Author: WhiteHouse

04.07.10 11:18 AM

11:17 A.M. EDT

MS. SWAIN: Good morning on this beautiful spring day, and welcome to the White House. We are very pleased to be here in the beautiful and historic State Dining Room at the White House for a dialogue on childhood obesity and childhood health with the First Lady, Michelle Obama.

We’re very pleased for this program, which is live on C-SPAN this morning, to have students from all around the Washington, D.C., area and students watching all across the country. Some of them will be calling in with questions on our discussion on childhood obesity.

We’ll be here for 45 minutes altogether, and we all hope to learn more about this topic and why it’s so important to young people’s health and how to stay healthy, and also why the First Lady is so passionate about it.

So boys and girls here in the White House, would you please join me in welcoming the First Lady Michelle Obama to our discussion this morning. (Applause.)

MRS. OBAMA: Hello, everybody. (Applause.) Well, hello.

AUDIENCE: Hello.

MS. SWAIN: Well, we’re going to just plunge right into it, and as we get started here, I thought — I’m going to ask you a question, and then we’re going to introduce the students in the room. I had a very important question as we were getting ready this morning, Mrs. Obama, from a young man sitting in the back. We keep using this big word “obesity” and he wasn’t sure what it meant.

MRS. OBAMA: Yes, yes. Well, it is a pretty big word, but I think it — you know, just to make it simple, it’s when people’s weight gets higher than it should be. And there are very scientific measurements for it. Something called Body Mass Index is what a lot of doctors try to measure. But as you grow, your weight and your height should remain fairly consistent, but people’s Body Mass Index really varies.

So there’s no one right weight or height to be. If you look in my whole family, we’ve got people who are 6’6” and people who are 4’11”. And weight and height really depend on you as a person. But what this is all about, really, is about making sure that you guys are healthy, that you’re eating the right foods, that you’re getting enough exercise. This isn’t about how you look, this isn’t about appearances, because we all have to own and be proud of exactly who we are.

I am 5’11”. I was probably this height when I was very young, and my parents taught me to be proud of the way I look. And this isn’t about how you look. This is about how you guys feel. It’s about health.

So I think that’s the big takeaway. And you can talk to the doctors and the experts and the scientists, if you want to get a more definitive answer to what obesity technically is, but it’s really about our health. It’s about your health.

Does that help? Yes, yes? All right, good. It’s a good way to start.

MS. SWAIN: The way that this event all came together is that students around the country have participated in an annual documentary contest that our network C-SPAN holds, called “Student Cam”, and this year we had 1,000 documentarians —

MRS. OBAMA: That’s great.

MS. SWAIN: — from all around the country. But interestingly, health was the number one issue among young people. We had 128 different entries on aspects of health, so it’s much on their minds. The economy, number two. (Laughter.) So not surprised there.

But today we’re going to meet one of the very special documentarians, Matthew Shimura, who is here as the first prize middle school winner; he’s been thinking about childhood obesity for a while. Matt is in the front row and will meet you in just a minute. Matt, welcome and congratulations for your winning documentary.

We also have young people who entered the contest who are watching from all the country — also did, on the topic of childhood obesity, so they are thinking about this and have questions for you. But let me introduce you to the young people who are here at the White House with us today. And I’m going to ask you to stand up with your group when I call the name of your schools, so your parents can see that you’re here.

First of all, where’s the Hamstead Hill Academy in Baltimore? Welcome.

MRS. OBAMA: Welcome, you guys.

MS. SWAIN: Stuart Hobson Middle School in Washington, D.C. — sixth through eighth grade. Hello, Stuart Hobston, looking good.

Next is Alexandria, Virginia — Lyles Crouch Elementary School. Hello, Lyles Crouch.

Now, we’ve got a group of Girl Scouts from the national capital region who have been involved in health and wellness issues. Welcome, ladies.

MRS. OBAMA: Good to see you all.

MS. SWAIN: How about the Alliance for a Healthier Generation? Where are those students? Good morning and welcome.

And then we have a number of student journalists who are covering this event. Where are our student journalists?

