Author: Lynn Sweet

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the First Lady
________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release February 20, 2010

REMARKS BY THE FIRST LADY
TO THE NATIONAL GOVERNORS ASSOCIATION

JW Marriott
Washington, D.C.

11:09 A.M. EST

MRS. OBAMA: Thank you all so much. Thank you. It is a pleasure for me to be here with all of you today and to welcome you all to Washington.

Thank you, Governor Douglas, for that very kind introduction. And thanks to you and Governor Manchin for your leadership in Vermont as well as [West] Virginia, and as the Chair and the Vice Chair of the NGA.

And I also want to recognize all the governors who are here today and to thank you for your outstanding leadership and the dedicated service that you provide to states all across this country. We are grateful to you.

Now, I would be remiss if I didn’t thank all the spouses who are here for all the things you have to put up with. (Laughter.) The long hours, absolutely. (Applause.) You all are making the same kind of sacrifices, putting up with long hours and late-night crises. And all I can say is, been there, done that. (Laughter.) And I know how you feel, and we are just grateful to have you all. And again, we’ll give them another round of applause. (Applause.)

Now, I know that the focus of this year’s meeting is the issue of health care. And over the next few days, you’re going to be talking about spiraling costs that are straining your budgets and running up all of our deficits — costs like the nearly $150 billion a year that we spend on obesity-related conditions like diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure. You’re going to talk about the staggering Medicaid burdens — and how premiums have risen three times faster than wages, often bankrupting families in your states, sinking businesses in states all across this country.

But we all know that there’s another set of statistics that have to be a part of this discussion — like how nearly one in three of our children in this country is now overweight or obese. Like how one in three kids today will eventually develop diabetes — and in the African American and Hispanic communities, the number is nearly half. Because if we think our health care costs are high now, just wait until 10 years from now. Think about the many billions we’re going to be spending then. Think about how high those premiums are going to be when our kids are old enough to have families of their own and businesses of their own.

So we all know that we can’t solve our health care problems unless we address our childhood obesity problem, too. And that’s really why I’m here today: to talk about the issue of childhood obesity that is so important to me and what our states and our nations can do to solve it.

But we have to begin by understanding how we got here, what’s caused this crisis in the first place. And I have my theories, but when you all think about it, this is a relatively new phenomenon. This wasn’t something that we were dealing with when I was growing up. Back when we were all growing up, most of us led lives that naturally kept us at a healthy weight. We walked to school and we walked home, because we usually lived in communities where our schools were close. All of us ran around all day at school, doing recess and gym because everybody had to do it. And then when we got home, we’d be sent right back outside and told not to come back home until dinner was served. (Laughter.) You know your parents didn’t let you in the house.

And back then we ate sensibly. We had many more home-cooked meals. That was the norm. And much to our dismay at the time, there was always something green on the plate. (Laughter.) Fast food and dessert was a special treat. You had it but you didn’t have it every day, and the portion sizes were reasonable. In my family I remember a couple of pints of ice cream — this was a big treat — we’d get three pints of ice cream for a family of four and that would last us a week, because you wouldn’t eat a pint, you’d get a scoop, and that would be it. You’d savor that a spoonful at a time.

And these weren’t arbitrary rules that our parents just made up. As we know now, it was a way of life they imposed to help keep us active and healthy. They knew back then that kids couldn’t and shouldn’t sit still for hours. They knew that kids needed to run around and play. They knew that keeping us healthy wasn’t about saying no to everything, but it was about balance and moderation. We all had our share of burgers and fries and ice cream growing up. We just didn’t have it every day, and not at every meal.

But somewhere along the line, we kind of lost that sense of perspective and moderation. And we all want the very best for our kids just like our parents wanted for us. But with the pressures of today’s economy, and the breakneck pace of modern life, many parents feel like the deck is stacked against them.

They want to prepare healthy foods for their kids, but a lot of times they’re tight on money and they just can’t afford these meals. Or oftentimes they’re tight on time because they’re juggling longer hours at work and many of them juggling multiple jobs. So they just can’t swing coming home and making a home-cooked meal around the dinner table. It’s hard.

They want their kids to be active, but sometimes they live in communities where either it’s not practical to walk to school or, worse yet, it’s not safe. Or they live in communities where gym classes and school sports are considered luxuries and not necessities — the first things to go in a budget crunch. And those afternoons playing outside, they’ve been replaced by afternoons sitting inside in front of the TV or video games or the Internet. And as a result, many parents feel like they’ve lost that sense of being in charge that their parents had.

But we have to be honest with ourselves: Our kids didn’t do this to themselves. Our kids didn’t decide whether there’s time for recess or gym class, or our kids don’t decide what’s served to them in the school cafeteria. Our kids don’t decide whether to build playgrounds and parks in their neighborhoods or whether to bring supermarkets and farmer’s markets to their communities. We set those priorities. We make those decisions. And even if it doesn’t feel like we’re in charge, we are.

But that’s the good news. Because if we make these decisions here, then we can decide to solve this problem. And that’s precisely what so many of you are doing right now in your states. You’re experimenting and innovating. Many of you are ignoring the naysayers and the old partisan divides, and focusing solely on what works.

In Pennsylvania, for example, folks started a Fresh Food Financing Initiative to bring grocery stores to underserved areas. And I got to visit one of those communities yesterday when I spent some time with Governor Rendell in Philadelphia. In that community they started with $30 million, and then they leveraged that for an additional $190 million from the private and non-profit sectors. And with that money they’ve funded 83 supermarket projects in 34 counties that are making profits, and they’re projected to create more than 5,000 jobs.

In North Carolina, they’ve launched a full-scale effort to help kids eat healthier and to exercise more. They’ve banned snack and soda vending machines from elementary schools. They’ve given grants to cities and to counties for things like sidewalks and trails and community gardens. And they’ve trained 41,000 teachers across the state on how to incorporate physical activity into the classroom.

And Arkansas started on the issue of childhood obesity way back in 2003 — something former Governor Huckabee and I discussed yesterday when I appeared on his TV show. They screened students’ BMIs, which was controversial. They got healthier food into their schools and required regular physical education classes. And as a result, that state was able to halt the rise of childhood obesity completely.

What you all are doing is proof that if we are creative and committed enough, if we meet this challenge with the kind of energy and determination that it requires, then we can take back control and we can turn back the tide and we can give our kids the kind of lives they deserve.

And that’s why last week we launched this wonderful initiative called “Let’s Move.” It’s a nationwide campaign to rally this country around a single ambitious goal, and that is to solve the problem of childhood obesity in a generation so that the kids born today will reach adulthood at a healthy weight.

So we’ve issued a call to action. We’ve said, let’s move. Let’s move to help families and communities make healthier decisions for their kids. And let’s move to bring together governors and mayors and doctors, nurses, our business leaders, non-profit community, our educators, our athletes, our parents to tackle this challenge once and for all. Because it’s going to take every last one of us — particularly folks in the private sector, from the food industry offering healthier options to retailers who understand that what’s good for kids and families can actually be good for businesses, too.

That’s why, over the next 90 days, the first ever government-wide task force, which includes members of our Cabinet, will develop a national action plan. And they won’t just review every government program relating to child nutrition and physical activity and advise us on how to marshal those resources. But they’re also going to develop benchmarks to measure our progress, and recommend actions that can be taken by the private and the non-profit sectors.

But we cannot wait 90 days to get to work here. So we’ve already gotten started on a series of initiatives to achieve our goal.

There are four key pillars. The first: Let’s move to offer parents the tools and information they need and that many have been asking for to make healthier choices for their kids. So many parents want to do the right thing, but they are bombarded by conflicting information, and they don’t know what to believe or where to start. That’s why many of you have been running public education campaigns and creating healthy-living Web sites. And California is leading the way, becoming the first state in the country to require restaurant chains of a certain size to post calorie information on menus and menu boards — just one part of an aggressive, anti-obesity strategy that’s making a difference across that state. And the health care legislation in Congress follows their lead. It includes a similar provision to help parents make informed decisions.

Let’s Move is going to add to these efforts. We’ve started with a Web site, called letsmove.gov, that’s going to have helpful tips and step-by-step strategies for parents. We’re also working with pediatricians and family doctors to encourage them to screen kids for obesity early, and then actually write out a prescription for parents with action steps that they can take to address it so they don’t feel like they’re dealing with this problem alone.

And we’ve been working with the FDA and the food industry to make our food labels more customer-friendly, so that people don’t spend hours squinting at words they can’t pronounce to know if the foods they’re buying are healthy. In fact, the nation’s beverage companies, the largest, just announced that they’re going to be providing clearly visible information about calories on the front of their products and on their vending machines and soda fountains. And this is a step in the right direction. It’s an important step, but it’s still only one step. And we have so many more ahead.

We can’t forget, for example, that 31 million of our children participate in federal school meal programs. So we don’t want to be in the position where we take one step forward with parents making good decisions, but then we take two steps back when lunch time rolls around at school and kids are faced with poor choices in the school cafeteria.

So let’s move to get healthier food into our nation’s schools, and that’s the second part of this initiative. There’s a reason why our governors are such passionate advocates for our school meal programs. It’s because you all know the impact that these programs have. You know that when kids get the nutrition they need, they perform better in the classroom and they miss fewer days of school. So let’s multiply that by 31 million, and we are talking about a serious impact on education in this country.

That’s why we’ve set a goal of doubling the number of schools in the HealthierUS School Challenge. And we’ve already gotten several major food suppliers to commit to offering healthier school meals.

We’re also updating and strengthening the Child Nutrition Act. Secretary Vilsack is taking the lead on these efforts, and we plan to invest an additional $10 billion over 10 years to fund that legislation. This will allow us to serve 1 million more kids in the first five years, and dramatically improve the quality of food in our schools — decreasing sugar, fat, and salt; and increasing fruits, vegetables, and whole grains.

But our success here is up to you. It’s up to you to get that — get the most out of these new investments. And maybe that means demanding more from your suppliers in your state, or maybe renegotiating your contracts to include healthier options. Maybe it means starting a farm-to-school program or insisting on healthier options in school vending machines, which, by the way, has actually meant increased revenues in schools in Kentucky and Maine and elsewhere.

