instead. That portion of the law has not been remarked on much. It says by 2017, if you have a better way of doing it, help yourself, go ahead, take that route.
Now, some folks have said, well, that’s not soon enough. So a few weeks ago, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat, and Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown, a Republican, and Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu, they proposed legislation that would accelerate that provision. So it would allow states to apply for such a waiver by 2014 instead of 2017.
I think that’s a reasonable proposal. I support it. It will give you flexibility more quickly, while still guaranteeing the American people reform. If your state can create a plan that covers as many people as affordably and comprehensively as the Affordable Care Act does -- without increasing the deficit -- you can implement that plan. And we’ll work with you to do it. I’ve said before, I don’t believe that any single party has a monopoly on good ideas. And I will go to bat for whatever works, no matter who or where it comes from.
I also share your concern about Medicaid costs. I know this has been a topic of significant conversation over the last couple of days. We know that over half of all Medicaid costs come from just 5 percent of enrollees, many of whom are what’s called dual eligibles -- seniors in Medicare as well as in Medicaid. The Affordable Care Act helps address this by changing the incentives for providers so that they start adopting best practices that will work to reduce cost while improving quality.
But we understand the pressure you’re under. We understand that we’ve got to do more. So today -- and I mentioned this to Christine last night -- I’m asking you to name a bipartisan group of governors to work with Secretary Sebelius on ways to lower costs and improve the quality of care for these Americans. And if you can come up with more ways to reduce Medicaid costs while still providing quality care to those who need it I will support those proposals as well.
So here’s the bottom line. Once fully implemented, I’m convinced the Affordable Care Act will do what it was designed it to do -- cut costs, cover everybody, end the worst abuses in the insurance industry, and bring down our long-term deficits. I am not open to re-fighting the battles of the last two years, or undoing the progress that we’ve made. But I am willing to work with anyone -- anybody in this room, Democrat or Republican, governors or member of Congress -- to make this law even better; to make care even better; to make it more affordable and fix what needs fixing.
You see, part of the genius of our Founders was the establishment of a federal system in which each of our states serves as a laboratory for our democracy. Through this process, some of the best state ideas became some of America’s best ideas. So whether it’s through Race to the Top, or improving the Affordable Care Act, or reforming the way that we approach social programs by ensuring that spending is tied to success, our approach has been to give you the flexibility that you need to find your own innovative ways forward. In fact, this week I’m issuing a Presidential Memorandum that instructs all government agencies to follow this flexible approach wherever the law allows.
But even as we preserve the freedom and diversity that is at the heart of federalism, let’s remember that we are one nation. We are one people. Our economy is national. Our fates are intertwined. Today, we’re not competing with each other; we’re competing with other countries that are hungry to win new jobs, hungry to win new industries.
I’m confident we will win this competition as long as we’re fighting it together. And I know that, whatever our differences, you share that goal. So you’ve got a partner in the White House to make this happen. And I hope that this becomes the start of a productive and serious conversation going forward -- one that I want to start by answering some of your questions.
So thank you very much. (Applause.) Thank you.
FLOTUS & SLOTUS ADDRESS GOVERNORS
White House, Feb. 28, 2011:
First Lady Michelle Obama and Dr. Jill Biden Address National Governors Association
First Lady Michelle Obama and Dr. Jill Biden welcome the Nation's governors to the White House and talk about their campaign to support America's military families.
Office of the First Lady, Feb. 28, 2011:
Remarks by the First Lady and Dr. Jill Biden to the National Governors Association
DR. BIDEN: Good morning, and thanks to all of you for inviting us here today. It was a great time last night, wasn’t it? We had a great day --
MRS. OBAMA: Whooo! (Laughter and applause.)
DR. BIDEN: So Michelle and I will be joining your spouses shortly for lunch.
But we wanted to speak to you today about something that’s very important to all of us: military families.
Over the past two years, we have had the privilege of traveling around the country and around the world, visiting with service members and their families, and hearing their stories firsthand. Many of the stories are about the pride these families have in serving our country. But there are also challenges.
We bring the concerns back to the White House, and the President and the Vice President and the Cabinet have responded by committing attention and resources to support our military families.
We know that each of you shares our commitment by supporting our troops and their families. Many of you have active bases in your states, and all of you have Guard and Reserve families.
We know well the tremendous service they provide to our country. Today, Michelle and I want to talk to you about our efforts to increase awareness of the unique experiences of military families.
We want to take the opportunity to thank you for your ongoing support and ask for your feedback about the needs and concerns of military families in your states.
Many of you know that my son was deployed to Iraq as a member of the Delaware Army National Guard. He is back now, but I will always remember the mixture of pride and concern that I felt throughout his deployment.
I know I don’t have to tell any of you just how critical the National Guard is to our national security. Tens of thousands of our brave citizen soldiers are serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other regions –- and taken together, they make up nearly one half of our nation’s military strength.
They also respond to national disasters, humanitarian crises –- from 9/11 to Hurricane Katrina, to areas in need around the world -- they answer the call under your leadership.
As a military mom, I know what a difference it makes when individuals or groups reach out to show support to service members and their families.
I’ve seen through my work with small grassroots organization at home called Delaware Boots on the Ground that community groups can make a huge difference.
Where a military family in Delaware has a need, we try to meet it, whether it’s physical labor or repairs around the house, a fun night out for the kids, or other simple ways individuals, businesses and groups can support a family through a deployment.
There are small and effective groups like this all over the country -- like one in Minnesota that collects top-brand hockey equipment for military children, or the barbecue lovers in Ohio that travel the state providing meals for military family picnics, deployment and welcome-home ceremonies, or the accountants across the country that dedicate their talents every spring to help with tax returns.
As an educator, I love hearing about the ways schools and teachers support military children during the deployment of a parent.
Just a few weeks ago, an amazing teacher near Ft. Stewart in Georgia told me how she sets up parent-teacher conferences over the Internet, so she can update deployed parents on their children’s progress in the classroom. Many of the military children in that school keep laminated pictures of their deployed parent on their desk.
