Author: WhiteHouse

03.03.10 02:19 PM

2:12 P.M. CST

MRS. OBAMA: Thank you, guys. (Applause.) Thank you so much. (Applause.) How you all doing? (Applause.) You excited? (Applause.) You all fired up? (Applause.) That’s a good thing.
I’m just happy to be here.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: We love you! (Applause.)

MRS. OBAMA: Well, let me tell you something. The White House is a pretty neat place to live, but let me — let me just say this. One of the best things I do is coming out of the White House and coming here to spend time with all of you. You all really do — (applause) — you all really help remind us what we’re here for. And we’re just so proud of you.

And let me start by thanking Tiffany for that beautiful introduction. (Applause.) I got to meet Tiffany backstage. And I know that the reason she got to introduce me was because she worked hard and won an essay competition to do it. And we are proud of her. We’re proud of you, Tiffany, proud of the work that you’re doing. (Applause.) You’re a beautiful young lady, a sweetheart, and I want you to keep up whatever it is you’re doing, because you’re doing good things. And we’re just so proud of you. (Applause.)

I also want to thank, before we get — I want to thank a few people here, because there are a lot of people here who care about this state and care about this city; people who have done a lot to make this visit possible, who’ve done a lot of important groundwork to get this state in the limelight. And I want to make sure that we recognize those people — some of them who couldn’t be here, like Congressman Bennie Thompson, because he’s in Washington. (Applause.) The President has him working hard in Washington and we’re glad he’s there working. But who came along is his wife, London, and their daughter. If you all would stand so that we can say hello. (Applause.)

And also another Congressman — I don’t think he could be here — Gregg Harper — he’s in Washington, but his wife, Sidney, is here. Sidney, would you stand, please. (Applause.)

And I have to thank your mayor, Mayor Johnson, and his wife, Kathy. (Applause.) Got a chance to talk and meet them both. And it’s not easy having the First Lady come to your city, but they have just been gracious and they worked very hard, and we’re just so honored and thrilled to be here.

I also want to thank the school superintendent, Dr. Lonnie Edwards. Dr. Edwards, would you please stand? (Applause.) Because Dr. Edwards let us visit during a school day, so we’ve got to give him a round of applause. (Applause.)

And last but not least, I have to thank Governor Barbour and his beautiful wife, the First Lady of the state of Mississippi. They have — they’ve opened their hearts to me from the very beginning of this initiative. I’ve said this before — there are so many people who have been out on front on this issue long before I showed up at the White House and long before we launched “Let’s Move,” and Mrs. Barbour has been just a big advocate of “Let’s Go Walkin’” — that initiative is exactly the kind of things we need to replicate all over this country. And I am grateful to both the Governor and the First Lady for their hard work and their commitment and their sincerity. So let’s give them another round of applause. (Applause.)

So since I’ve been here I went to visit Pecan Park Elementary School. Did I say that right? Pecan?

AUDIENCE: Yesss —

MRS. OBAMA: Because where I come from, sometimes you say “pecaan” — but it’s “pecon” round here, right? (Laughter.) But we got to visit that school and some of the great kids there, and I got to walk with Mrs. Barbour and the Governor and the principal there — principal Quon — and a couple of students around the track that they built. And the kids were out there exercising and working out. It was a beautiful day, a beautiful facility, and it’s just something that we should be highlighting all over the country.

So they showed us how Mississippi, how Jackson, is working to make sure kids stay healthy and active. And that’s one of the reasons why I’m here visiting Brinkley Middle School. Can I hear it? (Applause.) That’s why I’m here, because we want to continue this conversation that I’ve been having around the country — starting about a few weeks ago. It’s an issue that I care deeply about — not just because I’m a First Lady but because I’m a mother. And I’ve said this ever since I came into office — I approach this job first as a mother. And I’m thinking about all of you all as a mother, not as a First Lady.

And we have to figure out what we can all do together in this country to help our kids in the country live healthy and active lives, and to stay that way throughout your entire lives. We care about you deeply, because too many kids right now just aren’t living that way. And we all know that. Too many kids in this country don’t get enough exercise and they aren’t as healthy as they need to be.

And if we’re honest with ourselves, as all of you know, we know that here in Mississippi, kids struggle with these issues sometimes even more than in other parts of the country. And we all know that when our kids don’t eat right and they don’t get enough exercise, what happens is that they’re at greater risk of a whole range of preventable diseases — things like diabetes. And a long time ago diabetes was also only something that happened in adults, and now we’re seeing it more and more among kids because they’re less healthy. Things like heart disease and cancer — all these things should be older folks’ issues, but we’re seeing more and more of our children being — struggling with these issues.

And what the Governor will tell you is that one of the other problems is that these preventable issues cost the state money. Here in the state of Mississippi, I think you’re spending about $750 million each year to treat diseases that don’t even have to exist. So that’s the bad news — right? That’s the kind of stuff that we’re here to fix.

But there’s a lot of good news — good news is that the folks around this country, particularly around this state and this city, have begun to focus on this issue in a real serious way. We know that a lot of this is our fault, the grownups — right? This isn’t on you all — right? And people have gotten an important wakeup call. They’re looking at the health statistics, they’re looking at you guys and they’re seeing the future in you, and we all know that we’ve got to do something. That’s the good news. Finally we’re waking up and we’re getting moving — right?

And that’s why I wanted to come to Mississippi. I picked this state because of all the creative things that are already happening here to fix things. I’m not here to highlight what’s wrong; I’m here to highlight what’s right — (applause) — what we can do for our kids. (Applause.)

Lots of good examples, like up in Hernando, Mayor Chip Johnson is working to build more sidewalks and to bring weekly farmer’s markets to town so folks in his town can be more active and eat better. And Mayor Johnson was with me when I launched “Let’s Move” in Washington, D.C. That’s a good thing.

Here in Jackson, there’s an organization called My Brother’s Keeper that’s launched an initiative called "Jump Start Jackson" — and there they’re trying to bring more fresh grocers to town, and make it safe for kids to walk and bike to school.

And all across Mississippi — and this is really key because this is where the whole state can come into play. What the Governor has done is signed a law to help make sure that schools like Brinkley are giving students more time in school to be active and to play, and that they’re teaching in the curriculum every day about healthy lifestyles and doing better to serve healthier lunches here — right — because many of the kids here, you’re eating most of your meals here at school so it’s incumbent upon us to make sure that those meals are healthy.

If you think about it, before that law was signed the average school here in this state — the lunch had more than 900 calories. That’s a lot of — that’s a lot of calories in a lunch for some kids — right? But today, they’ve been cutting those calories by reducing fats and sugars that are in the foods you have, and increasing more fruits and whole grains. Have you all noticed that? Some changes in your lunch? (Laughter.) Yes, I know how — right. There’s the kids, and the grownups, right? (Laughter.) But these are important things for you to know as you see the changes in the lunchroom — they’re happening for a reason.

Before that law was passed, more than three in four middle schools sold things like candy and salty snacks and soda to the kids. And now, today, because of that law, more than three in four schools don’t serve those kinds of foods. And I know we’ve got a few unhappy faces about that, but this is a good thing.

Every day, folks here in this state prove that if we in this country are creative and we’re determined and we’re focused, that we can meet these challenges — because this isn’t just happening in Mississippi; it’s happening all across the country — that if we really work together we can really reverse these trends and turn back the tide. We can help you all live the kind of healthy, active lives right from the start.

The thing is if you learn these habits early — right — you’ll carry them through — with you for the rest of your lives. So what I have asked people to do is let’s act. Let’s get going. Let’s move. That’s why we call this initiative “Let’s Move.” It’s about all of us getting up, getting together to make sure that our kids are living the kind of lives that we need them to live.

There’s one important goal to this initiative. We are trying to end the epidemic of childhood obesity in a generation. That’s a big goal — because we want kids born today to grow up healthy and at a good weight when they reach adulthood. So that’s the goal. And reaching this goal, it’s an ambitious goal to talk about doing anything in a generation. It’s a hard thing. But that’s why we started “Let’s Move,” because this initiative is asking everyone in the country to do their part to reach this goal. Everyone has got to do their part.

That’s why I’ve been traveling around the country — and I’m going to do this for years to come — asking everyone to step up and get involved. I’ve been meeting with governors and mayors; I’ve already met with many of them. I’m asking them to do their part to make cities and states more — healthier; building more sidewalks, turning playgrounds into track fields, and opening up abandoned buildings, and doing a whole range of creative things to do their part.

I’ve been meeting with parents and I’ve been asking parents to do their parts, because it doesn’t matter what we feed you at school, but if you get home and it’s hard for parents to make healthy choices, then you guys still aren’t leading healthy lives, so we’ve asked parents to step up and do more.

And I’ve been meeting with educators and school nutrition leaders, people like Mary Hill, asking them to do their part to make sure you all have options that not only are healthy but they taste good and they look good and it looks like something that you event want to try.

In a couple of weeks I’m going to even meet with the food manufacturers, the people who make the food that goes into your lunches and also the people who make food, period. (Applause.) And I’m going to be asking them to do their part, right, because if the stuff you buy in the grocery stores aren’t healthier, if the options are limited, then it’s hard for your families to make healthy choices.

And today I wanted to be here especially because I’m going to ask for help from the most important group of this whole entire effort, and who do you think that group is? It’s you, right? It’s all of you — all of you young people. You have to do your part, too.

So I’m really asking you all to help me. Have you ever been asked by the First Lady or the President of the United States to help them? (Laughter.) Well, I am asking you for your help. You going to help me? (Applause.) All right, well let me — but before you sign on — (laughter) — let me just tell you what I need you to do, because we can make all these changes in your communities, your parents can do things differently, the schools can do things differently, but if you’re not open to change and ready to do your part, then it won’t work either, right? I know your teachers tell you that all the time. You have to want to change, right? And it starts with the choices that you make. And this is what I tell my kids: Make healthy choices, right? When you have snack time, you’ve got the choice between grabbing a candy bar or the potato chips or grabbing an apple, right? And I urge my kids to just balance it out. Just think about putting a little more fruits and vegetables on that tray and then trying to eat them. Can you do that? Come on now. (Laughter.) A little less enthusiasm there. (Laughter.)

We know you have to be active and move, right? That means you can’t spend hours sitting in front of the TV and video games and the computer. You have to get up and move. Can you help me with that?

STUDENTS: Yes.

MRS. OBAMA: Yes. (Laughter.) They were so excited a few minutes ago. (Laughter.)

But the President and I ask our daughters these same things. I mean, this is what we talk about at home. When we’re at dinner, we ask them, what did you eat for lunch? What kind of choices did you make? Did you try a little salad? Did you put some carrots on your plate? And if you had dessert one day of the week, do you think you need to have it every day of the week? If you watch TV on Saturday all day, do you really need to watch it again on Sunday? If you haven’t finished your homework, should you really be on the computer? Now these are things that we need you to start asking yourselves. You all are in middle school, right? You all are large and in charge, right?

STUDENTS: Yes!

MRS. OBAMA: So now you’ve got to start asking yourselves these questions, right? And you have to help your parents out, because when they ask you to make the change, what don’t we want you to do, parents? Whine? (Laughter.) We don’t want whining. Can you help us by not whining about a change? (Laughter.) Can you do that? Come on, Brinkley!

STUDENTS: Yes!

MRS. OBAMA: Come on. Well, this is the kind of help we’re going to need from all of you. This is the kind of stuff we want you to think about as we move through this initiative, the kind of choices that you’re making. And we’ve been working with kids your age for the entire year. At the White House we planted this wonderful garden, and we had middle school students just your age working with me every step of the way. They helped me pull up the soil and plant the seeds, and they’ve been at the White House several times a year, because we’ve just been learning what it looks like to grow your own food and eat your own food. And the thing we found out is that when kids play a role in what they do, they’re much more inclined to try new stuff if they grew it. So hopefully many of you can get involved in your community gardens as well.

But that’s what "Let’s Move" is all about. "Let’s Move" is really about you all. It’s really about making things better for our kids, and that’s why we’re here today. You’ve got a community of people around you. You all should look in this room, because it’s not just you up there. Back there are hundreds of people who care deeply about you, and they’re all here working hard, from the President to the governor on down, because we all care about you. And it’s important for you all to understand that we’re here doing this for you.

So we’re doing this because eventually you all are going to be in charge of all this, right? One day you’re going to be the parents and the teachers and the doctors and the principals and the governors, and we need you healthy, right? We need you to be in a good, strong body so that you can get these things done.

So let me tell you a little bit about what "Let’s Move" is all about, just quickly, because there are four parts. One of the things we’re doing is asking your parents to make healthier choices, but we have to do a better job of making sure that they have the information that they need. So we’re working with the FDA to make sure that, you know those labels that they read, that tell you what’s in food? Well, it’s too complicated. We’ve got to make that easier so that they know what’s healthy and what’s not. So we’re trying to make that easier. We’ve set up a Web site called letsmove.gov. Some of you all may want to go on there, walk through that with your parents, because it gives helpful tips and strategies on what to eat and how to move. The second part of the initiative is that we’re asking people to "let’s move" so that parents actually have the foods and vegetables in their own communities.