But while school meals provide critical nutrition for millions of kids, we also can’t forget that kids get plenty of their calories at home, right in their own neighborhoods. And many of our kids live in what we call “food deserts,” and these are areas without access to a grocery store. Imagine that, living in a community without a grocery store. So too many of those calories at home come from fast food or processed foods from the local gas station or convenience store.

So that’s why the third component of “Let’s Move” is, let’s move to ensure that all our families have access to healthy, affordable food in their communities. Right now there are food deserts in every single state in this country, so we’ve set an ambitious goal, and that is to eliminate every last one of those food deserts within seven years.

And to achieve this, we’ve created the Healthy Food Financing Initiative that is modeled on what was so successful in Pennsylvania. We’ll start with an initial investment of $400 million a year. And we’ll use that to leverage hundreds of millions more from the private and non-profit sectors to bring grocery stores to underserved areas across the country.

And once again, our success here is going to depend so much on what you do. We need you to encourage communities to apply for these grants, and provide the right incentives — from helpful zoning laws, to remapped transit routes that help shoppers access stores, to job training to entice grocers with a well-prepared workforce.

But we know that eating right is only part of the battle. We all know that in our own lives. We know that physical activity is critical, too — not just for better health but for better academic achievement. Experts recommend that kids get at least 60 minutes of active play each day. And we know that many of our kids aren’t anywhere close to that. So let’s move — and I mean that literally. We have to move to find new ways for our kids to be physically active both in and out of school.

And I have to say that many of you have been very creative on this piece already. Folks in West Virginia have taken the lead in bringing DDR — that’s Dance, Dance Revolution — it’s a new video game that gets kids up and moving. Many other states use it as well. And let me tell you, I can attest to Dance, Dance Revolution. We got it at Camp David, and it will make you sweat. (Laughter.) And it is addictive in a very good way. The President still can’t do it. (Laughter.)

Georgia is using a program called HOPSports, and they’re beaming in videos of famous athletes into gym classes so kids can learn skills and techniques from their heroes and their role models.

And to build on these efforts, “Let’s Move” is going to work to modernize and expand the President’s Physical Fitness Challenge. And we’ve already recruited professional athletes from dozens of different sports leagues. They’re going to be involved to encourage our kids to get and stay active.

So that’s just some of what we’re doing — just some of it. That’s how we’re working to attack this problem from every single angle. Because that’s the thing about this issue of childhood obesity — it has so many different causes. There are so many different culprits, and it’s not enough to tackle any one of them alone, because we can give our kids the healthiest school meals imaginable, but if the rest of their calories come from the corner store or drive-through, then they still won’t get adequate nutrition. And we can have shiny new supermarkets on every block in every community, but if parents don’t have the information they need, they’ll still struggle to make the right choices for their kids.

So we need a comprehensive, coordinated approach to this problem. But that doesn’t necessarily mean an expensive approach, because I know that many of you are stretched thinner than ever in these times, and don’t actually have money to spare. But often it’s about doing more with what you already have. If you’re already paving a new road, for example, why not add a sidewalk or a bike path, too? Or if you’re already building a housing development, why not add a playground? If you’ve got school gyms or playing fields empty after hours, why not find a way to open them up to the community at night or on the weekends?

I also want to be clear that “comprehensive and coordinated” doesn’t mean centralized. I’ve spoken to so many experts on this issue, and not a single one of them has said that the solution is for the federal government to tell people what to do. That doesn’t work. There is no one-size-fits-all answer to this problem. Because what works in Rhode Island might not work in Arizona. What’s perfect for Hawaii might not be right for Minnesota. Different states, as you know, have different needs and different priorities and different resources.

And you all know best what’s going to work for the people that you serve. You know what’s working and you know what isn’t. That’s why the NGA’s efforts to support this issue and to provide best practice is going to be so valuable. It has already been. That’s why I’ve reached out to so many of you to get your ideas and your input and to learn more about how we can help you. And I want to hear from every single state, of every size, from every region. I want to work with leaders from both parties, because the way I see this, there is nothing Democratic or Republican, there is nothing liberal or conservative about wanting our kids to lead active, healthy lives.

There’s no place for politics when it comes to fighting childhood obesity. And I know all of you agree; I know that. You know that — (applause) — you know that because with a phone call or the stroke of a pen, you can determine whether a child can see a doctor or get a decent education or have a safe place to play, because you all are fighting the real battles every day on behalf of our kids, and you don’t have time for the fake battles. You’re interested in what works, what makes a real difference in people’s lives, what will make things better for the next generation.

It’s funny, because that’s what drove President Theodore Roosevelt to call the very first meeting of this organization a century ago to speak to America’s governors about conservation — about preserving America’s beauty and bounty not just for the current generation but for generations to come.

Working for the next generation is what drives so many Americans to do what they do — to work that extra shift, to take that extra job, to go without themselves just so that their kids can have more than they did. It’s what we’ve always done in this country. I know my parents have done it for me. They measured their success by the success of their children, by whether their children were happier and healthier and had a better shot at fulfilling their dreams than they did.

That’s why so many of you got involved in politics in the first place — to leave something better for those who are going to come after you. And in the end, that’s what “Let’s Move” is all about. It is simple. Let’s stop wringing our hands and talking about it and citing statistics. Let’s act. Let’s move. Let’s give our kids the future they deserve.

Look, I look forward to working with all of you in these efforts over the months and years ahead. I’m going to need you. I’m going to need you championing these causes, giving me feedback, giving me direction and guidance. It will not work any other way. And our kids can’t afford for us to get this wrong, and we know it.

So thank you in advance for your help, and I look forward to seeing you all on the dance floor tomorrow night. (Laughter.) Thank you so much. (Applause.)

END 11:33 A.M. EST

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_______________________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 22, 2010

Statement by the President on the Credit Card Bill Implementation

Today, the major reforms of the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act that I signed into law last spring take effect, marking a significant turning point for American consumers. For too long, credit card companies have had free rein to employ deceptive, unfair tactics that hit responsible consumers with unreasonable costs. But today, we are shifting the balance of power back to the consumer and we are holding the credit card companies accountable.

The new rules taking effect today mean that credit card companies can no longer retroactively increase rates or increase rates in the first year you open an account, charge misleading late fees or use over-limit fee traps. They’re now required to send ample notification if they plan to make changes to the terms of your card and they must employ clear, simple standard payment dates and times. There are new protections for underage consumers, restrictions on double billing and caps on high-fee cards. The new rules are an unprecedented step in my administration’s ongoing efforts to strengthen consumer protections and enact meaningful financial reform.

These new rules don’t absolve consumers of their obligation to pay their bills, but they finally level the playing field so that every family and small business using a credit card has the information they need to make responsible financial decisions.

##

After Democrats failed to pass health care–though the House and Senate each approved separate bills–the Senate Democrats lost their filibuster proof advantage when a Republican won the senate seat held by the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.). President Obama was sent back to the drawing board for his signature domestic agenda issue. On Thursday, Obama will meet in advance of a meeting with GOP and Democratic congressional leaders. The Obama White House posted their proposals on Monday in advance of the meeting, a package built on the Senate bill, with targeted changes, reporters were told in a briefing call Monday morning. And note: The sweetner Sen. Bill Nelson won for Nebraska is out. The main link is here.

“We took our best shot,” said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director.

Click below for briefing……

Monday briefing on the Obama White House revamped health plan……

MS. DOUGLASS: Good morning, everybody. This is Linda Douglass in the White House Office of Health Reform.

We have with us today Dan Pfeiffer, who is the White House communications director; Nancy-Ann DeParle, who is the director of the White House Office of Health Reform; and for any of your background questions, for any of your questions at all on financing, Jason Furman, who is the deputy director of the NEC.

This call is on the record, and it is embargoed until 10 a.m. this morning.

You’re going to hear first from Dan, and everybody’s going to talk a bit, and then we’ll open it up for some questions and answers.

So with that, I will turn it over to Dan.

MR. PFEIFFER: Thanks, everyone.

I want — at 10 a.m. today, we’re going to post online, on whitehouse.gov, the president’s proposal that he’s bringing to the table for the Thursday bipartisan health meeting. I just want to take a moment to give a sense of what it is and how we’re viewing it.

This is a — as we said before, the president would have signed both the House and the Senate bill had they come to his desk, because he thought they addressed the core goals that he laid out at the beginning of this process: additional stability and security for Americans with insurance; affordable options for those without; cutting costs for small businesses, families; and reducing the deficit. Both of those did all those things.

Since the Senate passed their version of health reform on Christmas Eve, the House and the Senate have engaged in a process to try to bridge the differences between those two bills. As I’m sure you remember, there was a couple of late nights in the Cabinet Room, where the president and the leadership were working through that.

What we’re going to put online today is our take on how to bridge those differences. It’s informed by the process that happened in the Cabinet Room and since then between the House and the Senate, but this is the White House’s take on it.

We view this as the — the opening bid for the health meeting. The president believes strongly that the meeting would be most productive were we to come to the table with one proposal that addressed these concerns, as opposed to a series of proposals in two different, competing bills.

So we took our best shot at bridging the differences. We think this may take some strong — some strong steps to improving the final product. It is our hope the Republicans will come together around their plan and post that online prior to the meeting so that the American people have a chance to look at it, analyze it and be thoroughly informed heading into this meeting.

This is — we’re — we — the president’s coming to the meeting with an open mind. He hopes the Republicans do too. Our hope is that we can find some areas of agreement. The Republicans bring good ideas to the table; we will find ways — look for ways to incorporate those into our proposals. We hope that there will be additional ideas that come from both Republicans and Democrats throughout this conversation that can be incorporated.

As we — and then we hope to have an honest, open, substantive discussion where both parties will get off — get off our — get off their talking points, find areas where we agree and have an honest, substantive debate about the areas where we disagree. And hopefully this will move the process forward and we can finally deal with this challenge that has bedeviled Washington for decades now.

I will now turn it over to Nancy-Ann DeParle, who will walk through some of the substantive details of what we have put online.

MS. DEPARLE: Thanks, Dan.

Before we get into the weeds on some of the specifics of the president’s proposal, I just want to take a step back and talk about the big picture of what an extraordinary accomplishment the president’s proposal would be for the American people in helping them with their health care, lowering health-care costs for businesses and government. It will make insurance more affordable by providing one of the largest tax cuts for health care in history, reducing premium costs for tens of millions of families and small businesses.