There are so many great and inspiring stories which demonstrate that every American can take their time, their expertise and their passion and use it to support and thank a military family.
Michelle and I have talked a lot about the ways that all Americans can support our troops and thank these men and women for their service.
And now, we are trying to encourage all Americans to join us in this effort.
As long as we have the privilege and the honor of serving in our roles, the First Lady and I will do whatever we can to support those who protect us -- and we look forward to working with you and your spouses on these ongoing efforts.
And now it is my pleasure to introduce my partner, my friend, your First Lady, Michelle Obama. (Applause.)
MRS. OBAMA: Thank you. Thanks so much, Jill. And again, welcome. I hope you all had a lovely evening last night. Got your groove on. (Laughter.) But we had a great time, so I hope you’re getting a lot of work done today.
I know that you have a busy day ahead, and Jill and I are grateful to have a chance to talk to you today about our latest endeavor. But we wanted to take a few minutes to talk with you about an issue that is important to both of us, as Jill said, and that’s mobilizing our country to support our military families.
As you know, all our men and women in uniform represent only 1 percent of the population, 1 percent of our country taking care of the needs of all of us. And they shoulder the entire responsibility of defending our country. They’re enduring tour after tour of duty, and they’re missing birthdays and holidays and all those daily moments with the people they love the most.
And these men and women aren’t the only ones who sacrifice for our country. I said this when I appeared on Oprah, is that it’s very easy for us to recognize the men and women in uniform because they’re in uniform, but there are people who we don’t see who aren’t in uniform. And the truth is those are the people who take care of them, and they’re their families. Their families serve, too.
And over the last two years, Jill and I have spent a lot of time meeting with spouses who play the role of both parents for months on end. If you think about the challenges your families face as you serve, which is how I came to this issue thinking about the challenges I face and then looking at a military spouse who is shouldering the exact same burden -- juggling play dates and carpools and doing their best to hide their own fears while answering questions from their kids about when mom or dad is coming home, enduring the grief and the heartbreak if they don’t return.
So the thing I had to think about is if I’m feeling sorry for myself in my role with all that I’m juggling, just imagine if I were in their position, with the pressures and the challenges and the uncertainty. But they do it proudly. And that’s the thing that we’ve learned. That’s been one of the benefits of traveling around the country. These families do not want our pity. They do not want our sympathy. They serve like their service members with pride, and they do it without complaint and they do it without regret. And every day, these men and women and these children and these parents and these aunts and uncles, they show us what words like “service” and “strength” and “sacrifice” -- they show us what those words really look like.
So I think we can all agree, all of us, regardless of what our political positions may be, we can all agree that with everything these families do to take care of this country and all of us, America, we have an obligation to take care of them. And that’s why last year my husband ordered a sweeping review of the entire federal government to see what the government is doing for these families and what the government could be doing better for these families.
And we gathered nearly 50 recommendations from Cabinet agencies for how we can improve services for our military families. That includes everything from simplifying financial aid applications for these families, to increasing career opportunities for these spouses, to expanding childcare options for the children of service members.
And all of this is a very good start. These are all very important steps, because our view is that we have to look internally before we can look outside. But we know that the needs of our military families won’t be met simply by improving the way things work here in Washington.
So much of what these folks need are things that government can’t provide. They need employers who are willing to hire them, even if they’re moving all across the country. They need employers who understand the unique challenges that military spouses face. They need schools that recognize the unique needs of kids who are facing multiple deployments. They need to know those kids are in their classrooms.
They need communities that show gratitude for the sacrifices they’re making -- not just with words, but with deeds. And not just once in a while, not just on Veterans Day or Memorial Day, but these communities need to rally around these families every single day.
And that’s why next month, Jill and I are going to be launching a campaign to rally this country around to support not just our troops, but their families. And we’re focusing on four main areas: employment, education, wellness and public awareness.
And just to give you a sense of what we hope to do, I mean, if you look at what we’ve accomplished with “Let’s Move” just in one short year, our goal is to take that same model and make the conversation about our military families at the top of mind of every single one of us in this country.
We’re going to be working with businesses and nonprofit organizations to improve career opportunities for veterans and military spouses. There are a lot of wonderful models, companies that are already doing great things. We want to raise up those models and encourage other businesses to find a way to do the same.
We’re working with education groups to make schools more accommodating for military kids, and we’re going to be encouraging all Americans to simply step up as individuals, which the folks in this country are more than willing to do. We care about our troops. Oftentimes we just don’t know what to do. And our hope is that through this public awareness campaign, we can funnel that energy, we can galvanize it, and we can direct it in a way that’s going to be most helpful for our military families.
And that might mean something as simple as mowing the lawn for a family in your community or shoveling the snow. When you talk to military families, these are the small things that make them feel appreciated without making them feel helpless. Or offering military family discounts at local businesses, offering professional services -- whether someone is a lawyer or an accountant or a mechanic. Whatever people do, that’s what we’re asking Americans -- find the thing that you do best and find a way to make that service something of importance and value to our military families.
However folks choose to help, the idea here is very simple: It’s about doing everything we can to keep military families in our hearts and on our minds.
And this isn’t just about doing it in a time of war because once the war is over -- and hopefully that will happen -- the battles of military families and our troops continue. The residual effects of deployments go on and on for a lifetime. So this isn’t just a campaign for today. This is a campaign for every day, all day. This is going to outlive me and Jill and Joe and Barack. This is something that should be a part of what we do here in America.
And Jill -- as she said, that this is especially important when we talk about our National Guard servicemen and women who you all have special responsibility for right in your own states so you know their needs, you know their contributions.
National Guard families, they face the same struggles as any other military family. The difference is, is that these families often don’t live on bases or in communities with those built-in resources and support networks. They are our neighbors. We don’t even see them. We don’t even know the challenges they face. And oftentimes they’re living in communities where no one can relate to their experiences at all. So it takes a special effort to reach out to these individuals and their families. And that’s why we want to work with all of you -- the governors of our states and with people and organizations within your states -- to help us find ways to better support military families, to keep raising awareness and making these families an important part of all of our common agenda.