Do you know that there are a lot of kids who live in communities that don’t have access to a grocery store or a farmers market or a place to buy fruits and vegetables? There are about 6.5 million kids who can’t walk down the street and go to a grocery store because their communities don’t have grocery stores. Well, part of "Let’s Move" is trying to eliminate that, because we can’t tell people to buy fresh food if there’s no place to buy it, right? You know how hard it is for your parents if they have to get on a bus to go get a head of lettuce and they just came home from work and they have to get in a cab to go to a grocery store — that’s hard and expensive for them, right? You all, if you’ve seen it, you know how hard it is. So we’ve got to make it easier. We’ve got to eliminate food deserts and make sure that there are more grocery stores and farmers markets in communities. So that’s something that we’re working on.

The third thing we have to do is make sure that, as I said, that more schools have healthier lunches, right — (applause) — because many of you are eating most of your meals at lunch. We can do an applause for that, that’s a good thing. (Applause.) It’s important for you to have the nutritious meals that you need at lunch. And Mississippi and Jackson, you all are already doing some wonderful things. I mentioned Mary Hill. She’s your food services director. Mary, you should stand up, because these kids should know who you are because you’re working hard. (Applause.)

Mary Hill is working on what you all eat, and one of the things that’s happened is that you guys eat lunch with your teachers now, right? And I know that might be a hassle having them sitting at the table with you, but what that does is because the teachers are sitting with you, what they’ve seen is that you’re more inclined to eat more fruits and vegetables, and so are your teachers. So just because of that one little change, having teachers eating with you, that changes how you eat. And that’s something that’s happened here in this state because of Mary, because of the governor, because of so many other people.

Here in Mississippi, another thing that’s happened is that they’ve taken fryers out of the school and put in more ovens, right? (Applause.) And just imagine, just because of that, in Starkville, two schools in that area, they’ve cut out about 3 million calories — 3 million calories — just by not having fried potatoes. Those are the kind of little things that make a difference.

But the key, one of the real things I’m highlighting in this "Let’s Move" challenge is the fourth thing, is that you all have to get moving, we all have to get moving, because you can eat the best food in the world, but if you all aren’t active, it’s going to be a tough thing.

So we need you all to get moving and be more active. This is where you guys come in, again, putting down the cell phones and thinking of creative things that you care about, whether it’s getting your parents to do the Electric Slide or doing Dance, Dance Revolution. I don’t — it doesn’t matter what it is. My kids — me and the President and our kids play Dance, Dance Revolution. How many of you all have done that? (Applause.) That’s a good game. That will make you sweat. (Laughter.)

And we need you all working, finding creative ways to stay active and get your parents active. And we’re going to expand the President’s Fitness Challenge so that more kids can try new things and get awards; maybe come to the White House because you’re meeting some goals; working with some professional athletes from all the leagues because a lot of them have signed on to help — people from Major League Baseball and the NBA and the NFL and WNBA. All of these professional athletes are going to be signing on to do clinics and to encourage you all to stay active.

So there’s a lot of good stuff in "Let’s Move." But we’re going to need you all, as I said. We’re going to need you all to help us get this stuff done. But know that we’re doing this all for you. We care so much about your future, we really do. We’re proud of every single one of you. You’re like our kids. And sometimes it may not feel that way because somebody is lecturing you trying to eat food that you don’t want to eat.

But we want you all to pursue your dreams, and we know all of you have big dreams. How many people here want to be a doctor? How many people here want to be a lawyer? How many people here want to be President of the United States? (Applause.) And that’s the good news, right? You all obviously have some big dreams, right? Well, in order to achieve those dreams, you’ve got to be healthy. And you’ve got to feel good physically and you’ve got to feel good about yourselves, right? And you won’t do that if you’re not eating right and getting good exercise.

And it’s our job as a community, as a nation, to make sure you have all the resources that you need to make it happen. So we’re going to start getting moving. You all promise that you will help me with this, because I’m going to be checking in. (Applause.) You think I’m not going to check in. And you have to help each other. Do you realize that? You’ve got to help your teachers help you. You’ve got to check in on your teachers. The teachers have to check in on you. You all have to check in on your parents. You’ve got to get your parents working. Your parents have to check in on the mayor, make sure the mayor is doing his job. We all have to check in on the governor — (laughter) — make sure that — because he’s promised me he’s going to get moving. (Laughter.)

And if we’re all working together, you all, all of you at Brinkley and all these other schools, we can get this done, right? And then you will be President of the United States, and maybe if you’re lucky you’ll be the First Spouse, like me. (Laughter.)

But thank you all. We’re proud of you and let’s get moving. Thanks so much. (Applause.)

END
2:36 P.M. CST

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.03.10 06:58 PM

The President today declared a major disaster exists in the District of Columbia and ordered Federal aid to supplement the District’s recovery efforts in the area struck by a severe winter storm and snowstorm during the period of December 18-20, 2009.

Federal funding is available to the District of Columbia and certain private nonprofit organizations on a cost-sharing basis for emergency work and the repair or replacement of facilities damaged by the severe winter storm and snowstorm.

In addition, assistance is available to the District of Columbia on a cost-sharing basis for emergency. protective measures, including snow assistance, for a continuous 48-hour period during or proximate to the incident period.

Federal funding is also available on a cost-sharing basis for hazard mitigation measures for the District of Columbia.

W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Department of Homeland Security, named Regis Leo Phelan as the Federal Coordinating Officer for Federal recovery operations in the affected area.

FEMA said additional designations may be made at a later date if requested by the District of Columbia and warranted by the results of further damage assessments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FEMA (202) 646-3272.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.03.10 11:46 AM

1:50 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much, all of you, for joining us today. And I want to thank Julie, Barbara, Roland, Stephen, Renee, and Christopher, standing behind me — physicians, physicians assistants, and nurses who understand how important it is for us to make much needed changes in our health care system.

I want to thank all of you who are here today. I want to specially recognize two people who have been working tirelessly on that — on this effort, my Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius — (applause) — as well as our quarterback for health reform out of the White House, Nancy-Ann DeParle. (Applause.)

We began our push to reform health insurance last March, in this room, with doctors and nurses who know the system best. And so it’s fitting to be joined by all of you as we bring this journey to a close.

Last Thursday, I spent seven hours at a summit where Democrats and Republicans engaged in a public and very substantive discussion about health care. This meeting capped off a debate that began with a similar summit nearly one year ago. And since then, every idea has been put on the table. Every argument has been made. Everything there is to say about health care has been said — (laughter) — and just about everybody has said it. (Laughter.) So now is the time to make a decision about how to finally reform health care so that it works, not just for the insurance companies, but for America’s families and America’s businesses.

Now, where both sides say they agree is that the status quo is not working for the American people. Health insurance is becoming more expensive by the day. Families can’t afford it. Businesses can’t afford it. The federal government can’t afford it. Smaller businesses and individuals who don’t get coverage at work are squeezed especially hard. And insurance companies freely ration health care based on who’s sick and who’s healthy; who can pay and who can’t. That’s the status quo. That’s the system we have right now.

Democrats and Republicans agree that this is a serious problem for America. And we agree that if we do nothing -– if we throw up our hands and walk away -– it’s a problem that will only grow worse. Nobody disputes that. More Americans will lose their family’s health insurance if they switch jobs or lose their job. More small businesses will be forced to choose between health care and hiring. More insurance companies will deny people coverage who have preexisting conditions, or they’ll drop people’s coverage when they get sick and need it most. And the rising cost of Medicare and Medicaid will sink our government deeper and deeper and deeper into debt. On all of this we agree.
So the question is, what do we do about it?

On one end of the spectrum, there are some who’ve suggested scrapping our system of private insurance and replacing it with a government-run health care system. And though many other countries have such a system, in America it would be neither practical nor realistic.

On the other end of the spectrum, there are those, and this includes most Republicans in Congress, who believe the answer is to loosen regulations on the insurance industry — whether it’s state consumer protections or minimum standards for the kind of insurance they can sell. The argument is, is that that will somehow lower costs. I disagree with that approach. I’m concerned that this would only give the insurance industry even freer rein to raise premiums and deny care.

So I don’t believe we should give government bureaucrats or insurance company bureaucrats more control over health care in America. I believe it’s time to give the American people more control over their health care and their health insurance. I don’t believe we can afford to leave life-and-death decisions about health care to the discretion of insurance company executives alone. I believe that doctors and nurses and physician assistants like the ones in this room should be free to decide what’s best for their patients. (Applause.)

Now, the proposal I put forward gives Americans more control over their health insurance and their health care by holding insurance companies more accountable. It builds on the current system where most Americans get their health insurance from their employer. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. I can tell you as the father of two young girls, I would not want any plan that interferes with the relationship between a family and their doctor.

Essentially, my proposal would change three things about the current health care system. First, it would end the worst practices of insurance companies. No longer would they be able to deny your coverage because of a preexisting condition. No longer would they be able to drop your coverage because you got sick. No longer would they be able to force you to pay unlimited amounts of money out of your own pocket. No longer would they be able to arbitrarily and massively raise premiums like Anthem Blue Cross recently tried to do in California — up to 39 percent increases in one year in the individual market. Those practices would end.

Second, my proposal would give uninsured individuals and small business owners the same kind of choice of private health insurance that members of Congress get for themselves — because if it’s good enough for members of Congress, it’s good enough for the people who pay their salaries. (Applause.)

The reason federal employees get a good deal on health insurance is that we all participate in an insurance market where insurance companies give better coverage and better rates, because they get more customers. It’s an idea that many Republicans have embraced in the past, before politics intruded.
And my proposal says that if you still can’t afford the insurance in this new marketplace, even though it’s going to provide better deals for people than they can get right now in the individual marketplace, then we’ll offer you tax credits to do so — tax credits that add up to the largest middle-class tax cut for health care in history. After all, the wealthiest among us can already buy the best insurance there is, and the least well off are able to get coverage through Medicaid. So it’s the middle class that gets squeezed, and that’s who we have to help.
Now, it is absolutely true that all of this will cost some money — about $100 billion per year. But most of this comes from the nearly $2 trillion a year that America already spends on health care — but a lot of it is not spent wisely. A lot of that money is being wasted or spent badly. So within this plan, we’re going to make sure the dollars we spend go towards making insurance more affordable and more secure. We’re going to eliminate wasteful taxpayer subsidies that currently go to insurance and pharmaceutical companies; set a new fee on insurance companies that stand to gain a lot of money and a lot of profits as millions of Americans are able to buy insurance; and we’re going to make sure that the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share on Medicare.

The bottom line is our proposal is paid for. And all the new money generated in this plan goes back to small businesses and middle-class families who can’t afford health insurance. It would also lower prescription drug prices for seniors. And it would help train new doctors and nurses and physician assistants to provide care for American families.

Finally, my proposal would bring down the cost of health care for millions — families, businesses, and the federal government. We have now incorporated most of the serious ideas from across the political spectrum about how to contain the rising cost of health care — ideas that go after the waste and abuse in our system, especially in programs like Medicare. But we do this while protecting Medicare benefits, and extending the financial stability of the program by nearly a decade.

Our cost-cutting measures mirror most of the proposals in the current Senate bill, which reduces most people’s premiums and brings down our deficit by up to a trillion dollars over the next two decades — brings down our deficit. Those aren’t my numbers; those are the savings determined by the Congressional Budget Office, which is the Washington acronym for the nonpartisan, independent referee of Congress in terms of how much stuff costs. (Laughter.)

So that’s our proposal. This is where we’ve ended up. It’s an approach that has been debated and changed and I believe improved over the last year. It incorporates the best ideas from Democrats and Republicans — including some of the ideas that Republicans offered during the health care summit, like funding state grants on medical malpractice reform, and curbing waste and fraud and abuse in the health care system. My proposal also gets rid of many of the provisions that had no place in health care reform — provisions that were more about winning individual votes in Congress than improving health care for all Americans.

Now, despite all that we agree on and all the Republican ideas we’ve incorporated, many — probably most — Republicans in Congress just have a fundamental disagreement over whether we should have more or less oversight of insurance companies. And if they truly believe that less regulation would lead to higher quality, more affordable health insurance, then they should vote against the proposal I’ve put forward.

Now, some also believe that we should, instead of doing what I’m proposing, pursue a piecemeal approach to health insurance reform, where we tinker around the edges of this challenge for the next few years. Even those who acknowledge the problem of the uninsured say we just can’t afford to help them right now — which is why the Republican proposal only covers 3 million uninsured Americans while we cover over 31 million.

The problem with that approach is that unless everyone has access to affordable coverage, you can’t prevent insurance companies from denying coverage based on preexisting conditions; you can’t limit the amount families are forced to pay out of their own pockets. The insurance reforms rest on everybody having access to coverage. And you also don’t do anything about the fact that taxpayers currently end up subsidizing the uninsured when they’re forced to go to the emergency room for care, to the tune of about a thousand bucks per family. You can’t get those savings if those people are still going to the emergency room. So the fact is, health reform only works if you take care of all of these problems at once.