Many of them are priced out of coverage today. And it will help over 31 million Americans afford health care.

It sets up a new competitive health insurance market, the exchanges, giving tens of millions of Americans the exact same health insurance choices that members of Congress will have. It brings greater accountability to health care, by laying out common-sense rules of the road to help keep premiums down and prevent insurance industry abuses and denial of care.

It will end discrimination against Americans with pre-existing conditions. And very, very importantly it puts our budget and our economy on a more stable path by reducing the deficit, by a hundred billion (dollars) over the next 10 years — by cutting government overspending and reining in waste, fraud and abuse — and about a trillion (dollars) over the second decade, reducing the deficit by about a trillion over the second decade.

So that’s the overview. That’s what this plan does. That’s what health reform will do. And it’s important to just keep that in mind, as we now talk about some of the specifics of the president’s proposal. As Dan said, essentially what we’re talking about here is the Senate bill with some targeted and important changes that achieve the president’s goals and bridge the gap between the House and Senate proposals.

So what’s new is that the president’s proposal eliminates the Nebraska FMAP provision and provides significant additional federal financing to all states, for the expansion of Medicaid, as well as some additional financing to those states that moved forward early and covered additional populations through Medicaid.

It closes the Medicare prescription-drug doughnut hole coverage gap, as the House bill did. It strengthens the Senate bill’s provisions that make insurance affordable, for individuals and families, and also makes an improvement vis-a-vis the House bill, with respect to people at the sort of 55,000 to 88,000 range.

It strengthens the provisions to fight fraud, waste and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid, in fact adding some proposals from the president’s budget this year on program integrity, as well as a number of proposals from Republican plans.

It increases the thresholds for the excise tax on the most- expensive health plans to make sure that the plans — the high-cost plans have time to transition and that there’s no disruption for workers, from 23,000 for a family plan to 27,500 for a family plan. And it starts that so-called Cadillac plan tax in 2018 for all plans.

And finally, it improves the insurance protections for consumers, and creates a new Health Insurance Rate Authority that you’ve heard Senator Feinstein talk about. This is something that she worked on with us, and Senator Rockefeller and others have proposed. It will provide federal assistance and oversight to states in conducting reviews of unreasonable rate increases and other unfair practices of insurance plans.

So that’s sort of an overview of where the president’s proposal makes some important targeted changes to the underlying Senate bill. I’m now — I guess we’d open up for questions?

MS. DOUGLASS: Yeah. So go ahead, now. We have Dan with us, as I said, and Nancy-Ann, and also Jason Furman. So we’ll go ahead and take your questions now.

OPERATOR: Ladies and gentlemen, if you wish to ask a question, we ask that you please press star then 1 on your touch tone phone. You will hear a tone indicating that you have been placed in queue. If you wish to remove yourself from queue at any time, please press the pound sign. And if you are using speakerphone, please pick up the handset before pressing numbers.

Once again, if you have a question, please press star, 1. And we only have time for once question at a time from each person. One moment.

Your first question comes from the line of Jake Tapper. Please go ahead — from ABC News.

Q Yeah. Hi. It’s Jake Tapper. So, quick question, Nancy- Ann. First of all, thanks, guys, for doing this, Linda and Dan, and Jason as well.

If you could just — is basically the idea with the excise tax on the Cadillac plans and the Cadillac plans — could you just go into a little bit more detail of this? First of all, is this basically extending what had been negotiated for collective bargaining agreements and just allowing that to happen for everybody, regardless of whether or not there are collective bargaining agreements? And if you could talk about specifics of the excise tax. Thanks.

MR. FURMAN: Yeah. This is Jason. What the White House released about the excise tax several weeks ago — basically this is the same thing but starts for everyone in 2018. So the threshold in that year would be $27,500 for a family plan. There would be in addition to — the Senate bill already has adjustments for high-risk occupations — would also add in adjustment if you have a workforce that’s older or for gender-related reasons you have higher health costs, would no longer count dental and vision benefits towards the calculation. So we’re starting in 2018.

Now it’s important to note that you still get the majority of the revenue from the Senate-passed provision in the second decade and the majority of the benefits for curve bending in the health system as a whole. So I think if you talk to health economists, this has always been about the medium to long run, and the proposal is, in many ways, improved to deal with that, because, for example, it focuses on the costliest plans, rather than firms that hire the costliest workers.

OPERATOR: Your next question comes from the line of David Corn from Mother Jones magazine.

Q Thanks, guys, as well. Following Jake on the excise tax, let me ask you — House Democrats basically say that they don’t like this in any form whatsoever.

And one argument they make is that — that the president has claimed repeatedly that if you have a plan you like, you will be able to keep it, there will be no change. Their argument is that with an excise tax there will be pressure on plans to change; you won’t get the same benefits, or you’ll have to pay more, or, you know, employers will make changes for you. How do you address that? And have you spoken to House Democrats about that — this particular provision of the president’s new proposal?

MR. FURMAN: This is Jason again. In terms of what you’re saying, you know, this entire plan, not just this provision, is about giving insurance companies more of an incentive to be more efficient, to bring down their rates, to not charge as much as they do. And this provision is just part of it. Doesn’t say anyone has to change the coverage they have, but I think everyone would appreciate, if they’re in an extremely high-cost plan, being able to get that on a more affordable basis.

OPERATOR: Your next question comes from the line of Laura Meckler, from The Wall Street Journal.

Please go ahead.

Q Thank you. My question is, what is the total cost of this plan now? And how are you going to fund the lost revenue from the excise tax and the extra money you need for the affordability provision?

MS. DEPARLE: Well, Laura, the whole thing is offset. And we believe that there’s sort of three categories of changes. One is the changes that we make to improve the affordability and enhance the coverage. We think those changes cost around 75 billion (dollars), and they’re paid for by increasing health savings and the employer and individual responsibility payment. So that — and the funding for states is part of this as well.

So that is offset. That’d be more than paid for by some increased Medicare Advantage savings, as I said, and improving the individual employer responsibility provisions in the Senate bill.

Then the delay and reform of a high-premium excise tax is more than paid for by an additional fee that we’re — a tax. We’re expanding the Medicare HI tax base to include unearned income, and there are also some loophole closers that you’ll see when you look through the proposal that we’re adding. So by doing that, it more than offsets the decrease in the high-premium excise tax by delaying it.

And finally, we’re closing the doughnut hole, and there’s — that will be partially offset by an extra $10 billion in fees on branded pharmaceuticals. So, you know, we’re relying on previous estimates, combinations of previous CBO scores of these items, and administration effacits (sic) — estimates. And obviously CBO will be the final arbiter, but we’re — we believe these will be deficit-neutral. We believe — we have a high degree of confidence in that. And we’re committed to making any minor adjustments that would be necessary to bring it back in line.

OPERATOR: Our next question comes from the line of Jeff Mason from Reuters. Please go ahead.

Q Hi, everyone. Thanks very much. My question is about the public option. We’ve looked through this proposal and haven’t seen it. Is a public option introduced here? And can you give a definite response as to whether you support reconciliation being the way that this — (inaudible) — in the long term?

MR. PFEIFFER: Sure. This is Dan Pfeiffer. There is not a public option in here. As you know, the president supports a public option. He included it in the first — in his initial set of proposals on how he wanted to see health reform enacted. That’s the first question.

Second question — we have made no determinations on which process to move forward with, if we — if this is the path we end up going down, coming out of this meeting.

One thing I want to be very clear about is, the president expects and believes the American people deserve an up-or-down vote on health reform. And our proposal is designed to give ourselves maximum flexibility, to ensure that we can get an up-or-down vote, if the opposition decides to take the extraordinary step of filibustering health reform.

OPERATOR: Your next question comes from the line of Robb — (inaudible) — from The New York Times.

Please go ahead.

Q Hi. That’s Robb Mandelbaum actually. And I have some questions about the small-business aspects of it.

I want to make sure I understand what your — what your employer responsibility is. Are you basically following the Senate provision but including a 30-employee deduction and then raising their fee — penalty from $750 to $2,000? And if so, how did you settle on this? And finally — can you talk a little bit about that?

And finally my last question is, you talk about $40 billion in tax credits to employers. Does that follow the House or the Senate version?

MS. : That is the Senate version of the small-business tax credit, the Senate version of what a small business is. So a small business is, you know, 50 employees and below and they’re exempt. Small businesses are exempt from any of these employer responsibility requirements.

And as you quickly figured out, we also added a cushion in there, to make clear that if you had 51 employees, you wouldn’t be paying the full assessment if you didn’t offer them health insurance.

So we tried to improve that provision in that way. And also we removed the penalty for a waiting period; we extended that out.

We wanted to strengthen the employer responsibility, and one of the — you may remember that, during the Senate debate, one of the issues with the Congressional Budget Office and their scoring of this was that they — you know, you needed to make this strong enough that employers would have an incentive to participate and provide health- insurance coverage. And in testing it, that number of 2,000 was one that made it stronger and helped us get more employer-sponsored coverage. (Pause.)

OPERATOR: Fox News. (Pause.) Mr. Noller (sp), your line is open. Do you have your mute button on?

Q Yeah. Good — you hearing me all right?

OPERATOR: Yes.

Q Republican leaders have repeatedly said they want to start from scratch. Your plan is a far cry from that. Did you reject the Republican call to that out of hand?

MR. : The president believes that we have done a lot of very good work on health reform over the last year and starting from scratch doesn’t make sense. However, we are coming to this meeting with an open mind to additional ideas, and we hope that the Republicans will do the same.

It is our hope that in the — in the next several days here before, (maybe ?) the Republicans will put forward their plan. There are a number of Republican plans out there. Hopefully they can work together to consolidate.

There has been one proposal. We hope they’ll post it online. We’re more than willing to have them post it on our website if they would like, or we’ll link to it. But I think that bringing — with each side bringing their best set of proposals to the table, we’ll have the most productive meetings.

OPERATOR: Next question comes from the line of Nikole Killion from Hearst Television. Please go ahead.

Q Hi. Thanks very much. And I had to jump off for a quick second, so if you’ve already answered this, please let me know. But we are currently on the air.