So we’re here because we want to hear from you. If you have outstanding ideas -- shoot, if you have good ideas -- (laughter) -- or if there are groups in your states that you know are making a difference, we’re asking you to tell us about these. Part of what Jill and I are going to continue to do is to travel the country and to use our platform, our ability to attract a little attention, and to shine a light on your states and the things that you do in an effort to provide these an example for the rest of the country for what they can do.
So we want to hear those ideas. We want to hear from your staffs. We want to put this information on serve.gov and find ways to better connect people looking for volunteer opportunities, looking for good ideas, finding a way for them to connect with you in your states.
Because in the end, this is something that I think we can all agree on, no matter where we come from, no matter what we might think about any other issue. We all know that this issue -- this is not a Democrat issue, this is not a Republican issue. This is an American issue. And more importantly, this is an American obligation. It truly is.
It’s about showing our gratitude to that very small group of Americans who make such a tremendous contribution and sacrifice to this country. And it’s about serving the people who sacrifice so much to serve us.
One thing my husband says is that when he talks to troops and he goes out to wherever they’re stationed, that they don’t talk about themselves. Never do they ask for anything for themselves. They are our soldiers, they’re focused, but they always worry about what’s going on back at home. That’s what keeps them not being able to focus on their mission -- not knowing that their wife, their children are being cared for; when they come back that they’ll be secure. Those are the issues that our soldiers struggle with when they’re out on the battlefield.
So I know that this is something that we can do together. And Jill and I, we didn’t come to this issue knowing that we were both passionate about this. We were blessed to be put together and be able to join forces behind this one issue. And we want the entire nation to feel like this is an obligation that we all can work on together.
So we’re going to need your help. We’re going to need your support and encouragement to make this a reality. We’re very excited about this initiative because we think that this will not only help our troops and their families, but it will help us as a nation link together and be even stronger.
So we’re excited. We’re going to gear up. We’re going to be working hard. We’re going to on the road. We’re going to make this fun and exciting. We’re going to pull in businesses and entertainment and sports, and we’re going to pull in all sectors to get behind this effort. And I know that people are more than ready to step up. So if there is any way that you can helpful to us, if there are any suggestions that you can have for how we structure and talk about this issue so that it continues to be a bipartisan issue, we will gladly take those recommendations. But I am looking for your leadership to make this happen, to make this a true success. And if we do this we will have some grateful families behind us. They’ve just been grateful to hear that this is a part of the national conversation. They don’t even want much. So I think because of that we can succeed.
So I want to thank you all for giving Jill and I your time. I know your time is limited. Things are tough in your states back home. But I think even in this economy there are so many things we can do to keep this agenda in the forefront of all of our minds.
So thank you all in advance, and I look forward to visiting your states. So you all take care and good luck. (Applause.)
A TOAST TO THE GOVERNORS
White House, Feb. 27, 2011:
Toasting the Nation's Governors
President Obama toasts the nation's governors, saying that they have a partner in the White House as they deal with difficult economic times, during a White House dinner for the National Governors Association. Washington State Governor Christine Gregoire offers a toast to the President.
Office of the Press Secretary, Feb. 27, 2011:
Remarks by the President and Governor Gregoire of Washington in an Exchange of Toasts at the 2011 Governors' Dinner
THE PRESIDENT: Well, good evening, everybody. Welcome to the White House. I want to start by acknowledging your outstanding chair, Christine Gregoire, for her wonderful work -- (applause) -- and your vice chair, Dave Heineman, for his wonderful work. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
I want to welcome some of you back, and I want to welcome those who are here for the first time. I know some of you may be confused and think this is the Oscars. (Laughter.) There are some similarities. First of all, everybody looks spectacular. And the second thing is, if I speak too long the music will start playing. (Laughter.) So I’m going to be very brief.
I know that the last couple of years have not been easy in a lot of your states. People have been struggling. Folks have lost jobs. Businesses have shuttered. We went through the toughest recession since the Great Depression. And nobody has felt it more than folks back home, and you see it each and every day. You have to respond in ways that go beyond just ideology or rhetoric.
The thing about governors is you’re in charge and people know where to find you, and they expect you to help them during tough times. And many of you over the last two years have done extraordinary work. Many of you are expected for the next two years, next four years, or however long it may be, to do extraordinary work.
The main message I want to deliver tonight, in addition to asking you to have some fun this evening, is to know that you’ve got a partner here in the White House. If you look around the room, we come from a lot of different parts of the country and people may have different perspectives, but one thing that we all absolutely share is the belief in the American Dream and the confidence that when our people get opportunities, they’ve got the ingenuity and the stick-to-it-ness and the drive to succeed.
And our job is to make sure that we are doing everything possible to ensure that each child gets a good education; that somebody who has a great idea is able to start a business and run with it; that we’re looking after our people, including those who are most vulnerable; and that we’re going to be bequeathing to the next generation the kind of America that will make us proud and assuring that the 21st century will be the American century just like the 20th century was.
We can’t do that by ourselves. There’s extraordinary diversity among our states, and that’s a great strength. That’s why our federal system is the laboratory for democracy, because in each of your states you guys are trying all kinds of things. And oftentimes your best ideas end up percolating up and becoming models and templates for the country.
But we’re also one nation and our goal has to be to find ways to find common ground and to work together, and I’m confident that we can do that moving forward.
So I want to propose a toast: Not only to all the governors who are here, but also to all their spouses, who put with life in politics. (Laughter.) It’s not always easy, but I hope your families, given all the sacrifices you’re making, feel that it’s worth it, because I certainly believe that the work that you’re doing each and every day is making an extraordinary contribution to our country.
Thank you very much. Cheers.
(An exchange of toasts is offered.)
And with that, I’d like Christine to come up and offer a few words, as well.
GOVERNOR GREGOIRE: Well, thank you, Mr. President. On behalf of all of the governors of our great country and their guests, we are delighted to be here. I want to thank you for your tremendous leadership through what is a very, very challenging time for our country.