Now, both during and after last week’s summit, Republicans in Congress insisted that the only acceptable course on health care reform is to start over. But given these honest and substantial differences between the parties about the need to regulate the insurance industry and the need to help millions of middle-class families get insurance, I don’t see how another year of negotiations would help.

Moreover, the insurance companies aren’t starting over. They’re continuing to raise premiums and deny coverage as we speak. For us to start over now could simply lead to delay that could last for another decade, or even more. The American people, and the U.S. economy, just can’t wait that long. So, no matter which approach you favor, I believe the United States Congress owes the American people a final vote on health care reform. (Applause.)

We have debated this issue thoroughly, not just for the past year but for decades. Reform has already passed the House with a majority. It has already passed the Senate with a supermajority of 60 votes. And now it deserves the same kind of up or down vote that was cast on welfare reform, that was cast on the Children’s Health Insurance Program, that was used for COBRA health coverage for the unemployed, and, by the way, for both Bush tax cuts — all of which had to pass Congress with nothing more than a simple majority.

I, therefore, ask leaders in both houses of Congress to finish their work and schedule a vote in the next few weeks. From now until then, I will do everything in my power to make the case for reform. (Applause.) And I urge every American who wants this reform to make their voice heard as well — every family, every business, every patient, every doctor, every nurse, every physician’s assistant. Make your voice heard.

This has been a long and wrenching debate. It has stoked great passions among the American people and their representatives. And that’s because health care is a difficult issue. It is a complicated issue. If it was easy, it would have been solved long ago. As all of you know from experience, health care can literally be an issue of life or death. And as a result, it easily lends itself to demagoguery and political gamesmanship, and misrepresentation and misunderstanding.

But that’s not an excuse for those of us who were sent here to lead. That’s not an excuse for us to walk away. We can’t just give up because the politics are hard. I know there’s been a fascination, bordering on obsession, in this media town about what passing health insurance reform would mean for the next election and the one after that. How will this play? What will happen with the polls? I will leave it to others to sift through the politics, because that’s not what this is about. That’s not why we’re here.

This is about what reform would mean for the mother with breast cancer whose insurance company will finally have to pay for her chemotherapy. This is about what reform would mean for the small business owner who will no longer have to choose between hiring more workers or offering coverage to the employees she has. This is about what reform would mean for middle-class families who will be able to afford health insurance for the very first time in their lives and get a regular checkup once in a while, and have some security about their children if they get sick.

This is about what reform would mean for all those men and women I’ve met over the last few years who’ve been brave enough to share their stories. When we started our push for reform last year, I talked to a young mother in Wisconsin named Laura Klitzka. She has two young children. She thought she had beaten her breast cancer but then later discovered it had spread to her bones. She and her husband were working and had insurance, but their medical bills still landed them in debt. And now she spends time worrying about that debt when all she wants to do is spend time with her children and focus on getting well.

This should not happen in the United States of America. And it doesn’t have to. (Applause.)

In the end, that’s what this debate is about. It’s about what kind of country we want to be. It’s about the millions of lives that would be touched and, in some cases, saved by making private health insurance more secure and more affordable.

So at stake right now is not just our ability to solve this problem, but our ability to solve any problem. The American people want to know if it’s still possible for Washington to look out for their interests and their future. They are waiting for us to act. They are waiting for us to lead. And as long as I hold this office, I intend to provide that leadership. I do not know how this plays politically, but I know it’s right. (Applause.) And so I ask Congress to finish its work, and I look forward to signing this reform into law.

Thank you very much, everybody. Let’s get it done. (Applause.)

END
2:09 P.M. EST

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.03.10 11:10 AM

The White House announced today that President Obama will travel to the Philadelphia and St. Louis metropolitan areas next week to discuss health insurance reform.

He will head to the Philadelphia area on Monday, March 8 and to the St. Louis area on Wednesday, March 10. More details including press credentialing information will be released in the coming days.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.02.10 03:48 PM

A PROCLAMATION

Countless women have steered the course of our history, and their stories are ones of steadfast determination. From reaching for the ballot box to breaking barriers on athletic fields and battlefields, American women have stood resolute in the face of adversity and overcome obstacles to realize their full measure of success. Women’s History Month is an opportunity for us to recognize the contributions women have made to our Nation, and to honor those who blazed trails for women’s empowerment and equality.

Women from all walks of life have improved their communities and our Nation. Sylvia Mendez and her family stood up for her right to an education and catalyzed the desegregation of our schools. Starting as a caseworker in city government, Dr. Dorothy Height has dedicated her life to building a more just society. One of our young heroes, Caroline Moore, contributed to advances in astronomy by discovering a supernova at age 14.

When women like these reach their potential, our country as a whole prospers. That is the duty of our Government — not to guarantee success, but to ensure all Americans can achieve it. My Administration is working to fulfill this promise with initiatives like the White House Council on Women and Girls, which promotes the importance of taking women and girls into account in Federal policies and programs. This council is committed to ensuring our Government does all it can to give our daughters the chance to achieve their dreams.

As we move forward, we must correct persisting inequalities. Women comprise over 50 percent of our population but hold fewer than 17 percent of our congressional seats. More than half our college students are female, yet when they graduate, their male classmates still receive higher pay on average for the same work. Women also hold disproportionately fewer science and engineering jobs. That is why my Administration launched our Educate to Innovate campaign, which will inspire young people from all backgrounds to drive America to the forefront of science, technology, engineering, and math. By increasing women’s participation in these fields, we will foster a new generation of innovators to follow in the footsteps of the three American women selected as 2009 Nobel Laureates.

Our Nation’s commitment to women’s rights must not end at our own borders, and my Administration is making global women’s empowerment a core pillar of our foreign policy. My Administration created the first Office for Global Women’s Issues and appointed an Ambassador at Large to head it. We are working with the United Nations and other international institutions to support women’s equality and to curtail violence against women and girls, especially in situations of war and conflict. We are partnering internationally to improve women’s welfare through targeted investments in agriculture, nutrition, and health, as well as programs that empower women to contribute to economic and social progress in their communities. And we are following through on the commitments I made in Cairo to promote access to education, improve literacy, and expand employment opportunities for women and girls.

This month, let us carry forth the legacy of our mothers and grandmothers. As we honor the women who have shaped our Nation, we must remember that we are tasked with writing the next chapter of women’s history. Only if we teach our daughters that no obstacle is too great for them, that no ceiling can block their ascent, will we inspire them to reach for their highest aspirations and achieve true equality.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 2010 as Women’s History Month. I call upon all our citizens to observe this month with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities that honor the history, accomplishments, and contributions of American women.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this second day of March, in the year of our Lord two thousand ten, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth.

BARACK OBAMA

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.03.10 08:18 AM

“I’m pleased to hear that the Government Accountability Office has found what we have been hearing from people across the country: overall Recovery Act programs and projects are working effectively to create jobs and drive economic growth. As GAO notes, Recovery Act investments have been critical for preventing massive budget cuts to programs like education and Medicaid, and because we’re delivering on-time – and in many cases under-budget – on Recovery Act projects, we’ve been able to get maximum bang for the employment buck on our infrastructure investments.”

“Both public and private forecasters now say the Recovery Act is already responsible for about 2 million jobs, so it’s clear that our work over the last year is delivering results. Because the Recovery Act is an unprecedented program, we are constantly looking for ways to improve its implementation and appreciate some of the new recommendations GAO has made today. As we have with previous reports, we have asked agencies to look at how they can act on the new guidance to sharpen management of the program even further.”

“One year in, there is growing consensus that the Recovery Act has worked to pull us back from the brink of economic disaster and lay a foundation for recovery – we’re pleased to hear today that GAO agrees.”

FACT SHEET
GAO Report Key Findings

Payments Will Shift from Rescue to Rebuild, Best is Yet to Come

GAO: “However, by fiscal year 2012, investments in highways, transit, high-speed rail, and other transportation infrastructure will be the largest share of state and local Recovery Act funding… Thus, across the years, spending shifts from a primary focus on recovery to a primary focus on reinvestment.”

The Administration agrees and expects outlays for projects will double in the first two quarters of this year. As the weather begins to thaw, thousands of construction projects funded in late 2009 are expected to break ground across the country. And work is beginning on major project investments like broadband, health IT, smart grid and weatherization that were made last year.Recovery Funds Helped Fill State Budget Shortfalls, Avoid Dangerous Cuts

GAO: “Given enrollment growth, most states reported that the increased FMAP funds were integral to their efforts to maintain current eligibility levels, benefits and services, and to avoid further program reductions. For example, Georgia reported using these funds to avoid reductions in eligibility and optional benefits, and Colorado reported using the funds to reduce planned cuts to provider payment rates.”

Approximately $130 billion in Recovery Act funds have now gone to states to provide budget relief in areas like Medicaid and education to help keep people employed and assist those most in need. An additional $85 billion in funds have gone to states to administer other programs for a total $215 million to-date that is helping address state budget shortfalls.Recovery Funds Spent Wisely

GAO: “While many officials noted that they selected projects that could be started quickly, states and transit agencies have used the considerable latitude they have under the existing federal surface transportation structure to address a variety of state and local goals.”

More than 55,000 projects across the country have already been funded through the Recovery Act ranging from green building retrofits and highway improvement projects to construction of renewable energy manufacturing facilities and establishment of a nationwide smart energy grid. It’s clear from GAO’s assessment that the projects selected for Recovery funding are not only meeting immediate infrastructure needs and creating jobs up-front, but laying a new foundation for long-term economic growth.Cost Savings Lead to Additional Job-Creating Projects

GAO: “Many highway contracts were awarded for less than the original cost estimates. These ‘bid savings’ allowed states to fund more projects with the Recovery Act funding than were initially anticipated.”

As GAO notes, Recovery Act cost-savings are always reinvested in additional projects to create even more jobs and drive even more economic growth. GAO recognizes the Department of Transportation for regularly having projects come in under-budget, but this accomplishment is not limited to transportation projects. For example, in August, the Department of Homeland Security was able to quickly reallocate $240 million in bid savings on current projects to new in-line baggage screening projects at ten additional airports across the country.GAO Recognizes Improvements in Recipient Reporting

GAO: “[T]he second round of reporting appears to have gone more smoothly as recipients have become more familiar with the reporting system and requirements. GAO expects that the simplified jobs reporting guidance and reporting system enhancements will ultimately result in improved data quality and reliability.”

Because this level of recipient reporting is unprecedented, it is a constantly evolving process and we are pleased to hear that GAO recognizes the progress made with the most recent round of reporting. We appreciate GAO’s continued input on strengthening the process and agree that both the process and the data quality will become even better with each reporting period.GAO Recommends Improvements to Agency Implementation of Some Programs

GAO:
“The Secretary of Transportation should gather timely information on the progress states are making in meeting the maintenance-of-effort requirements and report preliminary information to Congress within 60 days of the certified period.”

“[W]e recommend that the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development develop a management plan to determine the adequate level of agency staff needed to administer both the Recovery Act funds and the existing Capital Fund program going forward… We recommend that the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development instruct housing agencies to discontinue use of the jobs calculator provided by HUD in the first round of recipient reporting for subsequent rounds of reporting to ensure the correct job calculation is used.”

“[W]e recommend that the Secretary of the Department of Education(Education) and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) provide clarifying guidance to recipients on how to best calculate FTEs for education employees during quarters when school is not in session.”

• The White House has directed agencies to assess GAO’s concerns and consider possible improvements.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.03.10 09:18 AM

Please find below excerpts from President Obama’s remarks this afternoon as prepared for delivery:

“I don’t believe we should give government bureaucrats or insurance company bureaucrats more control over health care in America. I believe it’s time to give the American people more control over their own health insurance. I don’t believe we can afford to leave life-and-death decisions about health care to the discretion of insurance company executives alone. I believe that doctors and nurses like the ones in this room should be free to decide what’s best for their patients.

The proposal I’ve put forward gives Americans more control over their health care by holding insurance companies more accountable. It builds on the current system where most Americans get their health insurance from their employer. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. Because I can tell you that as the father of two young girls, I wouldn’t want any plan that interferes with the relationship between a family and their doctor.”

“So this is our proposal. This is where we’ve ended up. It’s an approach that has been debated and changed and I believe improved over the last year. It incorporates the best ideas from Democrats and Republicans – including some of the ideas that Republicans offered during the health care summit, like funding state grants on medical malpractice reform and curbing waste, fraud, and abuse in the health care system. My proposal also gets rid of many of the provisions that had no place in health care reform – provisions that were more about winning individual votes in Congress than improving health care for all Americans.”