I just wanted more specifics exactly on the tax-credit proposal, how that would work; just kind if you can break down this table here, or kind of give me an example of how it would work for an average family.

MS. DEPARLE: Well, the table just shows in relationship to the House and Senate bills. So the president’s proposal relative to the Senate bill lowers premiums for families with income below 44,000 (dollars) and above 66,000 (dollars). And it does that by increasing the tax credits that those families would be eligible for.

And relative to the House bill, the proposal makes premiums less expensive for families with income between roughly 55,000 (dollars) and $88,000. So that was by reducing the cap on the premiums they would have to pay from 9.8 percent of their income to 9.5 percent of their income. So that’s the premium assistance that is given in the form of tax credits.

The second way in which the president’s proposal changes the underlying Senate bill is that it improves the cost-sharing assistance so that families below 55,000 (dollars) will get additional assistance. And that goes to the insurance company, to reduce their cost sharing, the actuarial value of their plan. So it will cover between 73 (percent) and 94 percent of their health-care costs, depending on their income level. And that’s an improvement over where it was in the Senate bill. As you can see on there, in the Senate bill it was 70 percent for someone who — a family that — of four, who made between 44,000 (dollars) and 55,000 (dollars). And it’s been reduced to — or it’s — you know, the actuarial value, the amount that’s paid, has been increased to 73,000 (dollars).

And very importantly, also, the president is making clear in this proposal that he’s adopting the Senate hardship exemption.

That’s something that he feels very strongly about; that if a family simply can’t afford to purchase health insurance, they should be able to get an exemption from that. That’s something that’s in the Massachusetts plan. The Senate bill has — had such a hardship exemption, saying that if you have — if you’re facing premiums that are more than 8 percent of your income, you just — you’re exempt. And as well people below a hundred percent of poverty are also exempt from any individual responsibility requirement.

OPERATOR: Next question comes from the line of Mark — Mike Shear from The Washington Post. Please go ahead.

Q Yeah. Thanks, guys. Two quick questions. One, the abortion language — could you tell me if that’s in here and sort of where — how it might be different if it is?

And also, on the Medicaid payments, it sounds like you guys are actually increasing help to states for Medicaid, and I’m wondering, you know, if you could sort of suggest how much and where that money comes from.

MS. DEPARLE: Well, on the second piece, on Medicaid, yes, we are. We’re treating all states equitably and adding an additional year of full federal financing, so that there will be four years, starting 2014, of full federal financing for the states for any expansion of Medicaid that’s in this bill.

Then, in the out years, 2019 — 2018, 2019, there will be 95 percent federal financing and, beyond that, 90 percent. So this, we think, gives states plenty of time to adjust to these new responsibilities and give them additional financing, pretty much forever, to cover this expanded population.

As well, we’re adding a provision to help states that have — that have stepped forward early on — there’s about a dozen states that have already covered some people in this population who are uninsured, and we’re going to give them some extra assistance as well.

And it’s financed in the way that I described before, through the additional fee that we added, through the additional Medicare Advantage savings, from plans. So it’s fully offset.

MR. PFEIFFER: In answer to your first question — right, this is Dan — the — just so everyone’s clear on what they’re looking at when this goes online at 10:00 a.m. today, it is — it will be the Senate bill which we are working off of, and then a set of proposed changes to the Senate bill. The language to which you’re referring is in the Senate bill, because that’s the base of how we’re doing it here. It’s the starting point for the discussion.

OPERATOR: The next question comes from the line of Cheryl Folberg from The New York Times.

Please go ahead.

Q Hi. Brother Scherer (sp) actually asked my abortion- language question, so I think I’m all set. Thank you.

MR. PFEIFFER: Thank you, Cheryl.

OPERATOR: Next question comes from the line of Janet Adamy from Wall Street Journal.

Please go ahead.

Q Hi. Thanks for taking my call. It’s just a follow-up question from earlier. Specifically, on the additional costs of these changes, it’s been reported that those — that the additional cost is about 200 billion (dollars). Can you tell us whether that’s correct?

And then, also, on the proposal for the new federal regulations on insurance premiums, can you explain why you think this will be more effective in keeping down premiums than the state regulation that we already have? Thanks.

MS. DEPARLE: Yeah, well, we think that the additional coverage — you know, the affordability changes, Janet, and the Medicaid FMAP additional payments, we think all that adds up to around 75 billion (dollars) in additional costs. And we know, relative to the Senate bill, we don’t think it’s — we think it’s going to be around 950 billion (dollars). So that would be my answer to that. Fully offset.

OPERATOR: The next question comes from the line of Christopher Fleming from Health Affairs.

Please go ahead.

Q Hi. Two very quick questions. One, what does your proposal do in terms of the exchanges? Specifically, does it move towards the national approach of the House bill, as opposed to the state-based approach of the Senate bill? And then second, just to clarify, you talked about having a unified approach, Democratic approach — (coughs) — excuse me — going into Thursday. Does this proposal as a whole have the support of the House and Senate Democratic leadership, or is it just the president’s proposal?

MS. DEPARLE: There are no changes made to the exchanges in the Senate bill.

MR. PFEIFFER: To the — to your second question — this is Dan — this is the — the proposal we’re putting online is informed by our discussions with the House and Senate leadership, since the Senate passed its bill on Christmas Eve, but this is the president’s proposal.

OPERATOR: The next question comes from the line of Jon Ward from the Daily Caller.

Q Hi. Good morning, all. One question for you, Dan; one for you, Nancy-Ann. And just politically, what in this — in this proposal do you think will persuade House Democrats who are wavering because of the political environment to maybe switch from a no vote to an aye or a yes vote?

And then Nancy, does this — does this proposal change what the Senate bill, I believe — (clears throat) — excuse me — had with the OPM being given authority to negotiate with health insurers? Because Republicans have been pointing to that as evidence of what they see as kind of an architecture for too much government involvement.

MR. PFEIFFER: To take your first question, I think that there are a — there are a variety of things here that could address concerns that many people — that many different members on our side of the aisle had. This version deals with affordability, which is a concern of some.

It deals with the — some of the concerns folks had about — about some of the special deals that went — that emerged throughout the process.

And I think in general, having the meeting on Thursday will allow — having a meeting with both sides of the aisle, on TV for everyone to see, after having had several days to review the proposal, will help take away a little of the concern people had about this seeming to be something that was hatched behind closed doors. We’re going to have an open, honest discussion. I think that can only help the process for both sides of the aisle.

MS. DEPARLE: On the OPM issue, that is the multi-state plan which — the national plan, which actually was an idea that Senator Olympia Snowe and others had. So I’m surprised to hear that — I haven’t heard the Republicans didn’t like that. That moves towards letting plans operate nationally, which is something I thought they liked.

MS. DOUGLASS: We have time for one more question.

OPERATOR: And your last question comes from the line of David Davin (sp) from FDL News.

Q Yes. Thanks for taking my call.

My question — I know you said that you’re not putting any limits on the process, but I’m curious, if indeed a reconciliation-type process is used, I’m not sure how something like the national insurance rate regulator would be germane and would be able to be used in that process. Did you take into consideration, you know, the limitations of making those fixes when you put together this plan?

MR. PFEIFFER: This is Dan again. We did take that — as I said before, the president wants and believes the American people deserve an up-or-down vote on health reform. And this package is designed to provide us the flexibility to achieve that if the Republican Party decides to filibuster health reform. And we — these calls are — my understanding is these calls are ultimately made by the Senate parliamentarian, but that was certainly a factor that went into how we put this proposal together.

MS. DOUGLASS: Thank you very much, everybody. Once again, this was on the record, and it is embargoed until 10 a.m. this morning. So thanks very much for joining us.

MR. PFEIFFER: One last thing. The bill will be posted at whitehouse.gov at 10, so you can just check our main White House page and it will all be up there.

Below, release from Lieberman……

Lieberman Announces Plan to Introduce Repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senator Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) today issued the following statement regarding his intent to introduce legislation to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell:

“I will be proud to be a sponsor of the important effort to enable patriotic gay Americans to defend our national security and our founding values of freedom and opportunity. I have opposed the current policy of preventing gay Americans from openly serving in the military since its enactment in 1993. To exclude one group of Americans from serving in the armed forces is contrary to our fundamental principles as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and weakens our defenses by denying our military the service of a large group of Americans who can help our cause. I am grateful for the leadership of President Obama to repeal the policy and the support of Secretary Gates and Chief of Staff Admiral Mullen.”

# # #

* * * In Case You Missed It * * *

On ‘ask,’ Lieberman answers the call: An exclusive chat about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
JAMES KIRCHICK
New York Daily News
Monday, February 22nd 2010

WASHINGTON – Just when you thought Joe Lieberman couldn’t frustrate and perplex liberals any further, he is going off to become chief sponsor of the most significant piece of socially progressive legislation that Congress will deal with this year.

Next week, the Connecticut senator will announce that he’s taking the lead on repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, the 1993 law that prohibits gay people from serving openly in the armed forces. Since implementation of the statute nearly 20 years ago, the military has discharged some 14,000 qualified men and women, many of them serving in critical jobs like Arabic and Persian translation.

It’s an unconscionable policy, as it forces individuals willing to die for their country to lie to their comrades and lowers the overall quality of our fighting force.

In recent years, Lieberman has provided no end of frustration to the American left, which views him as a traitor for his outspoken support of the Iraq war, his decision to endorse Sen. John McCain for President in 2008 and his objections to some early provisions of the Senate health care bill. For his heresies, Lieberman has been demonized like few other contemporary political figures.

Now that he’s taking such a public stand on a core liberal issue, will the left be able to get over its aversion to the iconoclast in their midst and recognize that Lieberman isn’t just the ideal person to front for this effort – given his popularity with Republicans and the trust he has earned from senior military officials – but that he’s genuinely sincere in his motivations?

The reasons why Lieberman, who was asked by the White House and gay rights groups to sponsor the legislation, would choose this battle are not hard to divine. Indeed, they strike at the heart of the political tradition of which he is the lonely standard-bearer: Social progressivism married with foreign policy hawkishness.