And if I might, I’d like to say a big thanks to our First Lady Michelle Obama, who has left a wonderful message across America that we stand with our men and women in service and we support our military families. (Applause.)
Mr. Vice President, thank you for being our partner, for taking our calls and calling us, and making sure that we are there for you and you are there for us. And to Dr. Jill Biden, thank you for being a symbol for all of the people in America for what higher education really means.
And to all of you who are members of the Cabinet, thank you for your friendship. Thank you for being with us. Thank you for reaching out, listening to us.
So, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of the nation’s governors, I propose a toast to the President of the United States. Sir, we stand with you as you deliver a message across the world of peace and democracy, as you bring back to America the kind of economic recovery we all need, and as you give hope to all of the children of America.
To the President of the greatest nation in the world, President Obama. Thank you.
(An exchange of toasts is offered.)
THE PRESIDENT: All right. Let’s start dinner, and everybody have fun.
Link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/...
HEALTH CARE UPDATE
White House Blog, Feb. 28, 2011:
Empowering States to Innovate
Posted by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius
As a former Governor, state legislator, and insurance commissioner, I know the ingenuity of state leaders to shape policies that fit the individual characteristics of their people, their industries, and their economies. The Affordable Care Act, signed by President Obama almost a year ago, provides states with the flexibility, resources and tools they need to improve the health of their residents, reduce the growth of health care costs, and invest in the prevention strategies that will make our nation healthier and more productive. Many of the ideas contained in the Act were modeled on reforms initiated by states like my home state of Kansas. And you can read a report on the resources and flexibility available to states here: http://www.healthcare.gov/....
Today, President Obama announced his support for another crucial step in empowering states to lead – the bipartisan “Empowering States to Innovate Act,” sponsored by Senators Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), Scott Brown (R-Massachusetts), and Mary Landrieu (D-Louisiana). The President said:
"This recognition – that states need flexibility to tailor their approach to their unique needs – is why part of the law says that, beginning in 2017, if you can come up with a better system for your state to provide coverage of the same quality and affordability as the Affordable Care Act, you can take that route instead…
A few weeks ago, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat, Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown, a Republican, and Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu, they proposed legislation that would accelerate that provision, so it would allow states to apply for such a waiver by 2014 instead of 2017. I think that’s a very reasonable proposal. I support it. It will give you flexibility more quickly, while still guaranteeing the American people reform. If your state can create a plan that covers as many people as affordably and comprehensively as the Affordable Care Act does – without increasing the deficit – you can implement that plan, and we’ll work with you to do it. I’ve said before, I don’t believe that either party holds a monopoly on good ideas. And I will go to bat for whatever works, no matter who or where it comes from."
In the last ten months, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has already made $2.8 billion available to states to help them begin to reform the disjointed and often dysfunctional health care systems serving their populations. Those funds allow state leaders to invest in improvements even at a time of record state deficits. These investments have begun to bear fruit with tougher oversight of insurance premium increases, new rights and protections for consumers, more choices for people living with medical conditions like cancer, and the elimination of many of the worst insurance industry practices.
Every state has begun working on implementing the key provisions of the Affordable Care Act, from enforcing the ban on lifetime coverage limits to running the new high-risk pool program. This includes the development of state-based health insurance Exchanges, a new, competitive marketplace that would allow health insurance plans to compete for customers based on the quality of their products and the competitiveness of their prices. Governors of both political parties have shown true leadership in applying the expertise of their states in devising approaches that best fit their own market conditions.
The proposal President Obama discussed today would allow states that choose to do so to develop health reform models for their states as soon as 2014 so long as they meet certain criteria, including certifying that their proposals would cover at least as many of their residents as the policies in the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act will let states make these type of reforms starting in 2017; the legislation endorsed today by the President accelerates that schedule to 2014, the same year that the Exchanges and other key reforms take effect.
Under this legislation, governors will be able to apply for State Innovation Waivers to implement reforms that:
• Provide coverage that is at least as comprehensive as the coverage offered through the Exchanges – a new competitive, private health insurance marketplace.
• Make coverage at least as affordable as it would have been through the Exchanges.
• Provide coverage to at least as many residents as the Affordable Care Act would have provided.
• Do not increase the Federal deficit.
State reforms could take many forms. Among the models states could adopt are:
• Linking tax credits for small businesses with tax credits for low-income families;
• Automatically enrolling people in health plans;
• Alternative health plan options to increase competition and provide consumers with additional choices;
• A broader choice of benefit packages to provide more choices for individuals and small businesses; and
• Allowing large businesses to purchase health insurance through the Exchanges.
The law also allows states to submit a single application that includes Medicaid waiver requests which could, for example, seek to give people eligible for Medicaid the choice of enrolling in Exchange health plans.
Those models represent innovations that have been advanced by Democrats and Republicans in states and here in Washington. And these models give residents of these states at least as much assistance and protection as the provisions of the Affordable Care Act.
And no matter where you live or what innovations your state pursues, all Americans will be protected from the worst insurance company abuses. The law includes important protections already in place to make sure insurance companies:
• Don’t impose lifetime limits on the dollar amount they will spend on health benefits or drop your coverage just because you get sick;
• Offer young adults without access to job-based coverage the option of remaining on their parent’s plan until their 26th birthday;
• Cover all recommended preventive services without cost sharing;
• Allow patients to choose their own doctor in their network; and
• Spend at least 80 percent of premium dollars on health care, rather than executive salaries and administrative costs.
By maintaining these important basic protections for all Americans – no matter which state is their home – we will combine the benefits of a national movement to improve health and health care with the local innovations that have always made our nation great. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the states to make these reforms work for the American people.
Link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/...
WHITE HOUSE PRESS BRIEFING
2/28/11: White House Press Briefing
White House Press Briefings are conducted most weekdays from the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room in the West Wing.
Office of the Press Secretary, Feb. 28, 2011:
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney and U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations Susan Rice, 2/28/2011
MR. CARNEY: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. As I mentioned this morning, we have with us today the United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice. She was just in a meeting with the President and the U.N. Secretary General, and I would like her to speak about that meeting. And then she’ll take some questions from you. And I'll step aside. Thanks.