MRS. OBAMA: Oh, good, it’s the journalists.

MS. SWAIN: They’re right near the professional journalists in the back, too, so —

MRS. OBAMA: All right, watch them. Watch them behind you. (Laughter.)

MS. SWAIN: Then is there any person here who hasn’t had a chance to stand that I didn’t introduce your group? If not, please stand up now.

MRS. OBAMA: And make sure you stand up, because your parents are watching.

MS. SWAIN: Okay, it looks like we’ve got everybody.

MRS. OBAMA: All right, great.

MS. SWAIN: Well, if you could begin by telling us — in the past every First Lady has had a special issue. Mrs. Reagan was worried about drug use by young people. Mrs. Bush was involved with literacy and reading. How did you come to choose this issue, and why?

MRS. OBAMA: Yes, I’ve said this so many times before. I came to this issue as a mom way before we were anywhere near coming to the White House. I mean, you guys know I have these two beautiful little girls, Malia and Sasha — they’re not so little now — but I was like a lot of your parents. I worked a job, my husband worked a job, we were very busy, you’re trying to make sure that you’re doing the right thing as a mom and keeping your job together, and our health habits got way out of kilter because we were eating out too much. I didn’t have time to cook. I had to buy a lot of quick packaged things, so my kids were drinking a lot of sugary drinks, and you were rushing to make sure that the lunch was good and something that they’d eat. We were probably eating too many things out of a box.

So we were doing probably what most of your parents do, because you’re just trying to get through the day, and everybody has got too many activities, and you’re shuttling to work, and you’re eating on the run, and you’re missing dinner together. We were living that life.

And it seemed fine, I thought I was in control until one of my kids’ pediatrician kind of tapped me on the shoulder, because he was regularly measuring that BMI, that Body Mass Index, that I talked to you about. And we were lucky that we had a pediatrician that really checked this pretty accurately, because we lived on the South Side of Chicago, predominantly African American community, and weight issues and obesity issues are pretty significant there, so he was tracking that. And he told me, you know, you may want to watch it. And I didn’t think we had a problem because I look at my kids and I see perfection, just like your parents see. They’re perfect, they’re beautiful. And it wasn’t that they weren’t, but it was just that things were just tipping over to the point that we needed to make some changes.

So we made some pretty simple changes in our household. We made sure we got more fruits and vegetables and dinner. I cooked more. We ate out a little bit less. We limited desserts to weekends — I know, not every day. I took out sugary drinks so my kids were drinking more water. We made sure they were exercising; at least moving around everyday, so no TV during the weeks — week.

So those little changes made a pretty significant difference. And my view is that if I could make those kind of changes and it could help my family in such a significant way, I wanted to make sure that we were doing that with the rest of the country, because my view is that if I’m having this problem in my household and I don’t know it and it was unclear to me, then what’s going on with everybody else, people who don’t have information or don’t have pediatricians who are working with them?

So when we planted the garden, the White House Kitchen Garden a year ago, we did it to start a conversation with young people about eating healthy. Maybe they would get more engaged in fruits and vegetables if they were involved in growing them.

And what we found with working with the kids that helped me with the garden was that if kids planted it and were involved in it and understood it, they’d eat it and they’d be excited about it. And they could help not only change their own health habits, but they’d go back home and start teaching their parents, because once I started talking to my kids about what they needed to eat, trust me, they were monitoring me way more than I was monitoring them.

They cleaned out the cabinets. They looked at labels a bit more. They made decisions about the kind of snacks they would eat. They started making pretty healthy choices for themselves, and a lot of times, when I wanted to cheat, they’d pull me back.

So my hope is that young people around the country will take that kind of interest in their own health. And then to see the statistics, seeing that one in three kids in this country is overweight or obese, and that we’re on track for the first time ever for our kids to live shorter lives than we do. That in and of itself was terrifying enough for me. I wouldn’t want that fate for my girls, and I don’t want it for any of you or any other kids in this country.

So we started “Let’s Move” and hopefully it will catch on, and you guys are going to be the key ambassadors to really make this happen, because this is really about you and it’s about the kids that are going to follow you.