In an exclusive interview with the Daily News, Lieberman told me that his commitment to repealing DADT is twofold. First, allowing gays to serve openly fulfills the bedrock American promise of providing citizens with “an equal opportunity to do whatever job their talents and sense of purpose and motivations lead them to want to do – including military service.” Second, and no less important for a lawmaker whose commitment to national security the Pentagon can’t doubt, is that “When you artificially limit the pool of people who can enlist then you are diminishing military effectiveness.”

Lieberman disputes the claim that allowing gay people to serve openly would cause havoc within the ranks. Indeed, to argue that belittles the maturity of our soldiers.

“My own experience as a member of the Armed Services Committee, visiting our troops on bases here in this country and abroad, particularly in war zones, the most remarkable quality you’ll find is unit cohesion,” he told me. “What matters is not the gender of the other person in your unit or the color or the religion or in this case the sexual orientation. It’s whether that person is a good soldier you can depend on. And that’s why I think it’s going to work.”

Like the Cold Warriors of yesteryear, who rightly said that America couldn’t win the hearts and minds of people abroad as long as it discriminated against black citizens at home, Lieberman argues that allowing gays to serve is a core American value that will earn us international respect.

“I see this as an extension, the next step of the civil rights movement,” he says.

And – this is me speaking – can one think of a better way for homosexual-hating, diversity-fearing Islamofascists to bite the dust than at the hands of openly gay American Marines?

Despite recent polling which shows overwhelming support for lifting the ban, Lieberman does not predict an easy fight. Even McCain, Lieberman’s good friend and ally, is opposed, stating: “At a time when our armed forces are fighting and sacrificing on the battlefield, now is not the time to abandon the policy.”

Sarah Palin echoed the line: “I don’t think so right now. … And I say that because there are other things to be worried about right now with the military.”

That doesn’t deter Lieberman, who has a reputation for stubbornness and who promises to “work as hard as I have on anything that’s been important to me as a senator.” It’s probably wishful thinking given their habitual vituperation, but now that Joe Lieberman is spearheading one of their signature causes, perhaps liberals will come to appreciate the man they’ve loved to loathe.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/02/22/2010-02-22_on_ask_lieberman_answers_the_call.html

President Obama and First Lady Michelle hosted their second ball for the nation’s governors on Sunday night at the White House.

The menu:
French Onion Soup with Croutons
Rib Eye Roast with Shrimp Scampi
Roasted Potatoes, Carrots and Mushroom Caps
Seven Layer Salad
Baked Alaska

Wines offered:
Sugarleaf Vineyards Petit Manseng 2008
Landmark Vineyards Syrah “Steel Plow” 2006
Fenn Valley “42 Ice Wine” 2008

Governors’ Dinner Table Settings 2010
SERVICE PLATES – CLINTON STATE CHINA SERVICE, made by Lenox Inc., Trenton, New Jersey, 2000. Commissioned to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the White House.

KING CHARLES SILVER FLATWARE, made by Gorham, Providence, Rhode Island, 1974; supplemented in 2006 by Lenox Inc., owner of the Gorham molds.

KENNEDY GLASSWARE, made by the Morgantown Glass Guild, Morgantown, West Virginia, 1961; supplemented in 1991 by Lenox, Inc.

CREAM SOUP CUP AND SAUCER – JOHNSON STATE CHINA SERVICE, made by Castleton China, Inc., New Castle, Pennsylvania, 1968

WATER GOBLET – FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT STATE GLASSWARE SERVICE, Tiffin Glass Co., Tiffin, Ohio; cut by T.G. Hawkes & Company, Corning, New York, 1938-1955; and later reorders

Pool report #2 Todd Gilman
2010 Governors’ Ball

Governors and first spouses from around the country were in black-tie attire in the State Dining Room.

Pool was ushered in at about 7:20, just before President and First Lady were introduced and entered.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota was seated to the right of FLOTUS. Neither he nor any other guest was seen measuring drapes, though of course the pool can only attest to the 10 minutes it was in the room.

In the back row: Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida – well beyond hugging range – at Table 3 with Govs. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Mike Beebe of Arkansas, and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of Calif. sat beside Wisconsin Gov Jim Doyle, with Interior Sect. Salazar two seats to Arnold’s right, and the two governors clicked glasses at the toasts.

Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who got a shoutout from Obama during his pre-toast remarks, was in a striking emerald jacket at Table 12 with FLOTUS and Pawlenty.

Obama opened with a joke: “This is not too stiff of an affair, because last year, Ed Rendell led a conga line. We still have photographs that we may use.”

He recalled the dire economy that hung over last year’s meeting. “Each of you in your own respective states saw how brutal it was on so many families… We took some swift and decisive action” to help “folks in your state” with unemployment, COBRA etc and to help governors “fill some of those budget holes that I know are still tough and I suspect we’ll be talking about tomorrow” when they all return, tuxedo-less

He spoke of the “very tough choices that many of you made” in the past year, but said that governors know how to work across party lines, as reflected in the NGA itself. “One of the things I’ve always said about governors that Washington could learn from is that it’s hard to be overly ideological as governor because the fact of the matter is, the rubber hits the road with you.”

Obama’s toast itself was brief. He offered it to the constituents who put up with himself and governors and “to our spouses and families who make extraordinary sacrifices.” His words trailed off into laughter at some sort of spousal joke with the first lady; the transcript may lend itself to the (probably faulty) interpretation that he was alluding to the occasional gubernatorial infidelity.

After Obama, Gov. Jim Douglas, R-Vt., gave a toast. He’s chairman of the National Governors Association, whom Obama lauded as an “extraordinary partner with this White House. Always constructive, always thoughtful.”

“This is a challenging time for all of us to serve as chief executives at the federal or the state level. It’s an economy that’s still undergoing a great deal of stress… so [it’s] essential that we all work together in the public interest to bring our states and the American people back to a position of prosperity,” Douglas said.

Speaking to Obama he offered the toast to “you, the First Lady and the people of this great country.”

Also spotted, at separate tables: Gov. David Paterson of NY, Gov. Bill Richardson of NM. Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood were seated together.

Vice President Biden was at the table in the middle, with a head-on view of the lectern.

Apologies to the many other VIPs. Presumably, all the governors in town for the NGA were at the dinner, but no attendance list was available. I can report that Texas’ chief executive, Rick Perry, nine days from the primary and never a fan of the NGA anyway, was home campaigning today.

The room was very elegant, with candles, gilt-edged plates, gold embossed name cards and such.

The menu:
French Onion Soup with Croutons
Rib Eye Roast with Shrimp Scampi
Roasted Potatoes, Carrots and Mushroom Caps
Seven Layer Salad
Baked Alaska

Wines offered:
Sugarleaf Vineyards Petit Manseng 2008
Landmark Vineyards Syrah “Steel Plow” 2006
Fenn Valley “42 Ice Wine” 2008

Governors’ Dinner Table Settings 2010
SERVICE PLATES – CLINTON STATE CHINA SERVICE, made by Lenox Inc., Trenton, New Jersey, 2000. Commissioned to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the White House.

KING CHARLES SILVER FLATWARE, made by Gorham, Providence, Rhode Island, 1974; supplemented in 2006 by Lenox Inc., owner of the Gorham molds.

KENNEDY GLASSWARE, made by the Morgantown Glass Guild, Morgantown, West Virginia, 1961; supplemented in 1991 by Lenox, Inc.

CREAM SOUP CUP AND SAUCER – JOHNSON STATE CHINA SERVICE, made by Castleton China, Inc., New Castle, Pennsylvania, 1968

WATER GOBLET – FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT STATE GLASSWARE SERVICE, Tiffin Glass Co., Tiffin, Ohio; cut by T.G. Hawkes & Company, Corning, New York, 1938-1955; and later reorders

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_______________________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 21, 2010

DAILY GUIDANCE AND PRESS SCHEDULE FOR
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2010

In the morning, the President and the Vice President will receive the Presidential Daily Briefing in the Oval Office. This meeting is closed press.

Later, the President will deliver remarks at a meeting with Governors at the White House. The Vice President will also attend. The meeting is pooled press. Following the meeting, Secretary Duncan will hold a media availability with Governors at the West Wing stakeout area. Non White House hard pass holders who wish to attend the avail should send their full name, date of birth, social security number and country of citizenship to [email protected] by 11 AM Monday morning.

In the afternoon, the President will meet with Governor Schwarzenegger in the Oval Office. This meeting is closed press. Following the meeting, the President will meet with Senior Advisors. This meeting is closed press.

Later, the President and the Vice President will hold separate meetings with Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack and Secretary of Labor Solis in the Oval Office. These meetings are closed press.

In-Town Travel Pool
Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg
Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP
TV Corr & Crew: CNN
Print: Ebony
Radio: NPR
Travel Photo: New York Times

EST

9:00AM In-Town Travel Pool Call Time

9:15AM THE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT receive the Presidential Daily Briefing
Oval Office
Closed Press

10:05AM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks at the National Governors Association
The State Dining Room
Pooled Press (Pre-set 9:05AM – Final Gather 9:35AM – North Doors of the Palm Room)

12:40PM THE PRESIDENT meets with Governor Schwarzenegger
Oval Office
Closed Press

1:15PM THE PRESIDENT meets with Senior Advisors
Oval Office
Closed Press

3:00PM THE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT meet with Secretary Vilsack
Oval Office
Closed Press

3:30PM THE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT meet with Secretary Solis
Oval Office
Closed Press

Briefing Schedule

12:00PM Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs

##

In advance of the Obama White House sponsored bi-partisan health care summit with congressional leaders on Thursday, the administration will post a revamped health care plan at www.whitehouse.gov at 10 a.m. eastern time on Monday.

President Obama and First Lady Michelle host their second Governors Ball at the White House Sunday night, headlined by Harry Connick Jr. The nations governors–including Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn– are in Washington for the National Governors Association annual meeting.

This year, Mrs. Obama is presiding over a program featuring Harry Connick. In the afternoon–following her policy of leveraging White House official events with youth outreach programs–Connick will talk to students about his career. Last year, Mrs. Obama welcomed culinary students to the White House kitchen for a preview advance from the White House chefs of what was then her first big White House dinner.

Below, from the White House….