AMBASSADOR RICE: Thank you very much, Jay. Good afternoon, everyone. I want to start by giving a brief readout of the President’s meeting with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that just finished a little while ago.
As you might expect, a significant portion of that meeting was devoted to discussing the situation in Libya. The U.N. has played a positive and very important role in efforts to end the bloodshed there and to hold the Qaddafi regime accountable, and support the Libyan people. Indeed, in Libya, the United Nations is demonstrating the indispensable role that it can play in advancing our interests and defending our values.
We'll come back to Libya in a few minutes, but let me just finish with the brief readout of the President’s meeting with the Secretary General.
The President and the Secretary General also discussed the situation elsewhere in the Middle East as well as the situation in Côte d’Ivoire. And with respect to Côte d’Ivoire, they expressed their concern about the escalation of violence there and the need to enable the legitimately elected president, Alassane Quattara, to assume responsibility for governing Côte d’Ivoire.
They also discussed the historic referendum that recently took place in Southern Sudan, where the people overwhelmingly voted for independence. And they discussed the vital work that the U.N. and the international community have still to do, along with the parties to the Sudanese conflict, to resolve outstanding issues and ensure lasting peace as the South gains its independence in July of this year.
The President and the Secretary General also discussed their shared agenda to build on the strengths of the United Nations while pursuing and implementing very important management reforms as well as budgetary discipline.
And finally, President Obama reaffirmed the administration’s strong belief that the United Nations continues to play a vital role in addressing tough, global and transnational threats, and in doing so, its work enhances the safety and well-being of the American people.
Now, coming back to Libya, as you know on Saturday night in New York, the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1970, a tough and binding set of sanctions aimed at stopping the Libyan regime from killing its own people.
As you know, from the very beginning of the crisis in Libya, we’ve been clear that it’s vitally important for the international community to speak with one voice, and it has done so with an unusual and important sense of urgency, determination and unity of purpose.
This resolution that we passed had several important components. First, it refers the situation in Libya directly to the International Criminal Court. This is the first time that the Security Council has unanimously voted to refer a case of heinous human rights violations to the ICC.
Secondly, it includes a travel ban and an assets freeze on key Libyan leaders. It imposes a complete arms embargo on Libya and mechanisms to enforce it. And finally, it takes new steps against the use of mercenaries by the Libyan government to attack its own people, and it facilitates the delivery of vital humanitarian assistance.
These sanctions and accountability mechanisms should make all members of the Libyan regime think about the choice they have before them: Violate human rights and be held accountable, or stop the violence and respect the Libyan peoples’ call for change. There’s no escaping that critical choice.
Meanwhile, all the members of the United Nations Security Council are united in their determination that these sanctions work and work as swiftly as possible. But the Security Council has not finished its business and will continue to monitor the situation in Libya quite closely.
And I’ll reiterate what the President said over the weekend. Now is the time for Colonel Qaddafi to step aside to prevent further bloodshed and to allow the Libyan people to have a government that is responsive to their aspirations.
I’m happy to take a few of your questions.
MR. CARNEY: I just want to, if I could, just -- I'll call on people. What I'd like to do is do all questions for Ambassador Rice now, and we can get to other issues after that.
But, Darlene, why don't you start?
Q: Thank you. Madam Ambassador, can you update us on the status of the talks for instituting a no-fly zone? How far along are those talks?
AMBASSADOR RICE: Well, as Secretary Clinton said today in Geneva, these talks are underway with our partners in NATO and elsewhere. We have made clear that it is an option that we are considering and considering actively and seriously....
Q: Are you prepared to offer material support to the anti-government rebels in Libya?
AMBASSADOR RICE: Well, we are, first of all, in communication with all sort of elements of Libyan society -- civil society, leaders of all sorts -- to understand their perspectives and be able to be as supportive as we can of the Libyan people’s aspirations for freedom and for justice.
It’s unclear at this point who will emerge as the critical opposition elements, and we await to see how the opposition will coalesce. In that context, it’s certainly premature I think to begin to talk about any kind of military assistance.
Q: Dr. Rice, thanks for being here. In an interview with several reporters, Moammar Qaddafi said that he’s not going anywhere, he’s never used force, all my people love me....
AMBASSADOR RICE: It sounds, just frankly, delusional. And when he can laugh in talking to American and international journalists while he is slaughtering his own people, it only underscores how unfit he is to lead and how disconnected he is from reality. It makes all the more important the urgent steps that we have taken over the course of the last week on a national basis, as well as the steps that we’ve taken collectively through the United Nations and the Security Council.
And we’re going to continue to keep the pressure on. You’ve seen reports about the massive quantity of resources, some $30 billion that the Treasury Department has seized since the assets freeze went into effect on Friday -- and this in light of the fact that Colonel Qaddafi and his son Saif say they have no resources out there to be seized; they led a clean and uncorrupt life.
Q: Ambassador Rice, when you talk about Colonel Qaddafi slaughtering his own people, he was -- he appeared to be doing that a week or so, even longer, and yet the President stopped short of calling for regime change until this weekend....
AMBASSADOR RICE: Well, first of all, it is up to the Libyan people. And we will continue to be very supportive of their efforts to achieve the universal rights and the freedoms and the opportunity that they are seeking. I think we have been very, very clear about what is right and what is moral in this situation, and what has been unacceptable and inexcusable violence. And we have taken very strong and very swift actions to confront that.
On Friday, we froze the assets of Libya’s leaders, and on Monday, $30 billion -- an unprecedented quantity of resources have been seized in just over the last several days. On Saturday, the Security Council with the U.S. and leadership of others moved at a speed that is, I can tell you from my experience, almost unheard of, to pass unanimously a resolution that not only imposed a travel ban, an assets freeze, and arms embargo, but referred the situation in Libya for the first time on a unanimous basis to the International Criminal Court....