“At stake right now is not just our ability to solve this problem, but our ability to solve any problem. The American people want to know if it’s still possible for Washington to look out for their interests and their future. They are waiting for us to act. They are waiting for us to lead. And as long as I hold this office, I intend to provide that leadership. I don’t know how this plays politically, but I know it’s right. And so I ask Congress to finish its work, and I look forward to signing this reform into law.”

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.02.10 08:24 PM

“During these difficult economic times, supporting American workers, their families and our small businesses must be everyone’s focus. The bill passed tonight by the Senate will extend access to health care benefits for workers who have lost their jobs, help small businesses get loans so they can grow and hire, and extend unemployment insurance benefits for millions of Americans who are looking for work. I’m grateful to the members of the Senate on both sides of the aisle who worked to end this roadblock to relief for America’s working families.”

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.03.10 05:51 AM

On Tuesday, March 2, 2010 the President signed into law:

H.R. 4691, the “Temporary Extension Act of 2010,” which provides short-term extensions of several authorities, including those related to: (1) unemployment compensation; (2)COBRA premiums; (3)Medicare physician payments; (4)Medicare therapy caps; (5) surface transportation programs; (6)flood insurance programs; (7)retransmission of television broadcasts; (8)Federal poverty guidelines; and (9) Small Business Administration loan guarantees.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.02.10 12:49 PM

Savannah, Georgia

3:46 P.M. EST

Q Mr. President, what has impressed you about Meddin Studios? What do you see here that —

THE PRESIDENT: Well, look, the — if you think about the two businesses we just visited, on the one hand you’ve got old-line manufacturing at a steel company that is in its third generation, but they’ve been able to adapt to a tough manufacturing environment and succeed, mainly around customer service, being able to turn around orders very quickly, specialized orders.

These guys here at Meddin I think are doing a similar concept, which is that whatever the customer needs in terms of film production, digital production, sound, you name it, they’ve got it all under one roof. And what it means is that anybody who comes here is going to be able to, from soup to nuts, do what they need to do very effectively.

The main reason that we wanted to highlight what they’re doing is they took advantage of an SBA loan to get this thing started. And I was just finding out how that experience was. I’m sort of doing a customer satisfaction survey here — (laughter) — with our SBA loans, and it sounds like it really was helpful in terms of making sure that these guys could get started with the business idea that they had, and it doesn’t sound like, without it, they would have been able to get moving as quickly as they did.

So it’s a testimony, I think, to the good work that the SBA is doing. It’s an example of the kinds of additional capital we want to get out to small businesses and medium-sized businesses as part of the jobs package that hopefully will be working its way through Congress in the next several weeks.

END
3:48 P.M. EST

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.02.10 01:29 PM

WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individual to a key administration post:

James L. Taylor, Chief Financial Officer, Department of Labor President Obama also announced his intent to appoint Woody N. Peterson to serve as Commissioner of the District of Columbia Judicial Nominations Commission.

President Obama said, “These accomplished and dedicated individuals will bring extensive experience to their roles, and I am grateful they have chosen to serve in my administration. I look forward to working with them in the months and years ahead.”

President Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individual to a key administration post:

James L. Taylor, Nominee for Chief Financial Officer, Department of Labor
James L. Taylor has nearly thirty years of federal financial management experience. He is currently the Deputy Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security, where he assists the Inspector General in managing over 600 auditors, inspectors, and investigators. From 1999-2005, Mr. Taylor was the Deputy Chief Financial Officer for the Department of Commerce, where he successfully implemented the department’s first integrated financial management system. Prior to his position at Commerce, Mr. Taylor served as the Deputy Chief Financial Officer for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, where he helped transform FEMA’s financial operations to more effectively support the agency’s disaster response activities. Mr. Taylor has received the Donald E. Scantlebury Award for Excellence in Federal Financial Management, and the Presidential Rank Award of Distinguished Executive. He received his B.A. from Old Dominion University and an MPA from the University of Delaware, where he was a Public Service Fellow.

President Obama also announced his intent to appoint the following individual to serve as Commissioner of the District of Columbia Judicial Nominations Commission:

Woody N. Peterson, Appointee for Commissioner, District of Columbia Judicial Nominations Commission
Woody Peterson is a partner at Dickstein Shapiro LLP in the Firm’s Antitrust & Dispute Resolution Group. His practice focuses on appellate litigation. Mr. Peterson has authored or co-authored numerous briefs in the federal courts of appeals and state appellate courts, as well as petitions for certiorari, briefs in opposition, and amicus briefs in the Supreme Court of the United States. The briefs have spanned subject areas as diverse as energy, antitrust, ERISA, securities, defamation, employment, insurance coverage, and intellectual property. Mr. Peterson is a member of the bars of the District of Columbia and Massachusetts. He served as co-editor of Chapter 11 (“Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity”) of the Fourth Edition of the BNA Employment Discrimination Law treatise, published in 2007. Mr. Peterson received his A.B., magna cum laude, from Harvard College in 1970 and his J.D., cum laude, from the Harvard Law School in 1976.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.02.10 10:10 AM

The President today declared a major disaster exists in the State of West Virginia and ordered Federal aid to supplement State and local recovery efforts in the area struck by a severe winter storm and snowstorm during the period of December 18-20, 2009.

Federal funding is available to the State and eligible local governments and certain private nonprofit organizations on a cost-sharing basis for emergency work and the repair or replacement of facilities damaged by the severe winter storm and snowstorm in the counties of Boone, Calhoun, Clay, Fayette, Greenbrier, Kanawha, McDowell, Mingo, Nicholas, Pendleton, Pocahontas, Raleigh, Ritchie, Roane, and Wyoming.

In addition, assistance is available to the State and eligible local governments on a cost-sharing basis for emergency protective measures, including snow assistance, for a continuous 48-hour period during or proximate to the incident period.

W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Department of Homeland Security, named Regis Leo Phelan as the Federal Coordinating Officer for Federal recovery operations in the affected area.

FEMA said additional designations may be made at a later date if requested by the State and warranted by the results of further damage assessments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FEMA (202) 646-3272.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.02.10 10:39 AM

12:31 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. (Applause.) Well, thank you so much. Everybody please have a seat, have a seat. Thank you. (Applause.) It is good to be back in Georgia. It is good to be back in Georgia — although where’s the sun, guys? (Laughter.) I was looking forward to —

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Fired up!

THE PRESIDENT: I’m still fired up, but we’ve been getting a lot of snow in Washington, D.C., so I was looking forward to maybe 60, 70 degrees. (Laughter.) But I guess I’ll take 50.

I want to, first of all, just make some acknowledgments of some wonderful leaders who are here. First of all, I want to thank President Kathy Love and the entire Savannah Tech community for their hospitality. (Applause.) I want to thank your governor, who I just had a chance to see recently, host him in the White House with the other governors — Mr. Sonny Perdue. (Applause.) Your mayor, Otis Johnson, is in the house. (Applause.) Congressman John Barrow — you’re in his district. (Applause.) That’s right. Congressman Jack Kingston — (applause) — Congressman Sanford Bishop — (applause) — and Congressman Hank Johnson are all in the house. (Applause.)

Well, thank you so much for taking the time to be here today. I really appreciate the opportunity to visit here at Savannah Tech. And I just took a brief tour of some of the classrooms where students are learning about clean energy. They’re learning about solar cells; they’re learning about efficient heating and cooling systems. You’ve got young people here who, through the YouthBuild program, are gaining job skills that will help them the rest of their lives. And by the way, they’re building a house right now while they’re at it. (Applause.)

From the instructors to the students, you saw just an incredible enthusiasm for America’s future. And I was just talking to President Love about the focus of Savannah Tech on clean energy, the idea that this can be a real model for green energy as a way of linking students to the enormous job opportunities and business opportunities that exist in the future. These are the skills that will help our country transform the way we produce and use energy.

And that’s so important –- especially as families in Georgia and across America continue to experience the painful consequences of the worst economic crisis that we’ve had in generations.

I had also had a chance to meet with some business owners who told me what I’ve heard time and again, that it’s tough out there. Unemployment in Georgia is still above 10 percent. That doesn’t include folks who have had to accept part-time jobs or, in some cases, have given up finding a job altogether. And when it comes to domestic policy, I have no more important a job as President than seeing to it that every American who wants to work and is able to work can find a job — and a job that pays a living wage. (Applause.) That was my focus last year and that is my focus this year: to lay a foundation for economic growth that will create jobs, that raises incomes, that will foster a secure economic future for middle class families.

This depends on not just spurring hiring, but doing so in the areas that will create lasting opportunities and prosperity. That’s why we’ve invested in roads and railways so that our economy has room to grow and we’re laying the infrastructure for the future. In fact, because of the Recovery Act, there are more than 300 transportation projects underway in Georgia right now. (Applause.)

That’s why we invested in schools and prevented layoffs of hundreds of thousands of teachers and public school workers, including thousands of educators in this state — because we know we will not be able to compete in new industries unless we’ve got workers ready to fill jobs in those industries. And I’d also point out that I’ve proposed the largest-ever investment in community colleges and technical schools like this one, to produce millions more graduates who are ready to meet the demands of a 21st century economy. (Applause.)

And to spur hiring and sustain growth we’ve placed a big emphasis on energy. Just a few weeks ago, I announced a loan guarantee to break ground on the first new nuclear power plant in our country in nearly three decades -– a project right here in Georgia — (applause) — right here in Georgia — a project that’s going to create more than 3,000 construction jobs in the next few years and ultimately 800 permanent jobs operating the plant. We’re on track to create 700,000 jobs across America building advanced batteries for hybrid cars, and modernizing our electric grid, and doubling our capacity to generate clean energy.

And, in fact, here at Savannah Tech, the Recovery Act provided a grant to YouthBuild to help provide training in these very fields. (Applause.) Because I’m convinced that the country that leads in clean energy is also going to be the country that leads in the global economy. And I want America to be that nation. I don’t want us to be second place or third place or fourth place when it comes to the new energy technologies; I want us to be in first. (Applause.)

So we have the potential to create millions of jobs in this sector. These are jobs building more fuel-efficient cars and trucks to make us energy independent. These are jobs producing solar panels and erecting wind turbines. These are jobs designing and manufacturing and selling and installing more efficient building materials -– because 40 percent of the energy we use is used by our homes and buildings. Think about that. All of us know that we use a lot of gas in our cars. But in terms of energy usage, 40 percent of it goes to our homes and our buildings.

So as we’re looking for additional initiatives to spur hiring, I think we ought to embrace what’s happening on this campus. I think we ought to continue to embrace the incredible potential that awaits us across America in clean energy. So in my State of the Union address, I called on Congress to pass a set of initiatives for homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient -– to continue the energy transformation that’s already begun. So today I want to explain the details of this program. And I also want to thank the members of the House and the Senate who are helping to usher this proposal through Congress.

Now, many of you have heard of “Energy Star” — how many people have heard of “Energy Star”? You’ve seen that “Energy Star” sticker on a computer or on a microwave? The Energy Star program was created to promote energy efficiency by letting consumers know which appliances, which electronics would save electricity and, therefore, would save them money over time. The program I’m describing today applies this concept not to the appliances, but to the home itself –- and it takes it further. So we’re going to call it “Homestar,” just to make it easy to remember. (Applause.)

Here’s how it would work. We’d identify the kinds of building supplies and systems that would save folks energy over time. And here’s one of the best things about energy efficiency — it turns out that energy-efficient windows or insulation, those things are products that are almost exclusively manufactured right here in the United States of America. (Applause.) It’s very hard to ship windows from China. (Laughter.) So a lot of these materials are made right here in America.

So we take these materials, and if a homeowner decides to do work on his or her house — to put in new windows, to replace a heating unit, to insulate an attic, to redo a roof -– the homeowner would be eligible for a rebate from the store or the contractor for 50 percent of the cost of each upgrade up to $1,500. Now, if you decided to retrofit your whole house to greatly reduce your energy use, you’d be eligible for a rebate of up to $3,000.

Now, these are big incentives. And you’d get these rebates instantly from the hardware store or the contractor. So if you went to Lowe’s or Home Depot or wherever you went, right there when you paid at the cash register you’d get that money. You wouldn’t have to mail in a long form, wait for a check to arrive months later. (Applause.)

Now, we know this will save families as much as several hundred dollars on their utilities. We know it will make our economy less dependent on fossil fuels, helping to protect the planet for future generations. But I want to emphasize that Homestar will also create business and spur hiring up and down the economy.

I was just meeting with a number of business leaders in different segments of this industry. We’ve got some manufacturers making insulation and windows and other products; we’ve got folks who are contractors. So — stand up, guys — the guys I just met with. See, they’re already — they’re ready to work. They’re ready to go. (Applause.) So we were just talking about how they are geared up and they’ve got the capacity to guarantee a homeowner that if they’re willing to do this work on their house, they will get their money back — not just through the rebate but in the energy savings that you’re seeing each year.