Mrs. Obama will give a group of Washington, DC music students a special preview of the talent performing at the White House’s annual Governor’s Ball. The 3:00 PM event will feature Mrs. Obama giving welcoming remarks and turning the program over to Grammy Award Winning artist, Harry Connick Jr. who will discuss with students his visit to the White House and his career advice for them. Harry Connick Jr. and a few residents from the New Orleans Musicians’ Village will close out the event by performing a song.

The Musician’s Village was conceived by New Orleans native Harry Connick, Jr. in the wake of Hurricane Katrina to rebuild homes for many of New Orleans cherished but displaced artists, those who have defined the city’s culture and created the sounds that have shaped the musical vernacular of the world.

In the evening, the President and First Lady will host the annual Governors Ball at the White House.

Will Sarah Palin play in Peoria? Except for a brief stop in Chicago to tape an Oprah Winfrey show last November, Palin’s first public appearance in Illinois will be April 17 in Washington, a town of about 14,000 near Peoria.

The local community center — called Five Points Washington — booked Palin for a speech and a dinner to raise money for a parking lot, youth scholarships and other projects. The 1,000 tickets sold out in a day. With VIP receptions thrown in, the center’s gross — according to my calculations — should be about $235,000, minus Palin’s fee, which is in the $100,000 ballpark.

Why Palin? “I think she has something to say,” Washington Mayor Gary Manier says.

Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee who quit her job as Alaska governor, never made it to Illinois during the presidential campaign because President Obama had a lock on his adopted home state. It would have been a waste of time for the McCain-Palin ticket.

Now, she’s out hawking her book Going Rogue, offering analysis on Fox News and making speeches, recently keynoting the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville, where she opened with a cheery, “Happy Birthday, Ronald Reagan.”

Manier says the Palin booking came out of a conversation he had with John Morris, an executive at Eureka College’s Ronald Reagan Museum, a tribute to the school’s most famous alum.

The speakers bureau representing Palin pitched the college for an event. Eureka took a pass but the board at Five Points — whose vice chairman is Steve Brown, the spokesman for Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, the chairman of the Democratic Party of Illinois — used the Eureka opening to land her.

There is a national fascination with Palin, whose flirtation with a 2012 presidential run has sparked stories about her competency. An ABC/Washington Post poll this month found 71 percent of those surveyed said she’s unqualified for the White House. But the populist and popular Palin has other metrics that also count — endless clicks from an insatiable Internet audience that responds to any headline with the word “Palin,” TV ratings and book sales. All of that buttresses Palin’s de facto leadership of a loosely organized national conservative movement.

Could Palin be a factor in the Illinois Senate and governor contests, with Illinois Republicans in strong starting positions for the November election?

She is as polarizing as she is popular. Last year, the winning Republican gubernatorial candidates in Virginia and New Jersey never had her stump for them. Illinois Democrats last week continued to pound U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, the Republican Senate nominee, for soliciting Palin’s backing last year. As Pete Giangreco, an adviser for Democratic Senate nominee Alexi Giannoulias, put it, Kirk was the author of “a covert memo trying to beg for her endorsement.”

But several Illinois Republican leaders said if Palin is agreeable — and used in targeted areas — she could be a help, especially in the governor’s race, where either state Sen. Bill Brady or Sen. Kirk Dillard will face Gov. Quinn.

Pat Brady, chairman of the Illinois Republican Party, says Palin “energizes people.” State Sen. Dan Rutherford (R-Pontiac), the Republican nominee for state treasurer — Washington is in his district — says, “I think she does invigorate a certain constituency.”

Palin probably wouldn’t play well in Cook and DuPage counties, but, in central and southern Illinois, her stardom could get out the vote.

FOOTNOTE: In her Tea Party speech, Palin mocked Obama by asking “how’s that hope-y, change-y stuff working out for ya?”

I asked White House senior advisor Valerie Jarrett recently what she thought of Palin’s dig.

Said Jarrett: “Making fun of the folks’ real, sincere hopes for change that Americans across our country felt, I don’t know that making fun of that is constructive. I prefer we would say, ‘Come and think of constructive solutions that really improve our country.’ I think people are tired of being made fun of.”

Schedule for Week of February 22, 2010

On Monday, the President will meet with members of the National Governors Association at the White House.

On Tuesday, the President will attend meetings at the White House.

On Wednesday, the President will address the Business Roundtable at the St. Regis in Washington, DC. Later, he will participate in a credentialing ceremony for foreign ambassadors at the White House.

On Thursday, the President will host a bipartisan meeting at the Blair House to discuss health reform legislation. The session will begin at 10:00AM EST. President is inviting the most senior House and Senate bipartisan leadership, as well as the chairmen and ranking members of the committees that oversee health insurance reform legislation in both chambers. The President also has invited the Republican and Democratic Congressional leadership to designate an additional four Members to attend the meeting and be available to participate. In addition to the President, attending and participating on behalf of the Administration will be the Vice President, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, and Nancy-Ann DeParle, Director of the Office of Health Reform. The meeting will be pooled for TV in its entirety with pool sprays throughout the day. It will also be streamed live on www.WhiteHouse.gov.

On Friday, the President will attend meetings at the White House.

##

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_______________________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 19, 2010

WEEKEND GUIDANCE AND PRESS SCHEDULE FOR
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 20 AND SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2010

The President has no scheduled public events on Saturday.

On Sunday, the President and First Lady will welcome the National Governors Association to the White House for the 2010 Governors’ Ball. The President will deliver toast remarks. The Vice President and Dr. Jill Biden will also attend. The evening will feature a performance by Harry Connick Jr. There will be a pool spray of the President’s remarks.

Also on Sunday, the First Lady will give a group of Washington, DC music students a special preview of the talent performing at the White House’s annual Governors’ Ball. The 3:00PMEST event will feature Mrs. Obama giving welcoming remarks and turning the program over to Grammy Award Winning artist, Harry Connick Jr. who will discuss with students his visit to the White House and his career advice for them. Harry Connick Jr. and a few residents from the New Orleans Musicians’ Village will close out the event by performing a song. The Musician’s Village was conceived by New Orleans native Harry Connick, Jr. in the wake of Hurricane Katrina to rebuild homes for many of New Orleans cherished but displaced artists, those who have defined the city’s culture and created the sounds that have shaped the musical vernacular of the world. Mrs. Obama’s event will be open press and media interested must RSVP to [email protected] by 10:00AM EST on Saturday, February 20th.

Saturday’s In-Town Travel Pool
Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg
Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP
TV Corr & Crew: ABC
Print: CQ
Radio: CBS
Travel Photo: New York Times

Sunday’s In-Town Travel Pool
Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg
Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP
TV Corr & Crew: CBS
Print: Dallas Morning News
Radio: FOX
Travel Photo: TIME

Saturday, February 20, 2010

EST

10:30AM Pool Call Time

Sunday, February 21, 2010

EST

10:30AM Pool Call Time

7:10PM THE PRESIDENT and THE FIRST LADY host the 2010 Governors’ Ball
State Dining Room
Pool spray for remarks (Gather Time 6:40PM – North Doors of the Palm Room)

Schedule for Week of February 22, 2010

On Monday, the President will meet with members of the National Governors Association at the White House.

On Tuesday, the President will attend meetings at the White House.

On Wednesday, the President will address the Business Roundtable at the St. Regis in Washington, DC. Later, he will participate in a credentialing ceremony for foreign ambassadors at the White House.

On Thursday, the President will host a bipartisan meeting at the Blair House to discuss health reform legislation. The session will begin at 10:00AM EST. President is inviting the most senior House and Senate bipartisan leadership, as well as the chairmen and ranking members of the committees that oversee health insurance reform legislation in both chambers. The President also has invited the Republican and Democratic Congressional leadership to designate an additional four Members to attend the meeting and be available to participate. In addition to the President, attending and participating on behalf of the Administration will be the Vice President, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, and Nancy-Ann DeParle, Director of the Office of Health Reform. The meeting will be pooled for TV in its entirety with pool sprays throughout the day. It will also be streamed live on www.WhiteHouse.gov.

On Friday, the President will attend meetings at the White House.

##

White House senior advisor Valerie Jarrett hits Harvard University’s Institute of Politics on Friday afternoon to headline a forum at 5 p.m. eastern time. Live feed link here

DNC chief Tim Kaine talking politics at the White House with Jarrett Thursday, Politico reports.

Jarrett, who picked up her undergraduate degree at Stanford University in 1978,” delivers the Drake Lecture there on March 4. She is a 1981 graduate of the University of Michigan Law School.

Below, from the White House….

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

EMBARGOED FOR 6 AM

February 19, 2010

President Obama, Department of Education Announce Race to the Top High School Commencement Challenge

WASHINGTON – The White House and the Department of Education announced today the first annual Race to the Top High School Commencement Challenge, inviting public schools across the country to compete to have President Obama speak at their graduation this spring.

“Public schools that encourage systemic reform and embrace effective approaches to teaching and learning help prepare America’s students to graduate ready for college and a career, and enable them to out-compete any worker, anywhere in the world,” said President Obama in a video released today. “This is your opportunity to show me why your school exemplifies the best that our education system has to offer.”

“The Race to the Top Commencement Challenge is an amazing opportunity for our nation’s high schools to share their accomplishments and aspirations,” said Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. “I look forward to hearing about the many dedicated principals, teachers and parents who work tremendously hard to ensure and promote academic excellence, and I look forward to hearing about the many students across this country who are putting their education first and taking responsibility for their future.”

At the beginning of the school year, the President encouraged students across the country to take responsibility for their education, study hard and graduate from high school. The Race to the Top High School Commencement Challenge encourages schools to show how they are making great strides on personal responsibility, academic excellence and college readiness.

Background Information on the Commencement Challenge:

Applications should be completed by students and must be submitted by a high school’s principal to www.WhiteHouse.gov/Commencement no later than Monday, March 15th at 11:59 pm EST. Each school may submit only one application and high schools must be public to apply. Following the application deadline, six finalists will be selected by the White House and Department of Education. These schools will then be featured on the White House website and the public will have an opportunity to vote for the three schools they think best meet the President’s goal. The President will select a national winner from these three finalists and visit the winning high school to deliver the commencement address to the class of 2010.

The application’s four essay questions focus on demonstrating how the school is helping prepare students to meet the President’s 2020 goal of having the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. Applications will be judged based on the school’s performance and dedication to providing students an excellent education that will prepare them to graduate ready for college and career choices. Each question must be answered in full to qualify and data that substantiates each answer is strongly encouraged.