First of all, the situation has evolved. We have been, as the President has said, focused very urgently on the protection of Americans and ensuring that Americans are safe. But we have also, as the same time, been actively working and planning to enable the swift and decisive response that you’ve seen forthcoming from the U.S. government....
Q: There’s been some talk about oil embargos. But does that make any sense now that it appears that most of the oil production is in the hands of rebel forces?
AMBASSSADOR RICE: Well, I think, from a sanctions point of view, the United Nations has historically, in recent years, moved away from sweeping measures, and focused most precisely on targeted measures that go after the leadership of the country and isolate those that are responsible for atrocities. We’re in a different world than we were 15, 20 years ago and have learned some lessons from regimes like Iraq and elsewhere that didn’t have the targeted effect that was desired and was more scattershot. So I think at least in the context of the Security Council in New York, when we look at sanctions, whether it’s on Iran, North Korea, or Libya, we aim, first and foremost, at targeted measures that go after those that are responsible for violations....
We have not had active discussions in New York on oil....
Q: Dr. Rice, two questions. One, can you walk us through what the process would be for the United Nations to recognize the sort of opposition in Libya, or recognize maybe the eastern part of that controlled territory? And number two, is there a message in there for the Iranian government, the government of Bahrain about how swiftly the U.N. seemed to respond in this case, and maybe the lack of quickness they responded to the Iranian uprising a year and a half ago?
AMBASSADOR RICE: The question of recognition is a very complicated one. And to recognize or seat a changed government requires a vote of a U.N. credentials committee. And depending on the murkiness of the situation, that can be more or less complicated. We’re dealing now with a request to the Secretary General from Qaddafi to withdraw accreditation for his diplomats in New York who stood up -- his perm rep, his deputy perm rep -- to the regime, and have been very clear in calling for the kinds of measures that the Security Council took on Saturday.
It’s too soon to say, in all honesty, how issues of credentials and issues of recognition will be sorted out. Unless and until there’s an obvious alternative government, it’s hard to give credentials to --
Q: How long will this process take? Weeks? Months?
AMBASSADOR RICE: It depends on how it evolves. Unless and until there’s an obvious alternative, it’s hard to take from one and give to another because there’s not a clear other to whom recognition can be given.
Q: And the Iran question?
AMBASSADOR RICE: Well, I think when -- what enabled the Security Council to act so swiftly and decisively in this instance was that there was just an egregious and widely reported series of mass killings by security forces on innocents -- not only those protesting, but those who stuck their heads out of windows; going into hospitals, reportedly, and shooting those dead that had already been wounded; shooting people as they came out of mosques.
And all of this I think served to galvanize a sense of outrage and determination on the part of the Security Council and the rest of the international community that action had to be taken. And quite unusually, the first calls came from the Arab League and the African Union, and subsequently the OIC for this kind of action. And the fact that Libya’s own diplomats in New York were urging decisive action I think also was an important factor.
Q: ....If Qaddafi were to oblige and get on a plane and go, what does the U.S. want to see happen next?
AMBASSADOR RICE: Obviously, the United States wants to see a responsible government emerge that respects the will of the Libyan people. They are -- there's a serious institution-building challenge that exists in Libya, as elsewhere in the region. We believe there are universal rights that need to be acknowledged and respected, and processes that are determined by the people in each of these different countries that charts a specific course that's suitable to that country. And it would be wrong of us to sit here with a road map for a political transformation in Libya.
But our consistent message across the region and indeed across the world is that the people deserve the right to chart their own future in a fashion that is -- that enables them to express themselves freely, assemble freely, select their leaders, and do so free of violence and intimidation....
Thank you. Ambassador, two questions. With regard to the military question, I know you’re saying it’s premature to decide whether to commit troops. Is it the U.S.’s position that that would need to be done through a NATO commitment and not through a U.S. military commitment?
And then, secondly, in the conversations with Ban Ki-moon, is the President discussing more broadly how to do a proactive strategy with the unrest that's sweeping the Middle East? And how do you get ahead of that?
AMBASSADOR RICE: Well, let me come to your second question first. The President and the Secretary General discussed the region broadly and the international efforts, including those led and coordinated by the United Nations, to be responsive to developments in each of these countries. So, for example, the Secretary General reported that he has sent high-level teams to both Egypt and Tunisia to engage those governments about the process of transition and the political support that the United Nations and the international community might be able to provide in support of those political transitions.
With respect to Libya, the Secretary General indicated that he intended to name a senior-level person to coordinate the United Nations humanitarian and political efforts with respect to Libya. That was something that we had encouraged and welcomed. And so there was a real effort discussed and agreed that would help to coordinate and consolidate both the humanitarian response, particularly with respect to Libya, and the political efforts to help support the democratic transformations that we hope are underway in various parts of the region.
Q: And the military question?
AMBASSADOR RICE: With respect to the military question, we are in discussions with partners and allies in NATO and elsewhere. We have been very clear that we have a range of options, a wide range of options that we’re considering, but it would be premature to say more than that....
Q: Okay, thank you. Ambassador Rice, you said something to the effect that we have not actively discussed oil at the U.N. Are you talking about specifically the Libyan issue or the increase, the request to increase oil in other countries like Mexico, Canada and some portions of Africa?
AMBASSADOR RICE: No, I was responding to the specific question of whether multilateral oil sanctions had been discussed actively in New York with respect to Libya, and the answer to that is no. The other issues have not been, to my knowledge, discussed in any formal venue and it’s really not the place where that kind of discussion would occur.
Q: But also, could you quantify the $10 million of humanitarian effort that the United States has committed for those refugees who are fleeing into the other countries that are bordering Libya?
AMBASSADOR RICE: Well, the U.S. government has begun to mount a very robust humanitarian response that will include resources to the various concerned agencies like the High Commissioner for Refugees, like the International Organization for Migration. We’ll also be looking at other kinds of humanitarian needs. The Secretary General explained to the President today, for instance, that the U.N. is quite concerned about the dearth of medical supplies in Libya and the importance of urgent action being taken to ensure that those kinds of critical humanitarian needs are meet. And we’ll be supportive of those efforts as we always are.