Let’s say you decide to use this rebate to seal up and insulate your attic — because you want to save electricity, but also because you’re tired of a drafty house. Think about all the ways in which that will stimulate jobs and growth. If you really knew what you were doing, you might do it yourself, but you’re probably going to have somebody come to the house to carry out the installation work -– (laughter) — because you did the smart thing and you refused to let your husband do it himself. (Laughter.) That’s the smart thing. (Applause.) He’ll be stubborn. He’ll tell you he can do it — (laughter) — but don’t listen to him.

So that creates work for small businesses and contractors like some of the folks who are here today. And obviously construction work is — that’s been as hard hit as anything during this recession, so you’ve got a lot of skilled contractors ready to go. And that, in turn, means that the contractors start hiring some of these folks who may have been laid off — some of them may have been trained right here at Savannah Tech. Now, you also have to buy the insulation and the other materials, and that means you’re producing business for your local retailer. And that retailer has to purchase those supplies from manufacturers –- as I said, most of them located right here in the United States of America. And I mentioned these domestic manufacturers who are in the crowd, they would benefit — they would benefit from this program. And then there’s this huge amount of capacity — excess capacity — in construction and related industries to meet any surge in demand that was out there.

So the fact is that there’s nearly 25 percent unemployment in the construction industry so far, so construction companies, hardware stores, contractors, manufacturers — they faced a rapid decline in demand in the wake of the mortgage crisis. And to make matters worse, these businesses have seen the same decline in credit that has hurt every sector of our economy.

So these are companies ready to take on new customers; they’re workers eager to do new installations and renovations; factories ready to produce new building supplies. All we’ve got to do is create the incentives to make it happen. And this is not a Democratic idea or a Republican idea; this is a common-sense approach that will help jumpstart job creation while making our economy stronger. (Applause.)

Ultimately, that’s what we’re called to do. Just like a responsible homeowner will invest in their homes in the near term to fortify their economic security in the long term, we’ve got to do the same as a country. It will have some costs on the front end — you buy a new boiler, or you get some insulation, or you get some new windows, that’s going to have an initial cost, and the same is true from a government perspective. And it’s going to be politically difficult to do some of this, but it’s what’s right to plan for our future.

The same is true when it comes to reforming our education system. The same is true when it comes to trying to make our health care system more affordable. The same is true when it comes to energy. Each of these things are hard; some of them have some costs on the front end, and working stuff through Congress is more than a notion. (Laughter and applause.) But by taking these steps we’ll help foster the kind of broadly shared growth that will serve us in the years and the decades to come.

That’s how we’ll create the conditions for businesses to expand and hire. That’s how we’ll truly grow our middle class again. That’s how we’ll not only rebuild our economy but we’ll rebuild it stronger than it was before this crisis.

I am confident that we can do it. Savannah Tech is leading the way; a whole bunch of folks in this room are leading the way; and I just hope that Washington stands alongside you in making sure that we’ve got the kind of energy future that we need.

Thank you very much, everybody. God bless you. God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

END
12:48 P.M. EST

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.02.10 09:38 AM

WASHINGTON–In his State of the Union address, the President called on Congress to pass a program of incentives for homeowners who make energy efficiency investments in their homes. Today, while touring a training facility at Savannah Technical College, the President outlined more details of a new “HOMESTAR” program that would help create jobs by encouraging American families to invest in energy saving home improvements. Consistent with the President’s call for a HOMESTAR program, the Senate Democratic leadership included a proposal of this kind as part of their Jobs Agenda released on February 4, 2010. The President looks forward to continuing to work with Members of Congress, business, environmental and labor leaders to enact a HOMESTAR program into law.

Background on the HOMESTAR program

With unemployment in the construction sector near 25% and with substantial underutilized capacity in our manufacturing sector, the HOMESTAR program has the potential to jumpstart our economic recovery by boosting demand for energy efficiency products and installation services. For middle-class families, this program will help them save hundreds of dollars a year in energy costs while improving the comfort and value of their most important investment – their homes. In addition, the program would help reduce our economy’s dependence on oil and support the development of an energy efficiency services sector in our economy. Key components of the HOMESTAR Program include:

Rebates delivered directly to consumers: Like the Cash for Clunkers program, consumers would be eligible for direct HOMESTAR rebates at the point of sale for a variety of energy-saving investments in their homes. A broad array of vendors, from small independent building material dealers, large national home improvement chains, energy efficiency installation professionals and utility energy efficiency programs (including rural utilities) would market the rebates, provide them directly to consumers and then be reimbursed by the federal government.$1,000 – $1,500 Silver Star Rebates: Consumers looking to have simple upgrades performed in their homes would be eligible for 50% rebates up to $1,000 – $1,500 for doing any of a straightforward set of upgrades, including: insulation, duct sealing, water heaters, HVAC units, windows, roofing and doors. Under Silver Star, consumers can chose a combination of upgrades for rebates up to a maximum of $3,000 per home. Rebates would be limited to the most energy efficient categories of upgrades—focusing on products made primarily in the United States and installed by certified contractors.$3000 Gold Star Rebates: Consumers interested in more comprehensive energy retrofits would be eligible for a $3,000 rebate for a whole home energy audit and subsequent retrofit tailored to achieve a 20% energy savings in their homes. Consumers could receive additional rebate amounts for energy savings in excess of 20%. Gold Star would build on existing whole home retrofit programs, like EPA’s successful Home Performance with Energy Star program.Oversight to Ensure Quality Installations: The program would require that contractors be certified to perform efficiency installations. Independent quality assurance providers would conduct field audits after work is completed to ensure proper installation so consumers receive energy savings from their upgrades. States would oversee the implementation of quality assurance to ensure that the program was moving the industry toward more robust standards and comprehensive energy retrofit practices.Support for financing: The program would include support to State and local governments to provide financing options for consumers seeking to make efficiency investments in their homes. This will help ensure that consumers can afford to make these investments. The program will result in the creation of tens of thousands of jobs while achieving substantial reductions in energy use – the equivalent of the entire output of three coal-fired power plants each year. Consumers in the program are anticipated to save between $200 – $500 per year in energy costs, while improving the comfort and value of their homes.

BACKGROUND ON PARTICIPANTS IN TODAY’S PRESIDENTIAL EVENT

Business Leaders Larry Laseter, President of Masco Home Services. Masco is a Fortune 150 company specializing in products and services for the home building and home improvement business, including windows and doors, installation, and contracting. After being hit particularly hard by the recession (40% reduction in workforce over a several year period), Masco created Masco Home Services (MHS) a year ago with the intent to provide residential energy efficiency retrofits to American households. Laseter is a Georgia resident, and MHS will open a Home Performance branch in Atlanta in May.Mike Lawrence, Vice President and General Manager for Insulation Systems, Johns Manville. Johns Manville is a leading manufacturer and marketer of insulation and roofing materials for commercial, industrial, and residential applications. Johns Manville is based in Denver, CO and has manufacturing facilities in Georgia as well as California, Montana, Arizona, Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, Texas, and New Jersey.Mark Andrews, CEO, North America, Knauf Insulation. Knauf Mark was named to a newly created North American CEO position in January 2010. Knauf’s US headquarters is in Shelbyville Indiana, and Knauf has manufacturing facilities in Indiana, Alabama, and California.Local Efficiency Contractors Patrick Shay, Green Swap. Patrick is an architect and co-founder of Green Sweep, an energy efficiency company that works with residential, commercial and industrial customers on cost saving clean energy and energy efficiency upgrades. Pat is also a Chatham County Commissioner and chair of the Chatham Environmental Forum, which is addressing energy, climate and other sustainability issues in the Savannah Chatham area.Howard Feldman, Costal Green Building Solutions. Howard is a co-founder of Coastal Green Building Solutions. He is a builder, renovator and a certified RESNET HERS rater, which means he evaluates homes and businesses for energy efficiency opportunities and upgrades. Howard’s company works in both Georgia and South Carolina. In addition to Patrick Shay and Howard Feldman, several other Savannah-area contractors and small businesses who would create jobs if this program were passed are in attendance.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.02.10 09:51 AM

Please find below a letter from President Obama to Congressional leaders on moving forward with health insurance reform legislation.

View the letter as a PDF.

March 2, 2010

Dear Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid, Senator McConnell, and Representative Boehner:

Thank you again for the time, energy, and preparation you invested in last Thursday’s bipartisan meeting on health insurance reform. I have always believed that our legislative process works best when both sides can discuss our differences and common goals openly and honestly, and I’m very pleased that our meeting at Blair House offered the American people and their elected representatives a rare opportunity to explore different health reform proposals in extraordinary depth.

The meeting was a good opportunity to move past the usual rhetoric and sound-bites that have come to characterize this debate and identify areas on which we agree and disagree. And one point on which everyone expressed agreement was that the cost of health care is a large and growing problem that, left untended, threatens families, businesses and the solvency of our government itself.

I also left convinced that the Republican and Democratic approaches to health care have more in common than most people think.

For example, we agree on the need to reform our insurance markets. We agree on the idea of allowing small businesses and individuals who lack insurance to join together to increase their purchasing power so they can enjoy greater choices and lower prices. And we agree on the dire need to wring out waste, fraud and abuse and get control of skyrocketing health care costs.

But there were also important areas of disagreement. There was a fundamental disagreement about what role the oversight of the health insurance industry should play in reform. I believe we must insist on some common-sense rules of the road to hold insurance companies accountable for the decisions they make to raise premiums and deny coverage. I don’t believe we can afford to leave life-and-death decisions about health care for America’s families to the discretion of insurance company executives alone.

No matter how we move forward, there are at least four policy priorities identified by Republican Members at the meeting that I am exploring. I said throughout this process that I’d continue to draw on the best ideas from both parties, and I’m open to these proposals in that spirit:

1. Although the proposal I released last week included a comprehensive set of initiatives to combat fraud, waste, and abuse, Senator Coburn had an interesting suggestion that we engage medical professionals to conduct random undercover investigations of health care providers that receive reimbursements from Medicare, Medicaid, and other Federal programs.

2. My proposal also included a provision from the Senate health reform bill that authorizes funding to states for demonstrations of alternatives to resolving medical malpractice disputes, including health courts. Last Thursday, we discussed the provision in the bills cosponsored by Senators Coburn and Burr and Representatives Ryan and Nunes (S. 1099) that provides a similar program of grants to states for demonstration projects. Senator Enzi offered a similar proposal in a health insurance reform bill he sponsored in the last Congress. As we discussed, my Administration is already moving forward in funding demonstration projects through the Department of Health and Human Services, and Secretary Sebelius will be awarding $23 million for these grants in the near future. However, in order to advance our shared interest in incentivizing states to explore what works in this arena, I am open to including an appropriation of $50 million in my proposal for additional grants. Currently there is only an authorization, which does not guarantee that the grants will be funded.

3. At the meeting, Senator Grassley raised a concern, shared by many Democrats, that Medicaid reimbursements to doctors are inadequate in many states, and that if Medicaid is expanded to cover more people, we should consider increasing doctor reimbursement. I’m open to exploring ways to address this issue in a fiscally responsible manner.

4. Senator Barrasso raised a suggestion that we expand Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). I know many Republicans believe that HSAs, when used in conjunction with high-deductible health plans, are a good vehicle to encourage more cost-consciousness in consumers’ use of health care services. I believe that high-deductible health plans could be offered in the exchange under my proposal, and I’m open to including language to ensure that is clear. This could help to encourage more people to take advantage of HSAs.

There are provisions that were added to the legislation that shouldn’t have been. That’s why my proposal does not include the Medicare Advantage provision, mentioned by Senator McCain at the meeting, which provided transitional extra benefits for Florida and other states. My proposal eliminates those payments, gradually reducing Medicare Advantage payments across the country relative to fee-for service Medicare in an equitable fashion (page 8). My proposal rewards high-quality and high-performing plans.

In addition, my proposal eliminates the Nebraska FMAP provision, replacing it with additional federal financing to all states for the expansion of Medicaid.

Admittedly, there are areas on which Republicans and Democrats don’t agree. While we all believe that reform must be built around our existing private health insurance system, I believe that we must hold the insurance industry to clear rules, so they can’t arbitrarily raise rates or reduce or eliminate coverage. That must be a part of any serious reform to make it work for the many Americans who have insurance coverage today, as well as those who don’t.

I also believe that piecemeal reform is not the best way to effectively reduce premiums, end the exclusion of people with pre-existing conditions or offer Americans the security of knowing that they will never lose coverage, even if they lose or change jobs.

My ideas have been informed by discussions with Republicans and Democrats, doctors and nurses, health care experts, and everyday Americans – not just last Thursday, but over the course of a yearlong dialogue. Both parties agree that the health care status quo is unsustainable. And both should agree that it’s just not an option to walk away from the millions of American families and business owners counting on reform.

After decades of trying, we’re closer than we’ve ever been to making health insurance reform a reality. I look forward to working with you to complete what would be a truly historic achievement.

Sincerely,

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.01.10 02:24 PM

2:00 P.M. EST

MR. GIBBS: Sorry, guys, no —

Q Where’s the jersey?