So I’ll stop there. I can go on and on and on. (Laughter.)

MS. SWAIN: How can they be ambassadors?

MRS. OBAMA: You know, I think first you can take the lead in your own homes. This is what I tell my kids, my girls. It’s not about never having the stuff you want, right? I would love it if I could live healthy on pie and French fries. I’d do it. I’d eat it. But the fact of the matter is, is that you can’t. We are made as humans to need a balanced diet with enough fiber and enough vegetables and fruits. And we have to be educated about what that diet should look like, and then we have to start making choices to not have candy every day, even if you can; to not ask for those desserts all the time, even if you can; to think about learning how to cook for yourselves, how to bake a chicken and make a little pasta; how to think about putting more water in your diet.

Those are decisions at your age. You’re the age of my girls. You guys can make those decisions, and you can help your parents, because they’re trying — they’re just trying to get you to eat. That’s all we want to do. We want you to eat something.

And if you complain and you don’t want to try new things, if you’re hesitant, if you are going to get that — you know, buy those chips instead of some pretzels, if you’re not going to make good decisions, it’s really not a whole lot that parents can do, because you’re not with us all the time, you’re at school, you’re with your friends.

So my whole goal in my kids — for my kids is to try to get them to think about the choices they’re going to make in their own lives. And I tell them it’s not about who they are today, it’s about who they want to be when they’re 20 and 25. I have them thinking about what kind of moms are you going to be, you know? If you don’t know how to feed yourself, then how are you going to feed your own kids?

So it’s really about you guys taking responsibility of your own future in so many ways and helping your parents and your families make those kind of decisions. I think that that’s the first thing that you can do, because that’s your power. You don’t have to live in a certain neighborhood. You don’t have to know anything more to make better decisions for yourself and be willing to make some of those decisions on your own. You don’t need a teacher or a parent to do it. You guys have the power to start doing it. And once you do it, your parents will follow. That, I know.

MS. SWAIN: Well, let’s introduce Matt Shimura officially. Matt is sitting in the front row and he came all the way to the White House from Honolulu. We’re very proud of his accomplishment. We had 1,000 entries in this StudentCam documentary, and Matt Shimura’s documentary on childhood obesity took first place in middle school. Matt, congratulations. (Applause.)

Now, Mrs. Obama announced her big project on childhood obesity in early February. By then you had finished your documentary, so you’ve been thinking about this for a while. What got you interested?

MR. SHIMURA: What got me interested was when I looked at our state’s furlough Fridays. It’s when we don’t have — the public schools don’t have school on Fridays, so they don’t have lunch and they don’t have P.E. on those days, so they’re lacking nutrition and physical exercise. So I thought that could lead to childhood obesity, and that’s how I chose that topic.

MS. SWAIN: What did you learn while making your film?

MR. SHIMURA: I learned, like, how to make a great documentary and express my ideas through filmmaking.

MS. SWAIN: We’re going to show just a minute of it for our viewers and students watching around the country. Here in the room — you’ll just hear it, as I told you before — but we’ll hear the audio of the documentary that you made, and then we’ll come back and have a question from you for Mrs. Obama.

(The documentary is shown.)

And that was Matt doing the voiceover in his documentary, as well. Congratulations on your work. You have a question for Mrs. Obama?

Q Mrs. Obama, how do you think the government can improve nutrition and physical activity in schools?

MRS. OBAMA: You know, I think that first of all, one thing I just want to say is that the solution to this challenge has to come from the bottom up. The government can’t be in a position telling people to do — what to do in their own homes, and that generally doesn’t work. So it’s really going to require all of us working together — the federal government, business leaders, food manufacturers, farmers, students, nurses — everyone has to come together.

But specifically, when you think about the federal government, when it comes to school lunches, the Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act is one of the ways that the government supports school lunches. And one of the things we’re trying to get done, because it’s time for it to be reauthorized, is to get more money put into implementing that act so that we change the kind of food you all get in your lunches so that there are more fruits and vegetables added; that there’s less processed food; that the quality of the food goes up, because a large percentage of kids in this country are getting half of their meals at school.