Thank you.
MR. CARNEY: Okay, guys, I’ve got to let the Ambassador go....
Okay, we’ll return to our regular programming....
Q: Thanks, Jay. The President warned governors not to denigrate or vilify public employees. Does he think that's what they’ve been doing?
MR. CARNEY: Well, as the President said several weeks ago now, he is very sympathetic to the need that governors and state legislators have in dealing with their budget issues, to have sacrifice at all levels; that everyone needs to come together, tighten their belts, and deal with their budget shortfalls, and that includes public sector employees. But he does not believe that it is helpful to denigrate or vilify public sector employees in a way that brings you no closer to resolving the problems and sows division instead of creating the kind of unity that you need when everyone sits at the table to solve the issues together....
Well, I would refer you to his speech. And I think that it’s fairly clear from what he said in the past that he does not think that an assault on public sector employees or the collective bargaining rights of public sector employees is the way to go. Rather, that everyone needs to come together, share the sacrifice, and resolve the issues that have led to these budget shortfalls.
Q: Can I also ask a Libya question? You’ve said a few times and Dr. Rice just said that the administration is in contact with all members of organized civil society, and leaders of various stripes. And it’s hard to see what the organized elements of civil society and what those leaders could be, since Colonel Qaddafi has tried so hard to squelch all of them. What's there? Who’s there? What are the organizations to talk to?
MR. CARNEY: Well, you make a good point about the situation in Libya, and it goes to the broader point that we’ve made about how every country is different in the region, the countries that have experienced unrest.
Without specifying particular individuals or groups that we are reaching out to -- and reaching out to through both diplomatic means but through businesses and NGOs -- I would say that we are having those conversations, finding out where these groups stand in terms of the desire for a process that is democratic and inclusive and responsive to the desires and aspirations of the Libyan people. But I’m not prepared to identify this group or this individual at this point....
Q: To the extent there is this urgency, do you think that this effort to have Qaddafi leave would be helped along by a strong statement from the President along the likes of the one we just saw from Ambassador Rice? She didn’t mince words.
MR. CARNEY: No, she didn’t. And neither has the President in his statements, or neither has Secretary of State Clinton or other government officials. And we have worked assiduously behind the scenes to bring about the kind of dramatic objectives in terms of the action at the United Nations and the unilateral sanctions that we’ve implemented that are putting, we believe, great pressure, and will put great pressure on not just Colonel Qaddafi, but the Libyan regime. I mean, if you are now a member of the Libyan government, you have to think very, very seriously about whose side you want to be on. Because if you stay with Qaddafi, if you stay with this regime, if you accept and act on orders to murder your own people, you will be held accountable. And the action taken by the United Nations to refer this to the ICC is a very dramatic statement about the accountability we expect those perpetrators to be held to.
Q: But who is going to hold them accountable? I mean, it’s one thing to say we hold them accountable, but who is going to do it? Are we?
MR. CARNEY: Bill, the history -- recent history has examples to show you that bad actors who treat their people in this manner can be held accountable, and we intend with our international partners for that to be the case...
Q: Can you comment on reports that U.S. naval warships are repositioning themselves in the Gulf to prepare -- I don’t know where they would position themselves -- in the Gulf or in the Mediterranean -- to prepare for action against -- any possible military action against Libya?
MR. CARNEY: What I will say, I believe the Defense Department has commented on that, that this force is being positioned. But this is part of, A, making sure that all options remain on the table for us; and, B, positioning our assets in a way that can be helpful in the cause of bringing humanitarian relief to the Libyan people. So that does not necessarily signal an intent to use military force -- although, as I said, we are leaving all options on the table....
Q: I just want to go back to Savannah’s question. At what point would it be appropriate to hear directly from the President calling on Qaddafi to step down, beyond readouts from phone calls or descriptions of conversations that he had with other officials?
MR. CARNEY: I’m sure the President will address this issue again. It’s not a matter of -- presidential action comes in many different ways and you just heard from our Ambassador to the United Nations, who just emerged from a meeting with the President and the U.N. Secretary General. She discussed in very clear terms the President’s position on the situation in Libya, on the Qaddafi regime. And I’m sure the President will address that again. But I’m not here to make any announcements on future statements by the President, but you can be sure that he has been incredibly active in dealing with this, as have all the principal members of the national security team. Secretary Clinton, I’m sure you all saw today, was in Geneva, and again, Ambassador Rice here.
Let me get to the back. Yes, sir, with the glasses and blue tie.
Q: Thank you. I’m interested -- is anybody considering to offer Mr. Qaddafi an easier way out?....
MR. CARNEY: I mentioned this morning -- I’m not sure you were here ....that exile is an option. And we -- it would be a quick option and it would comport with our desire to see him step down and remove himself from power. We are most interested in the end of his treatment of his people, the end of the violence against the Libyan people. And if exile is a quick option to make that happen, we would support that. But he and others will be held accountable for their actions regardless....
Q: Jay, the characterization of Libya -- a delusional leader literally suppressing his people facing sanctions -- it sounds an awful lot like Iran, as well. We equivocate about calling for the ouster of Ahmadinejad. Why do we do that?
MR. CARNEY: What I will say very clearly about what we’ve seen in Libya is, unlike anything we have seen in the unrest in the Middle East thus far in terms of the mass brutalization of people, the random killings, as the Ambassador mentioned, shooting people in windows, in hospitals, protestors -- unarmed, peaceful protestors on the street.
We have also condemned the violence that other governments, including the Iranian government, have used against peaceful protestors in no uncertain terms. And we do it again today. And we note with continued astonishment the hypocrisy of the Iranian government as recently as today where the foreign minister, I believe, claimed that there was absolutely no comparison between the protests in Iran, the peaceful broad-based pro-reform protests in Iran that were brutally suppressed, and the protests that they claim to support in other parts -- in other countries in the region. So that hypocrisy is clear for everyone to see....