MR. GIBBS: We’re in the process of getting the hockey sweater — thank you, Major, for correcting a southerner’s — it’s on its way. Trust me, the Canadians have kept in very close contact for this. And we are working on delivering that, figuring out the best way to —

Q What size is that?

MR. GIBBS: Oh, I’m definitely a medium. I mean, can’t you tell? (Laughter.) We’ll have — I presume before the week is over you will have the opportunity to see that. It was a fabulous game.

One quick announcement before we get going. On Monday, March 8th, President Obama will welcome President Funes of El Salvador for a meeting at the White House. The President looks forward to discussing the wide range of issues that comprise the dynamic relationship between our two countries, including economic security and immigration-related topics.

Mr. Feller.

Q Thanks, Robert. Can you tell us what the President has been doing since the health care summit to get a bill to his desk? Who has he been lobbying?

MR. GIBBS: I can look and see what calls he’s made. I don’t know the degree to which he’s talked to members of Congress on this or not.

Q Is he involved in the discussions about what the next proposal will look like and —

MR. GIBBS: Oh, absolutely. This has been brought up in a number of meetings, both over the weekend and this morning.

Q When the White House calls for an up or down vote on a bill doesn’t that mean reconciliation, and isn’t it one and the same at this point?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, the President will speak on this later in the week, likely on Wednesday. And I will wait until we have something from the President then. I do believe the President believes that an up or down vote is necessary. I think the Republicans could decide not to filibuster and that would be one way.

Q And does the President believe that the American people care about process, or just that the bill, itself, is important, regardless of how it gets done? Does he think they care about this debate?

MR. GIBBS: Well, Ben, I think let’s understand, first of all, the bill that passed — the basic health care bill has passed the Senate, it passed with 60 votes. So it didn’t — that legislation passed the Senate with a supermajority, not just with a majority of votes. Again, we’ll have time to discuss this later in the week when the President makes an announcement on moving forward.

Q I just meant on that broader issue of — regardless of how this gets done, does the President think that the American people are watching this and that they care about the process that Congress uses?

MR. GIBBS: The process in what way?

Q The process that they use to get a bill passed, that this is —

MR. GIBBS: Look, I think the American people care about what’s in the bill. I think that’s why you’ve seen the President take out a number of things that were added in this process in order to make it more to his liking.

Yes, sir.

Q Thank you, Robert. One follow-up on that and then one question on financial reg. Can you give us any sense of what to expect in the Wednesday announcement without describing what the details are exactly?

MR. GIBBS: I think that would be harder to do. (Laughter.)

Q What should one expect? I mean, what in general does the President want to do —

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, again, I think the President, Jeff, will outline what the next steps are and what are the — what’s the way forward on health care reform.

Q And does that include a revamped proposal from what you guys released last Monday?

MR. GIBBS: This is why my first question — your first question I found it probably harder to do.

Q All right. Moving on to financial reg. The topic of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency — we’ve talked about it before — Senator Shelby has suggested that it be housed in the FDIC. Is that something that the White House would look upon favorably?

MR. GIBBS: Look, Jeff, I think most importantly the CFPA has to have strong independent authority, an independent head, an independent budget, independent authority to do what it needs to do. That will be the test that we will look for as this legislation moves forward. But I will tell you the President is very serious about this proposal.

If you look at — if you look back over the course of what has happened as a result of and what may have caused a good portion of our financial downturn — subprime lending, credit cards, the easy availability of credit cards — these are things that the President believes and I think many believe can and should come under greater purview in a Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

Q But can that agency have the independence that you’re seeking and also be part of another —

MR. GIBBS: Well, I don’t know the degree to which we’ve looked at what Senator Shelby has discussed. It’s my understanding that at some point this week we’re likely to see legislation unveiled. We’ll certainly evaluate that. But, again, our test and the President’s strong test is to ensure strong independence for consumer financial protection.

Q But even without — just the last follow-up, even without commenting specifically on his suggestion to the FDIC, the crux of the question and apparently the crux of the debate which might lead to this financial regulation bill going through is will the White House allow or support this being in another agency at all?

MR. GIBBS: Jeff, I don’t think its address is the seminal test for this proposal. I think we have to determine whether or not the proposal that’s put forward has sufficient independent — is sufficiently independent, can it sufficiently make the decisions that it needs to do and affect consumer financial policy in a way that helps — finally helps consumers, not just the development of loans and the easy availability of credit cards that in many ways penalize consumers.

Jake.

Q Last month the President told Diane Sawyer that not having the health care negotiations be more public — the CSPAN cameras — was a mistake, because he had campaigned on process just as he campaigned on the substance of health care reform. And I’m just wondering if going forward, knowing that there’s going to be furious lobbying to get 216 votes in the House and 51 votes in the Senate, are you guys planning on any additional steps in the name of transparency, whether it’s releasing names of members of Congress that the President or Mr. Emmanuel or whoever reach out to? Is there anything you guys are planning on doing in the name of the forum you had last Thursday, to continue that kind of transparency — are there any additional steps you’re planning on taking?
MR. GIBBS: I can check. I don’t know the answer to that.

Q Okay. And then in terms of the President’s health report, I know that he was given basically a clean bill of health, but there was some talk about his cholesterol being a little higher and the smoking cessation needing to continue. Is there anything for all the Americans who are struggling with both cholesterol and cigarettes that you or the President wanted to say about either of those?

MR. GIBBS: Well, his — I think it’s the bad cholesterol measure was slightly elevated from where it had been previously. I think the doctor had told me that obviously he’s a few years older from when it was last measured and I think candidly if you asked him the diet of first and foremost a campaign is not as conducive. We are all living and thankfully breathing examples of that.

I think he would be also the first to tell you that he has probably had a few more cheeseburgers and I think he would admittedly tell you he’s had more desserts in the last year than I’ve seen him eat prior to this.

Q Is that because of more fancy events or because he has his own kitchen? (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: I would say this, that —

Q Or it’s the smoking —

MR. GIBBS: I think that — look, I think most people will tell you that if it’s available you’re more likely to eat it. And I think he’s had more access to sweets and desserts in the past year than he — look, those guys make good desserts over there and I think he’s on more than one occasion sampled more than he needed to. The good news is the number is only slightly above where the doctor would like to see it. So we were talking in the — on the helicopter on the way back that he probably had to push away from the table when the pie came more than he had in the previous year.

Look, on the smoking, the President continues to chew nicotine gum and, you know, I’d point at many of you and I’d point you to the comments he made in June of — I think in this room in June of last year, that while he’s quit smoking he is — occasionally falls off the wagon when it comes to that and — like many who have struggled with kicking that habit.

Q Is it more difficult because this is probably the most stressful year he’s ever had, I would assume?

MR. GIBBS: Yes, I mean, I can’t imagine that that helps. But, look, I think he — the doctor — obviously you saw in the report — he, as I said, continues to chew the gum and continues to both work hard at it as well as struggle with it probably each and every day.

Q Who does he bum smokes from, seriously?

MR. GIBBS: I don’t smoke, Ed, so I don’t know the answer.

Q Minority Whip Eric Cantor on health care told Speaker Pelosi that if in fact, in his words, that they’d ram this bill through the House, that the Democrats would lose their majority. Does the White House believe that that’s true? And is there any kind of sense of the calculation, the political calculation —

MR. GIBBS: I don’t understand when you say "ram it through the House," what do you mean?

Q That’s what Cantor said; that’s not my words.

MR. GIBBS: What do you think he meant?

Q Reconciliation — well, not reconciliation, but simply puts pressure on members to get this thing accomplished, to get this thing through.

MR. GIBBS: You know, again, I’d let Eric try to explain what he meant. The President believes strongly that we were — that he was elected to make progress on issues that had confounded and vexed Congress and the political system for years, health care being one of the bigger ones. Congressman Cantor is probably focused almost entirely on the next election. The President is focused on the next generation and making progress on some of these issues.

I sent this article around and I’m sure a number of you all saw it in the newspaper this weekend, and it was about the cost of doing nothing. What happens if Congressman Cantor’s viewpoint wins out? "’People think if we do nothing we’ll have what we have now,’ said Karen Davis, the President of the Commonwealth Fund, a nonprofit health care research group in New York. ‘In fact, what we will have is a substantial deterioration in what we have.’"

This is not her quote of this part of the — "Nearly every mainstream analysis calls for medical costs to continue to climb over the next decade, outpacing the growth in the overall economy and certainly increasing faster than the average paycheck. Those higher costs will translate into higher premiums, which will mean fewer individuals and businesses will be able to afford insurance coverage. More of everyone’s dollar will go to health care and government programs like Medicare and Medicaid will struggle to find the money to operate."

"’It will break all of our banks if we do nothing,’ said Peter Lee, who oversees national health policy for the Pacific Business Group on Health. ‘It is a course that is literally bankrupting the federal government and businesses and individuals across the country.’"

There are more of these quotes, including the fact that the typical price of family coverage now runs about $13,000 a year but premiums are expected to nearly double to $24,000 for a family by 2020.

So if we don’t act, this is what our future is. If we don’t act, insurance companies like Anthem that are sending letters to individuals in the individual insurance market saying their rates will rise 39 percent — that’s what will happen. Congressman Cantor says let’s start over, but the insurance companies aren’t starting over; health care inflation is not starting over; being dropped from your insurance coverage because somebody says you have a preexisting condition, that’s not starting over.

Q Is there any sense though or analysis from the White House that there’s a possibility of losing a certain number of seats either in the House or the Senate? There is a political calculation.

MR. GIBBS: That’s not what — that’s not being discussed, "if you do this, then this." That’s — what we’re focused on is trying to move forward for the millions of people that are struggling with the high cost of their own health insurance each day.

Helen.

Q I had two questions. The first one is moot now, but why did the President not give any voice to single-payer and to the government plan during the whole debate? The second question is, why are the Republicans and some Democrats so solidly against everything you proposed?

MR. GIBBS: An excellent question.

Q They’re both wise. (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: You’re a validator for that.

Look, let me take the second question. I was reading an article before I came down about the fact that the filibuster is on a record-breaking pace in this Congress. We’ve seen the notion of either an actual filibuster or the threat of a filibuster used unlike we’ve ever seen before. We have — and we mentioned this on Friday, we can’t even get an emergency extension of health and unemployment benefits for those whose benefits expired at midnight. We can’t even get agreement on moving forward with that. In fact, you can’t even get an agreement with the person holding that up to let us — to let the Senate vote on what he wants to hold up.

Q Why don’t you shame him?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I’m trying as best I can. (Laughter.)

Q Why don’t you use his name?

MR. GIBBS: I did on Friday — Senator Bunning for Kentucky —

Q Does he want everyone to run out of benefits?

MR. GIBBS: Look, sometimes even using their names doesn’t create the shame that you would think it would normally engender when there are people that lost their unemployment benefits because one person decided they were going to gum up the works. It’s just never — it’s just not how it’s ever worked. I don’t know why. I don’t know why.

Q Why did he oppose — I mean, why didn’t he fight for a government plan?

MR. GIBBS: We’ve debated this a number of times —

Q No, you never do —

MR. GIBBS: I know. (Laughter.)

Q — you’ve never explained. You always acted like it was out there —

MR. GIBBS: Look, I think the President, Helen, put forward the plan he thought was best for the American people.

Q And he doesn’t think the government plan is —

MR. GIBBS: Well, again, I think there are elements of — obviously strong elements in the exchange that would set up the type of choice in competition that the American people need to get access to affordable health care that creates a benefit and a plan that works best for them. There were a bunch of different options for this and I think the President has landed on one that not only does he think will be effective, but he also thinks has the ability to become law.

Q Does he think that Social Security and Medicare don’t work?

MR. GIBBS: No, I think he believes they are programs that have for many decades worked enormously well. We’ve got to put them on a sounder financial path, but there’s no doubt that whether it is through measures of senior citizens that are no longer either in or facing the threat of poverty or no longer have or no longer face the threat of not having health care at the time in which they need it most, obviously those are tremendously valuable programs.

Chip.

Q Going back to smoking — and I know some people think it’s a trivial issue, but it really isn’t at all since, number one, he’s setting an example for an entire nation, including children. And secondly his health is obviously a concern. Have you ever heard him talk about smoking from that point of view — setting an example, the disappointment and what it means for his health? I mean, it’s not just his issues, it’s the nation’s issue.

MR. GIBBS: Chip, I think he — I mean, again, in the remarks I pointed you towards, you know, I think — and he says, I don’t smoke in front of my kids, I think he understands that what he struggles with is not a good thing for his children to see or for anybody to see.

Look, Chip, I don’t doubt that he would tell you he wishes once and for all he could wipe away that struggle. I know he works on it each and every day. He understands — he understands it.

Q Do you know where and when he does it and how he manages to avoid the cameras and the children and everything else at —

MR. GIBBS: You know, Chip, we’re all running around here, so I am not with him 24 hours a day.

Q He said he was 95 percent cured when he spoke about this last year. Is he still at 95 percent?