So if we can do a better job in the schools of providing better options that are healthier, more nutritious, then we’re going to go a very long way.

But this act also works to encourage more schools to become U.S. Healthier Schools. And these are schools that are designated as already taking those steps to change the way they do things, providing healthier meals, incorporating nutrition education into the curriculum, making sure that they’re making time for physical activity and recess — because in many schools around this country, with budget cuts, oftentimes that’s the first thing to go. So we can’t tell kids, you know, “Get more exercise” and then take away recess and all physical activity out of the school.

So there are schools out there that are finding ways to put that kind of exercise and activity back into the curriculum. The Healthier Schools Challenge recognizes that, and we’re going to work to double those numbers of schools that qualify.

So there are many, many ways that the federal government can work on — through the Child Nutrition and Reauthorization Act.

Also, through the FDA, the Food and Drug Administration, we can work with grocery manufacturers to make sure that the foods that are produced in the stores have labels on them that help families make decisions. Because, you know when you walk into a grocery store, you walk down an aisle? My kids know the brands. Oh, that’s “X” brand! They know the commercial. But when a mom or dad picks up the cereal, how do you know whether this is something that’s nutritious? How many servings?

And right now the labels are really confusing. And if you’re busy and you’re trying to get in and out of the grocery store, you don’t have time to read labels or to make the kind of calculations. So we’re trying to work with the FDA and food manufacturers to simplify those things so that it’s easy, so that you guys can walk in and look at foods and make decisions about what actually is going to be healthy and how much of it to eat.

So those are just some of the ways that the federal government can be involved. But more importantly, this is an effort that’s going to require everyone. No one is off the hook on this one.

MS. SWAIN: Our next question is going to come from a student in Jenks, Oklahoma, who’s watching us on television. After that, we’ll take a question from the room. Who has a question so we can get ready? Okay, this young lady that’s on the row, you’ll be our first question after our call from Alexander England, who’s watching us in Jenks, Oklahoma. He goes to Jenks High School, and his winning documentary was “Childhood Obesity: America’s Underlying Problem.” He watches C-SPAN, which we appreciate, on COX cable in Oklahoma. Alexander, what’s your question?

Q Good morning, Mrs. Obama. It is an honor to talk with you this morning.

MRS. OBAMA: Good morning, Alexander. Thanks for calling in. What’s your question?

Q For my C-SPAN film, I interviewed the vice president of a fast food chain. He said that he rarely (inaudible) choices based on how healthy the food is, but instead on price. With that in mind, do you think efforts should be focused on lowering the price of healthy food? And if so, is there anything the government can do to encourage that?

MRS. OBAMA: I think you’re absolutely right that the cost of healthy foods oftentimes becomes a barrier. The access and affordability of foods is a huge issue. And with “Let’s Move” that’s one of our major pillars, is eliminating what are known as food deserts. There are millions of kids who live in areas all throughout the country that we call food deserts. Those are places where you can’t — there isn’t a grocery store, there isn’t a place to buy fresh produce, healthy food.

There are a lot of people who live in communities where the only access to food comes in the form of a convenience store or a gas station. You imagine trying to feed your family when the closest grocery store is a train ride or a cab ride or a car ride away. And there are millions of Americans who find it very difficult to cook the kind of foods that they know that they should, because they don’t have access.

We’re looking at starting a healthy food financing initiative modeled after some of the efforts that have been done in cities across the country and states. Pennsylvania has managed to eliminate food deserts through this financing initiative. With this, we’re taking money from the Treasury Department and the Department of Agriculture, and trying to leverage resources, millions of dollars, to try to encourage more grocery stores to relocate in underserved communities.

And that way, not only do you help to eliminate the food desert issue, but you can create jobs. You can build economies around new grocery stores relocating to communities. I saw this firsthand in Philadelphia in a community that hadn’t had a grocery store in it for a decade. You imagine a decade. So if you’re 10 years old, that means you’ve grown up in a community where your mom can’t go and buy a head of lettuce. That is a frustration, and it’s a reality in so many families’ lives.