Q: Did, in the Rice-Ban Ki-moon meeting, did the situation in Iran come up, and including the recent actions against human rights activists, journalist and bloggers, but also the protests and the government statements?
MR. CARNEY: In the meeting with the U.N. Secretary General, I don't have a readout that reflects that they discussed Iran. They might have. But I can say that we obviously are -- find the detention of opposition leaders to be unacceptable and we call on them to be treated well and released.
Q: And is there a concern that the turmoil in the Middle East may be empowering Iran? There is some talk that it may be doing that. What is the White House view of this?
MR. CARNEY: Our view is that peaceful protests by populations in different countries that are representative of broad interests and broad segments of society in a demand for peaceful, democratic change are inherently good things; that the governments there need to respond peacefully to them, to listen to the aspirations of their people, to engage their people in the political process; and that when real democracy is strengthened, when real democracy takes root, I think that's good for the people of the region. It’s good for the rest of the world, and it’s good for the United States.
That's it.
Q: That doesn’t really answer my question.
MR. CARNEY: Thank you very much.
AMERICA'S GREAT OUTDOORS LIVE CHAT
White House, Feb. 28, 2011:
Submit Your Questions: America's Great Outdoors Live Chat
In Cleveland, the President convened a Winning the Future Forum on Small Business in association with Cleveland State University and northeast Ohio economic development organizations. The Forum was an opportunity for the President, his economic team and Cabinet Members to hear directly from small business owners and leaders about their ideas for how we can continue to grow the economy, put Americans back to work, and win the future. Hear candid interviews from participants and guests conducted behind the scenes at the event.
On Thursday, March 3rd, Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, Nancy Sutley, and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, Lisa Jackson will host an Open for Questions live chat on the America's Great Outdoors Initiative. Please submit your video questions by responding to this video on YouTube, uploading your video at policyoutreach@ceq.eop.gov. Then, join us on the White House Facebook page Thursday, March 3 at 4:30PM where you will also be able to submit questions during the live chat - http://apps.facebook.com/whitehouselive/.
White House Blog, Feb. 28, 2011:
Join Us in Continuing the Conversation on America’s Great Outdoors
Posted by Nancy Sutley, Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality
Last week, President Barack Obama announced the Administration’s action plan, under the America's Great Outdoors initiative, to achieve lasting conservation of the outdoor spaces that power our nation’s economy, shape our culture, and build our outdoor traditions. This initiative seeks to reinvigorate our approach to conservation and reconnect Americans, especially young people, with the lands and waters that are used for farming and ranching, hunting and fishing, and for families to spend quality time together. Recognizing that many of these places and resources are under intense pressure, the President established the America’s Great Outdoors Initiative last April to work with the American people in developing a conservation and recreation agenda that makes sense for the 21st century.
This report is the product of 51 listening sessions across the nation—21 specifically with young people—consisting of more than 10,000 participants spanning all ages and backgrounds, plus more than 100,000 comments from citizens across the nation sharing with us your priorities for the lands and waters that you know best. We built this plan with your input and your involvement doesn't stop there.
On March 3, 2011, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson and I will continue the conversation by hosting the first America’s Great Outdoors live chat. You can join by video before the chat or by Facebook during the chat. You can post your YouTube video questions by responding to the video above, or by sending your questions to policyoutreach@ceq.eop.gov. To submit by Facebook during the live chat, sign on to our Facebook chat application on Thursday March 3rd at 4:30 pm (EST).
ENERGY UPDATE
Department of Energy, Feb. 27, 2011:
How ARPA-e is "Winning the Future"
The Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy (ARPA-e) is one of the most direct ways the Department of Energy is answering the President's call to "Win the Future". By directly funding some of the most groundbreaking discoveries in science and technology, we're encouraging the most advanced clean innovations out there today.
Department of Energy, Feb. 28, 2011:
Kicking Off the ARPA-E Energy Innovation Summit: Where Innovations in Energy Technology Are “Winning the Future”
Submitted by Dr. Arun Majumdar, Director of the Advanced Research Programs Agency - Energy
President Obama has recently been talking about his plan to “Win the Future.” Whether it’s taking steps to reform our education system, rebuilding our infrastructure, or encouraging breakthroughs in technology, the phrase is about marshaling the country’s best and brightest to solve today’s problems. As the President put it, “To win the future, we have to out-innovate, out-educate and out-build the rest of the world, tapping the creativity and imagination of our people.”
The ARPA-E Energy Innovation Summit that kicks off today just outside of Washington, D.C. highlights the amazing ingenuity of our citizens and businesses. This annual summit showcases the most advanced and revolutionary breakthroughs in energy technology today. These aren’t base hits. They’re the potential home runs – the breakthroughs in clean energy innovation that could make it affordable to put solar panels on every house in America, put millions of electric vehicles on the road or even harness wind energy that’s miles and miles above the ground a lot sooner than you might think is possible. We’re talking about truly changing the world – and making the U.S. the global leader in clean energy technologies.
Over the next three days, key players from academia, business and government are converging to discuss exactly how we can bring about the next Industrial Revolution in clean energy technologies. With keynote remarks from Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, Bank of America Chairman Charles Holliday, and Senators Lisa Murkowski, Lamar Alexander, and Mark Udall – the program itself promises to be a real treat. (full program)
Stay tuned to the Energy Blog over the next few days to see exclusive video interviews, inside looks from the Technology Showcase and in-depth profiles of featured projects.
Also be sure to follow along on Twitter, as we will be live-tweeting the events tomorrow with hash tag #ARPAE.
WINNING THE FUTURE FORUM ON SMALL BUSINESS
White House, Feb. 25, 2011:
Meeting in Cleveland: Winning the Future Forum on Small Business
In Cleveland, the President convened a Winning the Future Forum on Small Business in association with Cleveland State University and northeast Ohio economic development organizations. The Forum was an opportunity for the President, his economic team and Cabinet Members to hear directly from small business owners and leaders about their ideas for how we can continue to grow the economy, put Americans back to work, and win the future. Hear candid interviews from participants and guests conducted behind the scenes at the event.