MR. GIBBS: Yes. Yes. He’s —

Q Hasn’t made any progress since then? (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: No, but I think in many ways staying at 95 percent doesn’t change the percentage but is controlling a problem and an addiction that I think he’s talked about struggling with and I think, in all honesty, millions and millions of people across the country do. My father struggled with quitting. He wasn’t as good at sneaking it as some people have and he didn’t quit until a doctor told him he had lung cancer.

So I think — again, I think there’s a lot of struggle that goes on with this and I think he’s one of those who struggles.

Q He said at one point during the campaign that he smoked at some point — I don’t — I didn’t get the timeframe — five or six a day. He’s not doing that, is he, do you know?

MR. GIBBS: No. Not that I’m aware of, no. I don’t remember when he said that, to be honest.

Q It was still during the campaign but he — he said —

MR. GIBBS: Let me take a look at that, but that’s not — no.

Yes, ma’am.

Q On health care, can you — just another crack at this — is Wednesday about the way forward on process or is it about the way forward on substance?

MR. GIBBS: My sense is it will be both.

Q Okay, so we may hear new proposals that we haven’t heard before?

MR. GIBBS: Yes.

Q Okay. Does the President feel it’s part of his job to explain or justify the use of reconciliation, or to educate the American people about what it is from his perspective, given the fact that of course Republicans are referring to it as "ramming" the bill through? Does he feel the need to kind of provide another perspective on that issue?

MR. GIBBS: I think he would hope that that would be the cause many of you would take up.

Q So he won’t just rely on —

MR. GIBBS: No, look, I’m sure he’ll discuss — again, I think he’ll discuss process and policy. As we’ve discussed in here, Savannah, and I don’t want to get ahead of what the President might decide, but the notion — I think we’ve spent a lot of time over the past two months, whether it was on the issue of are we serious about creating a deficit commission; are we — how and where are we going to try certain terrorists in this country; and things like reconciliation.

It is — it’s enormously informative to watch a group of people who, to go through each of these examples, thought we ought to set up a deficit commission and a debt commission — until it came time to vote on that deficit and debt commission and then decided they weren’t for what they were — what some of them were cosponsoring only a few weeks earlier; or when criticisms about how a shoe bomber are dealt with and never get called out for eight years and an analogous situation happens in Detroit and all of a sudden everyone wants to handle this differently than they said they wanted to handle it for the previous eight years.

Then you take the view of something like reconciliation, something that has been used — it was the vehicle for welfare reform; it was the vehicle for the Bush tax cut in 2001, at a cost of $1.3 trillion; it was the vehicle for the tax cut in 2003 at a cost of $350 billion; it is how S-CHIP came to be, which is parlance for the Children’s Health Insurance Program; it is how COBRA came to be, which provides the ability for an individual that loses their job to continue their health care coverage when that happens.

And I think there are virtually limitless quotes on why this was good then versus why they view it differently now.

Q I guess my question was just whether he felt he needs to advocate that — if he feels it’s something he needs to address specifically?

MR. GIBBS: I don’t know whether he’ll address it specifically — whether he’ll address the specific hypocrisy or not.

Q Last thing. Is the President irritated or does he bristle at all about the fact that his medical report has to be made public and the whole world knows about it?

MR. GIBBS: No, I don’t — look, I spent some time with the doctor Friday and Saturday going through the release of this. Obviously it’s important, I think, for privacy — for those that are concerned about medical privacy to understand, as the document related, that the President had given permission for both me to have a discussion with the doctor about his medical records as well as for the doctor to release those — that memo.

The President understands that his health is more than just something that should be of concern to him and those that know and love him, but that his health is important based on the responsibility that the American people gave him in the election. He might not want to explain why he had a few more desserts last year than he had the previous few years, but —

Q That’s really hard to believe. He’s really skinny, you know? (Laughter.) It’s hard to imagine he’s hoarding desserts back there.

MR. GIBBS: I actually was — I was joking with the doctor about this, that all you guys think he eats carrots and celery and there’s more cheeseburgers, fries and pie than you previously knew.

Q When Senator Michael Bennet got a primary challenge from Andrew Romanoff, the White House pretty quickly got out and endorsed Senator Bennet. Are you going to endorse — take a position in the Blanche Lincoln Senate contest?

MR. GIBBS: We support Senator Lincoln as an incumbent senator, yes.

Q Okay. And does the President see a responsibility — see a responsibility that he has to help Nancy Pelosi get the votes this go-round? What role does the President have —

MR. GIBBS: Jonathan, the President helped get votes in all the go-rounds. I don’t doubt that he will use the — do the same thing this time to get the votes necessary to pass health care.

Yes, sir.

Q Can the participants in last week’s meeting expect to hear from the President before this announcement on Wednesday? Is he going to talk to people on both sides to tell them what he intends to say and do?

MR. GIBBS: Look, I don’t know whether he’ll call each and every one of them or not —

Q Well, not and each and every one of them, but the leaders on both sides?

MR. GIBBS: I think he will — let me check and see what the plan is for notification on that.

Q And is this part of the agenda tomorrow at all? Is he going to talk about health care reform when he’s in Georgia?

MR. GIBBS: No. I should have brought with me — he will focus on jobs and visiting a couple of businesses tomorrow, and talking specifically about details for weatherization and retrofitting as part of the economic plan — an idea that we rolled out in December, but details that we’ll have more of later today.

Q Robert, does the White House subscribe to the notion that there’s more than one way to measure bipartisanship on health care? Namely, that if some Republican ideas are incorporated into the bill it doesn’t matter whether the bill ultimately gets any Republican votes?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, ultimately how Republicans vote on their ideas is up to them. But, Ed, I think obviously there’s a part on our Web site where we posted the bill that shows the number — a sampling of the number of ideas that had been accepted as a result of the committee process. You saw some agreement last week on additional ideas.

Quite frankly, taking individuals and individual small businesses and putting them into a collective pool is an idea had by many Republicans, which is in many ways a foundation for a great part of the bill that governs individual insurance coverage.

So I think as the President said in here a few weeks ago, bipartisanship can’t simply be none of your ideas and all of our ideas. That’s not bipartisanship.

So, look, I think whether it’s on getting our economy moving again, whether it’s on health care, whether it’s on energy, I think you’ll see the President has ideas that Republicans have said they supported and enunciated in the past. Whether or not that drives them to supporting comprehensive reform will be up to them.

I do think, Ed, and I said this on Friday, I think what you saw in many ways, though, last week, there was no doubt a fundamental difference in the regulation of insurance and the regulation of the insurance market. I think you have a plan in the President’s that through the exchange will allow policies to be purchased across state lines. The plan that the President proposed, though, has a minimum standard for what that insurance has to entail. And I think that’s important for a number of reasons, not the least of which consumers have to feel confident that when they’re purchasing insurance it’s not something that in fact is too good to be true.

It also matters, quite frankly, for the rest of us because those that do get access to affordable insurance, if their insurance continues to not provide them with the ability to get the treatment that they need, that cost simply gets passed to you and I.

Q I guess what I’m asking, Robert, is can the White House claim bipartisanship on content if not on votes?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think without a doubt I can say quite clearly that the legislation includes the ideas of members of both parties in Washington.

Major.

Q Speaker Pelosi said a couple of hours ago that "in a matter of days we will have a proposal" — she said this about health care — "It will be a much smaller proposal than we had in the House, because that’s where we can gain consensus. But it will be big enough to put us on a path of affordable, quality health care." Does Speaker Pelosi have it about right — a smaller proposal coming from the President that will put the nation on a path — maybe not provide it entirely but put it on a path toward these goals?

MR. GIBBS: I don’t think I would disagree globally with what she’s talking about, keeping in mind, again, that there were differences between the House and the Senate in terms of the viewpoint of the House on their bill.

Q Would you disagree locally? (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: I would think globally and act locally. (Laughter.) No, I don’t — I think the summary is about right.

Q It’s not an insignificant phrase — "a much smaller bill." That encompasses potentially a lot of policy territory, taxation territory, spending exposure — all these sorts of these — and a path toward these goals the President put out —

MR. GIBBS: I have not seen the specific quote so — I can certainly talk to — no, no, I don’t — I’m not saying you don’t have it right. I don’t know — not having talked to her staff, I don’t know what she’s predicated that —

Q Is it fair to say that what the President will outline Wednesday will take the place of what’s on the Web site currently?

MR. GIBBS: Yes, I think, though, you’ll see — you’re likely to see a decent amount of overlap.

Q Will it be in legislative language? Is this going to be the new bill? Since we have leaders on both sides of Democrats saying, well, we don’t have a bill right now so it’s hard to get a whip count, we can’t really tell you if we have the votes or anything because there is no bill that we’re asking them to consider. Will this thing that we see Wednesday be the next thing for Democrats and Republicans to consider?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think it will definitely be the next thing for them to consider. I don’t — I doubt that it will be in legislative-ese, but I don’t think, to be honest with you, Major, that — obviously the broad outlines of — leaving aside Wednesday, the broad — I think one can evaluate the broad outlines of where you would be based on the specificity that’s on the Internet now.

Q You told us Friday that one of the tasks of the weekend was to look at the Republican suggestions from Thursday’s summit and see if they fit within something the President wants to endorse. Can you update us on that?

MR. GIBBS: That’s an ongoing process here.

Q Let me read you a couple of things that Warren Buffett said this morning: "Unfortunately we came up with a bill that really doesn’t attack the cost situation that much and we have to have fundamental change. We have to have something that will end the constant increase in medical cost as a percentage of GDP." Then he’s asked on CNBC, "Are you in favor of scrapping this and going back to start over?" "I would be if I were President Obama," is Warren Buffett’s answer. He seems skeptical on the issue of this legislation dealing with the cost and suggests possibly it might be better to start over.

MR. GIBBS: I think later in the same interview, Major, he I think speaks probably equally eloquently if not more so about the notion of doing nothing, about the notion of what happens. The cost of — as I said earlier, the cost of doing nothing on health care — we know what that means. It doesn’t mean a lot for Warren because he’s okay, right? But for somebody that lives in Warren, Michigan, they’re watching their health care premiums go up; they’re watching the small business they work for drop their health insurance. So he says —

Q He doesn’t say those things you said.

MR. GIBBS: He says pretty clearly in there if it’s where we are versus nothing, then the Senate bill is a good place to start.

Q Right, but he also says if it’s a choice between Plan A, which we’ve got, or Plan B, which is what’s in front of the Senate — "I would vote for the Senate bill but I would much rather see a Plan C that really attacks costs."

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I do not think that the President —

Q Do you think he’s saying what Republicans are saying, start over from scratch? Or do you think he’s saying something different?

MR. GIBBS: No, because I don’t think that the — I think that Mr. Buffett wouldn’t — I don’t think that Mr. Buffett would evaluate the proposal that the House Republicans put forward and think that — I don’t think that it scratches the surface on dealing with virtually every issue, including cost. It does virtually nothing on cost, it does virtually nothing on coverage, it does — it leaves regulation up to insurance companies.

So I think that’s why he was — again, were — if the choice is between the Senate bill and nothing, he supports the Senate bill.

Q But the President is not persuaded by his suggestion — strongly worded one — of a Plan C?

MR. GIBBS: I think the President is — and what has animated his actions from the beginning is dealing with costs. I don’t think that — I don’t think that the — I don’t think that the last word on health care will always just be this — will be the legislation moving forward. I think the President will continue to look at ways to cut costs in health care.

Q Quickly, one last one on financial regulation. Does the White House consider it somewhat of a victory that Republicans are talking about a consumer protection agency that may be in Treasury when for a while that appeared to be a potential sticking point entirely? I mean, do you think you’ve made some headway here, even if you can’t get one that has its own address, its own edifice, its own letterhead, if you will?

MR. GIBBS: I think, honestly, Major, what is most important is the authority that that entity has. Whether that is — if that authority is something that isn’t constrained by other forces, that’s that the judgment that the White House will make about its efficacy. I would say if you have Republicans like Senator Shelby and others beginning to understand the importance of protecting consumers against various financial instruments, I do think that is — I do think that’s progress. I think this will be — this is going to — many steps to get to where we need to go.

But I think bottom line for the President is we have to have a very, very strong — legislation has to contain a very strong mechanism for protecting consumers.

Q Thanks, Robert.

MR. GIBBS: Jeffrey.

Q I was wondering if President Obama was concerned about the three vacancies that will be coming up on the Fed Reserve Board of Governors and how quickly he plans to act on all three.

MR. GIBBS: I know that on the current vacancy, our plan — the one announced today — our plan is to nominate somebody in time for their confirmation prior to the term expiring.

Q In terms of all three vacancies, though, I think he said he would plan to nominate someone by June. But in terms of the other vacancies, is it concerning the President that this seven-member board is quickly evaporating?

MR. GIBBS: Well, look, Jeff, I think the President will seek to have nominees — that he’ll seek to nominate somebody quickly and hopes that they can be quickly confirmed. Obviously we spent some time and energy earlier in the year working for Chairman Bernanke’s confirmation, as the continuity and stability in the financial system the President and the economic team believe to be very important. And I think the same can be said for the Board of Governors.