But with their financing initiative in Pennsylvania, they were able to partner with a chain store that came in. This grocery store is amazing. It looks like any Whole Foods store that you’d see in any community — fresh produce, fresh vegetables, everything you can imagine.

And the excitement that this community feels over having this resource that they haven’t seen had just turned this community upside down with excitement. So our view is that if we can do that in Philadelphia, if they can do it in Pennsylvania, there’s no reason we can’t do this, replicate this model in communities all across this country.

MS. SWAIN: And we have our student questioner here in the State Dining Room.

Q Good morning, Mrs. Obama. How would you think schools can show students what they should eat and what they shouldn’t eat while they’re there?

MS. SWAIN: And do you want to tell us your name?

Q Kayla Greenspoon (ph).

MS. SWAIN: Thank you for your question.

MRS. OBAMA: Thanks so much. It’s a good question. Some — many schools are already doing this. I mean, one of the things I said in a speech that I did to some of the school lunch ladies, the association — they were here in Washington — is that we have to remember that learning doesn’t stop at lunch time. The cafeteria is one of the most important classrooms in the school. And, yes, during that time — and not just that time alone, but by exposing kids to different types of foods, helping them get introduced, encouraging kids to try things that they haven’t tried — they may try some things in the school lunch room that they can bring home to their parents.

But nutrition education is an important part of a curriculum. And there are many schools in this country that are figuring out ways to incorporate those kind of activities into the regular curriculum. I visited many schools in the Washington, D.C., area that have wonderful community gardens and are using those gardens to not just teach science, but to teach reading and math. And along the way, if you’re using the garden, you’re also helping kids, again, become exposed to the different variety of fruits and vegetables that are out there. And when kids see that in the classroom, they may be more inclined to try it at home.

So this is why trying to increase the number of U.S. Healthier Schools is going to be really critical, because again, there are already schools who are figuring out ways to do this. So how do we scale that up? How do we take those best practices that are happening in schools already and make sure that they’re happening in all schools, for all kids around the country?

And it’s going to take some resources. And it’s going to take the folks who provide the food for the schools — there are companies out there that get contracts to provide the school lunches. We need them to take on ownership, to make sure that the lunches that they are providing aren’t just cheap and easy, but that they’re low in fat, salt, and sugar.

And many of them have already agreed that they’re going to do a better job. But we have to hold their feet to the fire, and that’s another way that you all can be involved. Look at the lunches that you’re providing — being provided. Talk to your teachers about the content. Ask questions. Figure out whether they’re balanced or not, because the more you educate yourselves, you guys can set the tone in your own schools in so many ways. Slowly, but surely, you can change the culture in your own environments.

MS. SWAIN: Mrs. Obama talked about the fact that they’ve planted a garden here at the White House to help with healthier eating. How many students in this room have a garden at home?

MRS. OBAMA: That’s nice.

MS. SWAIN: And how many of you who don’t? And a garden doesn’t have to be land. If you live in the city, you can grow it in pots, as well. How many of you are going to talk to your parents about planting a garden this year? I’ve got a few converts.

Who in this room has a question? All right, you’ll be next. But we’re to take another call from around the country. This is Sarah Gabriel. She is in Cedar Falls, Iowa, which is a Mediacom system. She’s an honorable mention winner in our contest. And her video was “Improving School Lunch: Too costly, or a way to bend the cost curve?”

Sarah, you’re on the line now for Mrs. Obama. What’s your question?

Q Hi. My question is also about improving the choice quality in schools. And I go to a public school where they do something to try to implement higher nutritional standards. But because my school still sells à la carte snack items to generate revenue, many students still just buy unhealthy snack items. So I was wondering if you have any ideas about how schools might address this issue?

MRS. OBAMA: Sarah, thanks for the question. You make a great point about the vending machines and about the la carte lines. These standards have to apply across the board. And we have to make sure that kids have healthy options.

I am a proponent of vending machines, because, kids, when you all are hungry, you’re going to look to a vending machine for a snack. The question is just what do we have in those vending machines and how do we think about the content of the food in those machines.