In addition to the required essay responses, applicants are invited to submit the following optional supplemental materials:

* A video – no more than 2 minutes in length – showing the school’s culture and character and highlighting how it is a model of educational success for other high schools around the country.
* Supplemental data on key indicators such as attendance, student achievement, graduation rates and where available, college enrollment rates. This data may be presented in the form of tables, graphs or spreadsheets and should be used to help the school make the most compelling arguments possible.

Text of President Obama’s Video

In a few short months, high school students across the country will put on their caps and gowns, pick up their diplomas, and prepare to start an exciting new chapter in their lives.

Graduation is an important moment for anyone. But a high school diploma is also important to our success as a nation – and it’s only the beginning. That’s why I’ve set a goal that, by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. We’ve started by investing billions of dollars in strengthening our nation’s schools – setting higher standards, supporting teachers and principals, and boosting the number of students who graduate high school ready for college or a career.

But the government can’t meet this goal alone – we need your help. And that’s why today I’m excited to announce the first annual “Race to the Top” High School Commencement Challenge. Just go to whitehouse.gov/commencement and fill out an application by March 15th telling us why your school is special and why it should be a model for other schools around the country working to boost attendance and increase the number of graduates prepared for college or a career. This spring, I’ll visit the winning school to speak at commencement.

Good luck – and thank you for doing your part to help make our students the best and brightest in the world.

###

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

_______________________________________________________________________________________

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 18, 2010

DAILY GUIDANCE AND PRESS SCHEDULE FOR

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 2010

In the morning, the President will hold a town hall meeting in Henderson, Nevada. The event is open to pre-credentialed media. The deadline to apply for credentials has passed. Following the town hall, the President will deliver remarks to the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce and the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority. The event is open to pre-credentialed media. The deadline to apply for credentials has passed.

The President will return to Washington, DC in the evening.

In-Town Travel Pool

Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg

Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP

TV Corr & Crew: NBC

Print: CCH

Radio: AURN

Travel Photo: New York Times

Out-of-Town Travel Pool

Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg

Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP

TV Corr & Crew: NBC

Print: WSJ

Radio: ABC

Travel Photo: New York Times

PST

10:00AM THE PRESIDENT holds Town Hall

Green Valley High School

Open Press

11:55AM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks to the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce and the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority

Las Vegas City Center, Aria Hotel

Open Press

1:05PM THE PRESIDENT departs Las Vegas, Nevada en route Andrews Air Force Base

McCarran International Airport

Open Press

EST

6:00PM In-town Pool Call time

8:05PM THE PRESIDENT arrives at Andrews Air Force Base

In-Town Travel Pool – Gather Time 6:35 PM – Briefing Room

Briefing Schedule

Press Secretary Robert Gibbs will gaggle on Air Force One

##

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

For Immediate Release February 18, 2010

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT

ESTABLISHING THE NATIONAL COMMISSION

ON FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND REFORM

Diplomatic Reception Room

10:20 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning, everybody. When I took office, America faced three closely linked challenges. One was a financial crisis, brought on by reckless speculation that threatened to choke off all lending. And this helped to spark the deepest recession since the Great Depression, from which we’re still recovering. That recession, in turn, helped to aggravate an already severe fiscal crisis, brought on by years of bad habits in Washington.

Now, the economic crisis required the government to make immediate emergency investments that added to our accumulated debt — critical investments that have helped to break the back of the recession and lay the groundwork for growth and job creation. But now, with so many Americans still out of work, the task of recovery is far from complete. So in the short term, we’re going to be taking steps to encourage business to create jobs that will continue to be my top priority.

Still there’s no doubt that we’re going to have to also address the long-term quandary of a government that routinely and extravagantly spends more than it takes in.

When I walked into the door of the White House, our government was spending about 25 percent of GDP but taking in only about 16 percent of GDP. Without action, the accumulated weight of that structural deficit, of ever-increasing debt, will hobble our economy, it will cloud our future, and it will saddle every child in America with an intolerable burden.

This isn’t news. Since the budget surpluses at the end of the 1990s, federal debt has exploded. The trajectory is clear and it is disturbing. But the politics of dealing with chronic deficits is fraught with hard choices and therefore it’s treacherous to officeholders here in Washington. As a consequence, nobody has been too eager to deal with it.

That’s where these two gentlemen come in. Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles are taking on the impossible: They’re going to try to restore reason to the fiscal debate and come up with answers as co-chairs of the new National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. I’m asking them to produce clear recommendations on how to cover the costs of all federal programs by 2015, and to meaningfully improve our long-term fiscal picture. I’ve every confidence that they’ll do that because nobody is better qualified than these two.

Alan Simpson is a flinty Wyoming truth-teller — (laughter) — if you look in the dictionary it says “flinty,” and then it’s got Simpson’s picture. (Laughter.) Through nearly two decades in the United States Senate, he earned a reputation for putting common sense and the people’s welfare ahead of petty politics. As the number two Republican in the Senate, he made the tough choices necessary to close deficits and he played an important role in bipartisan deficit reduction agreements.

Erskine Bowles understands the importance of managing money responsibly in the public sector, where he ran the Small Business Administration and served as President Clinton’s chief of staff. In that capacity, he brokered the 1997 budget agreement with Republicans that helped produce the first balanced budget in nearly 30 years. One is a good Republican, the other a good Democrat. But above all, both are patriotic Americans who are answering their country’s call to free our future from the stranglehold of debt.

The commission they’ll lead was structured in such a way as to rise above partisanship. There’s going to be 18 members. In addition to the two co-chairs, four others will be appointed by me. Six will be appointed by Republican leaders, six by Democratic leaders. Their recommendations will require the approval of 14 of the commission’s 18 members, and that ensures that any recommendation coming out of this effort and sent forward to Congress has to be bipartisan in nature.

This commission is patterned on a bill that I supported for a binding commission that was proposed by Democratic Senator Kent Conrad and Republican Senator Judd Gregg. Their proposal failed recently in the Senate. But I hope congressional leaders in both parties can step away from the partisan bickering and join this effort to serve the national interest.

As important as this commission is, our fiscal challenge is too great to be solved with any one step alone, and we can’t we wait to act. That’s why last week, I signed into law the PAYGO bill — says very simply that the United States of America should pay as we go and live within our means again — just like responsible families and businesses do. This law is what helped get deficits under control in the 1990s and produced surpluses by the end of the decade.

It was suspended in the last decade, and during that period we saw deficits explode again. By reinstituting it, we’re taking an important step towards addressing the deficit problem in this decade, and in decades to come.

That’s also why, after taking steps to cut taxes and increase access to credit for small businesses to jumpstart job creation this year, I’ve called for a three-year freeze on discretionary spending, starting next year. This freeze won’t affect Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security spending. And it won’t affect national security spending, including veterans’ benefits. But all other discretionary spending will be subject to this freeze.

These are tough times and we can’t keep spending like they’re not. That’s why we’re seeking to reform our health insurance system — because if we don’t, soaring health care costs will eventually become the single largest driver of our federal deficits. Reform legislation in the House and the Senate would bring down deficits, and I’m looking forward to meeting with members of both parties and both chambers next week to try to get this done.

And that’s also why this year, we’re proposing a responsible budget that cuts what we don’t need to pay for what we do. We’ve proposed budget reductions and terminations that would yield about $20 billion in savings. We’re ending loopholes and tax giveaways for oil and gas companies and for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. So, taken together, these and other steps would provide more than $1 trillion in deficit reduction over the coming decade. That’s more savings than any administration’s budget in the past 10 years.

I know the issue of deficits has stirred debate. And there’s some on the left who believe that this issue can be deferred. There are some on the right who won’t enter into serious discussions about deficits without preconditions. But those who preach fiscal discipline have to be willing to take the hard steps necessary to achieve it. And those who believe government has a responsibility to meet these urgent challenges have a great stake in bringing our deficits under control — because if we don’t, we won’t be able to meet our most basic obligations to one another.

So America’s fiscal problems won’t be solved overnight. They’ve been growing for years; they’re going to take time to wind down. But with the commission that I’m establishing today, and the other steps we’re pursuing, I believe we are finally putting America on the path towards fiscal reform and fiscal responsibility.

And I want to again thank Alan and Erskine for taking on what is a difficult and perhaps thankless task. I’m grateful to them for their willingness to sacrifice their time and their energy in this cause. I know that they’re going to take up their work with a sense of integrity and a sense of commitment that America’s people deserve and America’s future demands.

And I think part of the reason they’re going to be effective is, although one is a strong Democrat and one is a strong Republican, these are examples of people who put country first. And they know how to disagree without being disagreeable, and there’s a sense of civility and a sense that there are moments where you set politics aside to do what’s right.

That’s the kind of spirit that we need. And I am confident that the product that they put forward is going to be honest; it’s going to be clear; it’s going to give a path to both parties in terms of how we have to address these challenges.

All right. Thank you very much.

(The executive order is signed.)

Q Sir, is everything on the table for this?

THE PRESIDENT: Everything is on the table. That’s how this thing is going to work.

Q What’s “Erskine” in the dictionary? (Laughter.)

END 10:29 A.M. EST

The campaign of GOP Senate nominee Rep. Mark Steven Kirk (R-Ill.) is briefing via a conference call at 11:30 a.m. Chicago time Thursday. And it’s likely to be about a poll, since the Kirk campaign pollster is in on the call. This comes after the rival Democrat Alexi Giannoulias campaign held a briefing earlier in the week to go over, among other items, a Giannoulias poll showing him at 49 percent to 45 percent for Kirk.

Below, from Kirk campaign….

Kirk for Senate Senior Staff to Discuss State of Senate Race Today
A Clear Choice for Voters in November

Northbrook, Ill. – Senior members of the Kirk for Senate team will participate in a conference call at 11:30 AM CST TODAY to discuss the state of the U.S. Senate race in Illinois.

WHAT: Conference Call
WHO: Eric Elk, Campaign Manager
Pollster Greg Strimple, Fulcrum Strategies
Richard Goldberg, Kirk for Senate
TIME: 11:30 AM CST, Thursday, February 18

Below, release from FOX…..