Q Do you think that this will be a similar difficult way forward for you as it was with Chairman Bernanke? I mean, would he like to hold it off until he gets some other legislation through?

MR. GIBBS: No, I — look, I don’t think there’s — I think, again, our goal is to — particularly in the most recent announcement is to get somebody there nominated in time to — and ultimately confirmed in time to take up the seat as the term expires.

Q On his speech on health care on Wednesday, what type of venue is that? Is that like an address to the country? Is it a press conference?

MR. GIBBS: No, it will likely be off campus but it will be in the D.C. area.

Q In the form of a speech, though?

MR. GIBBS: Yes.

Yes, sir.

Q Thank you, Robert. Last Monday you were asked twice about the claims of Congressman Sestak, that he had been offered a high-ranking administration position and —

MR. GIBBS: I have not made any progress on that.

Q Just to let you know, I was in touch with Geoff Morrell from the Pentagon who said there was no discussion of it at all but Mr. Sestak’s spokesman, Jonathon Dworkin, said the Congressman stands by his story. Can you check if the White House made any offer?

MR. GIBBS: Yes, I was remiss on this and I apologize.

Q Can I follow up on that?

MR. GIBBS: There’s not much to follow up on. Let me check into that.

Q Thanks very much.

MR. GIBBS: Yes, sir.

Q Robert, does the White House see this episode with Senator Bunning as something isolated or is there something bigger that you’re trying to draw attention to here?

MR. GIBBS: Well, I think what we’re trying to draw attention to is the fact that hundreds of thousands of people who’ve lost their job and lost their health care because of that and their unemployment benefits — all of that is threatened because one person has decided to stop the entire process.

Again, normally the way this is always — this can be dealt with, they can talk about this, and it almost — I can’t imagine a scenario in which, in almost every other aspect of life, offering that individual a vote on what they propose to do wouldn’t remedy the situation. It’s hard to bargain with somebody when — if you say, I won’t do that because of this, and you say, well, how about we vote on that, and you say, I object. I don’t — what we’re trying to do is highlight the fact that because of the games of Washington, hundreds of thousands of people are without the benefits they need to continue as they look for work. Seems to me to be pretty common-sense.

Yes.

Q Robert, over the weekend, Speaker Pelosi gave herself an A for effort. Given, though, that Capitol Hill has yet to pass into law any of the President’s three key priorities — cap and trade, health care, financial reform — what grade would you give Congress, and the Speaker, for that matter?

MR. GIBBS: Well, obviously as it relates to health care, financial reform, and comprehensive energy legislation, as you mentioned, none of them are in law, but understand the House has passed all three of those. So it’s hard to argue that they haven’t accomplished their end of that bargain. And I think that’s what Speaker Pelosi was mentioning.

I think if you look at credit card legislation, cutting funding for wasteful defense projects, an economic recovery plan, I think there are a host of things with which the House has played obviously an enormous role in becoming law, in addition to making progress on the President’s priorities that you mentioned.

Q What about the Senate?

Q Yes, what grade do you give Harry Reid?

MR. GIBBS: We’re working on getting them caught up.

Peter.

Q Robert, thank you. There’s been a lot of focus on the issue of broken government. Does the President believe that paralysis in Washington has reached a point where political reform might become a worthy — systemic political reform might be a worthy project of his — for example, where he focuses on, say, redistricting, showing that there’s more competitive districts in Congress, term limits, and maybe even changing the filibuster rules?

MR. GIBBS: I have not heard specific conversation here about the issues that you mention. I think the President’s viewpoint would be — and I think last week demonstrated some progress on these fronts until Friday with Senator Bunning. But last week the Senate passed with 70 votes on a bipartisan basis, passed a plan to provide tax cuts for businesses that hire the unemployed. The House, with over 400 votes — thus in a bipartisan way — passed removing the antitrust exemption from insurance companies, therefore increasing competition available for individuals.

So as is true in most things in Washington, it’s fits and starts; it’s one step forward, one step back, or two steps back. I think if it relates to somebody like Senator Bunning, I think what confounds 99 other senators is when one decides to stop the entire process while the will of either the majority or a supermajority continues to exist. The comments from Senator Kyl over the weekend about the fact that, well, we’re going to get this done — I think what Senator Bunning has done has frustrated a lot of people across the political spectrum.

Q Can you fill us in on the rest of the week beyond Wednesday remarks? And then also —

MR. GIBBS: I don’t have anything on Thursday or Friday yet.

Q Not yet. So as far as the Wednesday thing goes, will we have a definitive answer on whether or not Democrats are going to pursue reconciliation? Will there be any question about any of those sort of details?

MR. GIBBS: Again, it doesn’t make sense for me to give you the President’s announcement for Wednesday on Monday, except to say —

Q Sure it does. (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: Well, I realize I was — that I did not necessarily have a willing room of agreement on that.

Q I’m not asking what it’s going to be, but just —

MR. GIBBS: I think what I said earlier to Savannah, that the way — what he discusses will point toward not just a policy, but a process moving forward.

Q So that means — you think we will know definitively — it’s not going to be a question —

MR. GIBBS: I think you’ll have a good idea of how we would proceed.

David.

Q You mentioned those other items that have passed on reconciliation. What Republicans say is those things had some bipartisan support; there were Democrats who supported welfare reform, there were Democrats that supported COBRA. This is strictly a partisan deal. What would be your response to that?

MR. GIBBS: My response would be they continue to move the goalposts. When Judd Gregg said if you have 51 votes for an idea it passes, what did he mean? I think he meant — I think he meant reconciliation was fine for what I want to reconcile, and it didn’t mean it if I didn’t want it; therefore pay attention not to what I said in the past, but what I said in the future in hopes of you not catching the hypocrisy in my argument.

Q Are you concerned about Byrd’s objections to using something this massive, using the reconciliation process —

MR. GIBBS: Well, again, understand this — the base Senate health care bill passed the Senate not with 50 or 51, but with 60 votes. Right?

Yes, sir.

Q Just back on that, just very briefly, an unknown White House spokesperson did say in the Philadelphia Enquirer — or did deny what Sestak had said three times —

MR. GIBBS: I said I would check on this. It’s hard for me to do follow-ups on something I can’t work through.

Q So at this point the White House is not ready to deny what Sestak said?

MR. GIBBS: No. I think I said I would check on the situation.

Yes.

Q Robert, on another issue. It’s March 1st and the National Black Farmers Association says this appropriation, the $1.25 billion appropriation for their settlement, has not been attached to any bill as of yet. And they’re concerned, again, that their monies will not be approved by Congress, again pushing this whole Pigford Suit case to another year or two maybe.

MR. GIBBS: Let me check on where the process would be from our end. I don’t — I can’t speak to the appropriations process on the Hill, but let me check on it from here.

Q Also, on the President’s health, has the pastry chef been given a mandate — (laughter) — no, seriously, though —

MR. GIBBS: Are you kidding me? The President loves the pastry chef. (Laughter.)

Q Right. That’s the problem. That’s the problem. Seriously, since Mrs. Obama is the woman of the house and she has talked about healthy eating — she has a garden outside —

MR. GIBBS: Hold on, let’s —

Q No, no, no, no, this is —

MR. GIBBS: On behalf of the President of the United States, let’s — I’ll do this. He doesn’t look like me, right? So let’s — I mean, he’s doing just fine. Let me tell you, I’d love to go to Bethesda, have them work through and tell me that I was where the cholesterol was on him and what have you. So let’s not —

Q Robert, I understand —

MR. GIBBS: The doctor would like to see his LDL lowered, but —

Q And that’s the point — are there going to be more fruits and vegetables in his diet? The LDL — are there going to be more almonds in his diet?

MR. GIBBS: This is funny. I love this. You guys thought he, like —

Q But it’s real, it’s a real issue, it’s a real issue. This is the President of the United States.

MR. GIBBS: You guys thought he, like, carried arugula in his pocket to snack on, and now all of a sudden he’s — now all of a sudden — now all of a sudden he’s breaking into my office looking for quarters for the vending machines. (Laughter.)

Q There are fresh apples on —

MR. GIBBS: "Put the potato chips down." (Laughter.)

Q There are fresh apples in the Oval Office at all times. I mean, will there be —

MR. GIBBS: Yes, which he eats a lot of. Look, I got to tell you, I mean, again — no, no, he does. I had an apple today; I can’t say Axelrod had an apple today. (Laughter.) Now I’m getting myself in trouble.

No, but, look, in all seriousness, because, look, I think obviously the health report is important, that, look, again, on the helicopter ride back he was the first one — he said, look, I just have to say no to dessert more often. Look, there’s not a — I don’t think there’s a magic formula except just, as he said, pushing away from the table before they put the pie in front of him.

Q So the pastry chef has not been given a mandate —

MR. GIBBS: No, to keep baking but he’s just got to use a little bit more presidential restraint, I would say.

David.

Q It’s a demand problem, not a supply problem. (Laughter.)

MR. GIBBS: Not untrue.

Q Going back to the CFPA, if it’s not given sufficient authority, is that enough reason for the President to threaten or actually conduct a veto?

MR. GIBBS: Well, David, I don’t want to get that far ahead of the process given the fact that we have not yet seen all of what the Senate bill will be. Obviously the House is on record with a strong CFPA. Look, again, without getting into where this thing — what might happen "if," I know this — let me just leave it at the President is — the President believes strongly that final legislation should and must include strong consumer financial protections. This is something that he outlined earlier, it’s been through the House, and he’s enormously serious about ensuring is part of the final product.

Thanks, guys.

END
2:53 P.M. EST

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.01.10 03:20 PM

WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individual to a key administration post:

Michael C. Camuñez, Assistant Secretary for Market Access and Compliance, Department of CommercePresident Obama said, “I am tremendously grateful to Michael for his outstanding work at the White House. I wish him the best as he moves to the Commerce Department to help lead our efforts to grow American jobs by expanding American exports and broadening access to new markets.”

President Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individual to a key administrations post:

Michael C. Camuñez, Nominee for Assistant Secretary for Market Access and Compliance, Department of Commerce
Michael C. Camuñez is Special Counsel to the President in the Office of the White House Counsel. He has also served as Special Assistant to the President for Presidential Personnel, advising the President on his senior appointments in the domestic cabinet and independent agencies. Camuñez also worked on the Obama-Biden Presidential Transition Project as part of the Agency Review Team. Prior to joining the administration, Camuñez was a partner in the law firm of O’Melveny & Myers LLP, where he represented Fortune 500 companies, officers and directors in a range of matters involving domestic and international commercial disputes. He also advised U.S. companies doing business abroad in Latin America and Europe on corporate compliance, anti-corruption, and the risks associated with foreign investment and multinational business transactions. Camuñez has remained active in public service throughout his career. From 1991-1993 he served as the Program Officer and Director of the National Service Demonstration Program at the bipartisan U.S. Commission on National Service in Washington, DC. From 1993 to 1995 he served as the Senior Policy Advisor for national service in the Clinton Administration, where he helped lead the effort to establish the Corporation for National Service and its signature program, AmeriCorps. He has also served on numerous boards, including as President of the Mexican American Bar Foundation in Los Angeles County and as a member of the Stanford Law School Board of Visitors. He was appointed by Democratic and Republican governors to the board of California’s public service commission, which he chaired from 2005-2007 with California First Lady Maria Shriver. From 2007 until his appointment in the administration, Camuñez also served as a member of the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission. He is a member of the Pacific Council on International Policy, the West Coast Affiliate of the Council on Foreign Relations. He is a graduate of Harvard College and Stanford Law School.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.01.10 03:26 PM

Katherine M. Gehl, of Wisconsin, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation for a term
expiring December 17, 2010, vice Collister Johnson, Jr., term expired.

Michael J. McCord, of Virginia, to be Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller). (New Position)

Michael James Warren, of the District of Columbia, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation for a term expiring December 17, 2011, vice Diane M. Ruebling, term expired.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.01.10 03:41 PM

On Monday, March 1, 2010, the President signed into law:

S. 2950, the “Criminal History Background Checks Pilot Extension Act of 2009”, which extends through March 30, 2011, a pilot program for certain volunteer organizations that serve children to have fingerprint checks on applicants for positions as volunteers or employees processed through the fingerprint identification system of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

03.01.10 04:05 PM

TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES:

Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent to the Federal Register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the national emergency with respect to the actions and policies of certain members of the Government of Zimbabwe and other persons to undermine Zimbabwe’s democratic processes or institutions is to continue in effect beyond March 6, 2010.

The crisis constituted by the actions and policies of certain members of the Government of Zimbabwe and other persons to undermine Zimbabwe’s democratic processes or institutions has not been resolved. These actions and policies continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the foreign policy of the United States. For these reasons, I have determined that it is necessary to continue this national emergency and to maintain in force the sanctions to respond to this threat.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
February 26, 2010.

White House.gov Press Office Feed