There’s nothing wrong with a vending machine per se. But you don’t have to always have a sugary drink in a vending machine. You can have a healthy sports drink. You can have water. You can have trail mix. You can have pretzels, nuts, crackers, cheese. There’s so many things that kids would eat — they just gravitate to what’s there.

So I think that that’s part of what we need to do, as we work through these nutrition guidelines, that we can’t just look at the food on the cafeteria line, but we have to look at all the food that’s available to our children. Again, that’s why this isn’t a problem that can be solved by the federal government — the school community, the local community, has to want to make these changes. And they have to make decisions about what’s going to go in those vending machines instead of what’s already there; how do you work with your local vendors.

We can work on high and try to set the tone, but really what happens at your schools and in your communities is really more up to you, your mayors, your city council people, than anything that can happen out of the White House. And it really should, because folks know their communities better than we’ll ever know.

But the fact of the matter is, as this question points out, is that we have to make sure that all of the options are good ones and not just some of them, because you guys are pretty sneaky, you’ll find a way to get to that bag of chips. (Laughter.)

MS. SWAIN: How many of you in fact, when you’re looking for snacks, at least feel that you have an option in your vending machines at school to have a healthy choice if you want one? Would you raise your hand if you have options for it? It looks like we have a little work to do in some of the schools.

MRS. OBAMA: Yes. No, we do. We do.

MS. SWAIN: What’s your question? And tell us your name too.

Q Well, my name is Terrick Mack (ph). I’m an eighth grader at Stillhouse (ph) Middle School. And my question is about false labelings on nutrition labels. And I wanted to ask what regulations could be put in place so that we can eliminate — that we know that we can ensure that false labels won’t be put on nutritious facts.

MRS. OBAMA: Well, as I mentioned earlier, the FDA is going to be working with the grocery store manufacturers this summer to work on the whole issue of labeling. And our hope is that because the grocery store manufacturers have — they want to be helpful in this effort, that this is one of the ways, one of the easy ways that they can be helpful, is figuring out how do you make, as I said earlier, simple, clear, accurate labels that give the facts in a way that the average consumer, the average purchaser, can figure it out and trust in the information.

But the FDA, the Food and Drug Administration, is going to be setting up new guidelines for labels. We want to do it with the help of the grocery store folks, because it’s their products, and we’re hopeful that they’re going to join in. But you’re absolutely right, you can’t tell families to make smart decisions if they’re confused about what to buy.

We’ve also talked to them about how they market to kids, right? I mean, the majority — I don’t want to quote percentages, but there are a lot of commercials that come on kid TV programs. My kids are watching it, with the sugary food and the tasty this and the — that’s what you guys are seeing a lot of.

And one of the things we’re asking them is that as you — as those grocery store manufacturers think about the products they’re going to market to kids, what percentage of those products are really healthy and how much of it is sort of kind of healthy, but it’s the stuff that you guys will push your parents to buy. And how do we change that? How do we become more responsible in what is advertised to you guys, right, so that you’re not bombarded with messages that say this sugary stuff is really what you want, really, right, you don’t really want the apple.

And it’s not enough just to change not marketing the not-so-good stuff. They have to help us market the good stuff to you. And they know how to sell stuff, right? I mean, I’m sure all of you could raise your hand and name your favorite brand of anything, right? You know the jingle and the tune. You can recite the words by heart. But if you’re hearing those same songs and messages about good foods, trust me you’ll be — those ideas and thoughts will be ringing in your head just as much as the sugary foods are. So we need to do a better job of getting you all the information that you need to make good choices.

MS. SWAIN: Once again, let’s see a hand for a future question. All right, this young man in the blue shirt, you’ll be next. But first, we’re going to take a call. And this is Kyle Street. And Kyle is an honorable mention winner for his video called “Childhood Obesity.” He is a student at Throop Elementary in Paoli, Indiana. And Avenue Cable is where he watches C-SPAN. Kyle, you are on and what’s your question?