FOX NEWS CHANNEL TO PRESENT INTERVIEW WITH FIRST LADY MICHELLE OBAMA

Former Governor Mike Huckabee will sit down with First Lady Michelle Obama for an interview to be presented on his FOX News Channel (FNC) program Huckabee (8-9 PM/ET) on Saturday, February 20th. An encore presentation will appear on Sunday February 21st at 8 PM/ET.

In her first interview with the network, First Lady Michelle Obama will speak with Huckabee about her “Let’s Move” campaign, an effort to tackle the challenge of childhood obesity nationwide. She will also address what life is like in the White House, among other topics.

Huckabee showcases the former Governor interviewing stars in news, politics and entertainment as well as an audience question & answer segment, and the house band known as the “Little Rockers.” The program also features special “On the Road” segments throughout cities in the United States and abroad, special musical guests and reflections on historical anniversaries.

FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour general news service covering breaking news as well as political, entertainment and business news. For eight years, FNC has been the most-watched cable news channel in the country, presenting the top thirteen programs in cable news. Owned by News Corp., FNC is available in more than 90 million homes.

###

Very cool watching Chicago’s Shani Davis speed skate to the gold last night. Rick Morrissey’s column here.

Below, from CNN….

Please find the latest CNN/ Opinion Research Corporation poll below.
For more information, visit CNN Poll: Who are the Tea Party activists.

Interviews with 1,023 adult Americans, including 954 registered voters, conducted by telephone by Opinion Research Corporation on February 12-15, 2010. The margin of sampling error for results based on the total sample is plus or minus 3 percentage points and for registered voters is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NOTE: QUESTIONS ON THIS PAGE RELEASED ON FEBRUARY 16.

QUESTIONS 2 AND 3 COMBINED

2/3. If the elections for Congress were being held today, which party’s candidate would you vote for in your Congressional district? (IF UNSURE:) As of today, who do you lean more toward?

Democratic Republican Neither No
candidate candidate (vol.) opinion
All Respondents
February 12-15, 2010 46% 46% 5% 3%

Jan. 8-10, 2010 45% 46% 6% 2%
Nov. 13-15, 2009 49% 42% 7% 2%
Oct. 30-Nov. 1, 2009 51% 41% 6% 2%

Registered Voters
February 12-15, 2010 45% 47% 6% 2%

Jan. 8-10, 2010 45% 48% 6% 1%
Nov. 13-15, 2009 49% 43% 6% 3%
Oct. 30-Nov. 1, 2009 50% 44% 5% 2%

7. Would you favor or oppose having a third political party that would run candidates for President, Congress and state offices against the Republican and Democratic candidates?

Feb. 12-15
2010

Favor 64%
Oppose 34%
No opinion 2%

CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP AND CNN/TIME TRENDS

Favor
Oppose
No opinion

1999 July 16-18*
67
28
5
1995 Aug. 4-7*
62
29
9
1995 April 17-19*
60
34
6
1995 Feb. 28-Mar. 1**
56
34
10
1994 Aug. 31-Sept. 1**
58
30
12
1994 Aug. 17-18**
59
32
9
1992 Oct. 20-22**
63
28
9
1992 July 16**
58
31
11
1992 July 8-9**
59
31
10
1992 June 3-4**
58
32
10

*CNN/USA Today/Gallup polls **CNN/Time polls
QUESTION WORDING 1992-1995: Would you favor or oppose the formation of a third political party that would run candidates for President, Congress and state offices against the Republican and Democratic candidates?

QUESTIONS 7 AND 8 COMBINED

7/8. Would you favor or oppose having a third political party that would run candidates for President, Congress and state offices against the Republican and Democratic candidates? (IF FAVOR) Suppose that having a third political party would mean that the winner of some elections would be a candidate who disagrees with you on most issues that matter to you. Would you favor or oppose having a third political party under those circumstances?

Feb. 12-15
2010

Favor third political party
under those circumstances 38%
Oppose third political party
under those circumstances 26%
Oppose third political party
under any circumstances (from Q. 7) 34%
No opinion 2%

23. What is your view of the Tea Party — would you say you strongly support it, moderately support it, moderately oppose it, or strongly oppose it, or don’t you know enough about the Tea Party to say?

Feb. 12-15
2010

Strongly support 15%
Moderately support 20%
Moderately oppose 8%
Strongly oppose 11%
Don’t know enough to say 45%
No opinion 1%

24. Please tell me whether you have or have not done each of the following: (NOT RANDOMIZED)

Yes, have No, have
done so not No opinion

Given money to any organization
associated with the Tea Party
movement
February 12-15, 2020 2% 97% *

Attended a rally or meeting held by any
organization associated with the Tea Party
movement
February 12-15, 2010 5% 95% *

Took any other active steps to support
the Tea Party movement, either in person
or through e-mail or on the internet
February 12-15, 2010 7% 92% *

QUESTIONS 25 AND 26 COMBINED

25/26. Now suppose the elections for Congress were being held today and a third candidate were running who was endorsed by the Tea Party movement. Which candidate would you vote for in your Congressional district – (ROTATED) (IF UNSURE:) As of today, do you lean more toward?

Democratic Republican The Other Don’t plan to
party’s party’s Tea Party’s candidate Vote No
candidate candidate candidate (vol.) (vol.) opinion

All Respondents
Feb. 12-15, 2010 46% 32% 16% 3% 1% 2%

Registered Voters
Feb. 12-15, 2010 45% 33% 16% 3% 1% 2%

RESULTS IN COLUMN LABELLED “TEA PARTY ACTIVISTS” BASED ON 124 INTERVIEWS WITH RESPONDENTS WHO ANSWERED “YES, HAVE DONE SO” TO ANY ITEM IN
QUESTION 24. SAMPLING ERROR: +/-9 PERCENTAGE POINTS.

Tea Party All
Activists Respondents

Men 60% 50%
Women 40% 50%

White 80% 71%
African-American 2% 11%
Latino 10% 11%

High school degree or less 26% 45%
Some college 34% 26%
College graduate 40% 28%

Less than $30,000 8% 28%
$30-50,000 18% 19%
$50-75,000 32% 17%
$75,000 or more 34% 25%

Urban 9% 21%
Suburban 41% 41%
Rural 50% 38%

Liberal 3% 18%
Moderate 20% 39%
Conservative 77% 40%

Describe self as Democrat 4% 32%
Describe self as Independent 52% 44%
Describe self as Republican 44% 25%

Vote for Democratic candidate
for U.S. House 5% 46%
Vote for Republican candidate
for U.S. House 87% 46%

18-29 years old 20% 20%
30-49 years old 40% 35%
50-64 years old 29% 27%
65 and older 12% 17%

Northeast 13% 19%
Midwest 29% 23%
South 31% 37%
West 28% 22%

Protestant/Other Christian 68% 50%
Catholic 16% 22%
Jewish * 1%
Other 6% 12%
None 9% 14%

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_______________________________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 17, 2010

DAILY GUIDANCE AND PRESS SCHEDULE FOR
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2010

In the morning, the President and the Vice President will receive the Presidential Daily Briefing in the Oval Office. This briefing is closed press.

The President and the Vice President will then meet with the co-chairs of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, in the Oval Office. This meeting is closed press. The President will then deliver remarks and sign an executive order creating the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform in the Diplomatic Reception Room. The Vice President will also attend. This event is pooled press.

Later, the President will meet with His Holiness the Dalai Lama in the Map Room. This meeting is closed press. An official photograph from the meeting will be released on www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse.

In the afternoon, the President will travel to Denver, Colorado. He will deliver remarks at a grassroots fundraiser for Senator Bennet at the Fillmore Auditorium in Denver. This event is open press. The President will also deliver remarks at a fundraising reception for Senator Bennet at the Sheraton Hotel. There will be travel pool coverage of the President’s remarks.

The President will then travel to Las Vegas, Nevada. The arrival at McCarran International Airport is open press. He will later attend a DNC fundraising dinner at a private home; no formal remarks are planned. This dinner is closed press.

Also tomorrow at 11:30AM EST, at HHS Headquarters in Washington, DC, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius will unveil a new report on health insurance premium increases, including requested increases in Connecticut, Maine, Michigan, Oregon, Rhode Island and Washington. The report comes shortly after Anthem Blue Cross announced plans to raise rates on its California customers by as much as 39 percent. The event is open to members of the media and will be webcast live at www.HealthReform.gov.

In-Town Travel Pool
Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg
Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP
TV Corr & Crew: FOX
Print: Christian Science Monitor
Radio: AP
Travel Photo: New York Times

Out-of-Town Travel Pool
Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg
Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP
TV Corr & Crew: FOX
Print: Washington Post
Radio: NPR
Travel Photo: New York Times

EST

9:00AM In-Town Travel Pool Call Time

9:15AM THE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT receive the Presidential Daily Briefing
Oval Office
Closed Press

9:45AM THE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT meet with the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform co-chairs Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson
Oval Office
Closed Press

10:10AM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks and signs an executive order establishing the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform
Diplomatic Reception Room
Pooled Press (Pre-set 9:00AM – Final Gather 9:45AM – North Doors of the Palm Room)

11:15AM THE PRESIDENT meets with His Holiness the Dalai Lama
Map Room
Closed Press

1:15PM THE PRESIDENT departs Andrews Air Force Base en route Aurora, Colorado
In-Town Travel Pool – Gather Time 12:30PM – North Doors of the Palm Room
Out-of-Town Travel Pool – Call Time 12:00PM – Virginia Gate, Andrews Air Force Base

MST

2:50PM THE PRESIDENT arrives in Aurora, Colorado
Buckley Air Force Base
Open Press

3:30PM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks at a grassroots fundraiser for Senator Bennet
Fillmore Auditorium, Denver
Open Press

4:40PM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks at a fundraising reception for Senator Bennet
Sheraton Hotel, Denver
Travel Pool Coverage

5:35PM THE PRESIDENT departs Aurora, Colorado en route Las Vegas, Nevada
Buckley Air Force Base
Open Press

PST

6:15PM THE PRESIDENT arrives in Las Vegas, Nevada
McCarran International Airport
Open Press

Briefing Schedule

Press Secretary Robert Gibbs will gaggle on Air Force One

##