Q Well, first of all, I’d like to say thank you for this opportunity. And in our small rural community, volunteers have just started a wellness program to promote a healthier lifestyle. (Inaudible) physical activity at a young age (inaudible) offering organized sports, team (inaudible). Mrs. Obama, as you mentioned, physical education programs are getting canceled or cut back because of the struggling economy. What other ways can the community help motivate kids to stay active and exercise?

MRS. OBAMA: Well, thanks for the question, Kyle, and it’s important. I’ve spent a lot of time talking about food, the food side of this equation. But as Kyle points out, the physical activity piece is just as important. Because the truth is, is that when I was growing up as a kid, we didn’t worry about what we ate. And we ate the cupcakes and this — we didn’t eat it every day.

But the difference was that when I was growing up, kids — every kid played outside for hours and hours, because, number one, it was safe and, number two, we only had like seven TV channels and not 700. So there was a period at which kid TV was over, so you were bored and your parents were going to kick you out of the house.

MS. SWAIN: And no computer, right?

MRS. OBAMA: No computers. Life has just changed. And now in my household, my kids could watch SpongeBob 24 hours a day, the same shows over and over and over again. I even know all the episodes. (Laughter.)

So you guys just have — you’ve got computers, you’ve got your iPod. A lot of what you’re drawn to has nothing to do with movement. And if you’re not signed up with an activity or you don’t have a ballet class in your neighborhood — or maybe it’s too expensive, because all these after-school programs are just really, really expensive for parents and families — if you’re not engaged in any of that, then a lot of times kids nowadays are just sitting in front of the TV or watching — playing on the video games. And guidelines basically say that kids should be getting, what is it, 60 minutes of exercise, physical activity every single day. That’s really what you’re supposed to do, right?

And when I was growing up, 60 minutes of playing around outside was nothing, it was just play. So things have gotten tougher for you all in so many ways. So we have to do a better job — and not just in schools, but outside of school — to figure out how do we get you guys moving again.

And, again, some of that is on you all. Some of that are the choices that you make, because you’re at the age now where you can make a decision to sit in front of the TV, or get up and jump rope, or walk up and down the stairs, or do a pushup, or figure out something fun, or turn on the radio and dance. I mean, exercise isn’t about sports. It’s not always about throwing a ball. It’s just about moving, right? And those are some choices that you have to make. But we have to do a better job in giving you guys options to play.

And Kyle’s community, it sounds like what they’re doing is what we need to have happen in all communities across this country, where the adults — the mayors and the city officials and the businesspeople and the community groups and the churches — are figuring out how do we open up parks and spaces for you guys to play? How do we organize leagues that aren’t going to cost an arm and a leg? How do we open up gym facilities for longer periods of time? Those solutions have to come from the bottom up, because it’s going to be different in every community.

But getting you guys moving, which is one of the reasons why we’ve called our campaign “Let’s Move” is because we really don’t have time to wait. We can’t let you guys sit around for another generation and not make physical activity a regular part of your lives. So we need to be modeling what’s going on in Indiana. Is that where Kyle is from?

MS. SWAIN: He is, yes.

MRS. OBAMA: And it’s a small community. They figured out a way to make it happen. But there are also bigger cities like Somerville, Massachusetts, where they’re figuring out how to just restructure that whole city so that they’re focused on health and physical activity. And we’ve got to be doing that in cities and towns all across this country.

MS. SWAIN: What’s your question? And what’s your name?

Q My name is Francis Wells. And my question is, what is the main cause of childhood obesity?

MRS. OBAMA: You know, I don’t know that they know that there’s one single cause for it. Sometimes, it’s genetics. And a lot of times, it’s lifestyle. As I said before, things have changed. The way we live as Americans have changed. We walk less, sometimes because it’s not safe to walk; sometimes it’s because the schools your parents need you to go to are further away than they used to be. I know when I grew up, I went to the neighborhood school around the corner and everybody went to the school in their neighborhood. So you could walk to school, right?

But if you’re being — going to a magnet school or a charter school or a new school somewhere else where you don’t have the ability to walk, what are you — you’re in your parent’s car, or you’re on a bus, or maybe the walk is shortened. And then you get to school and there’s no physical education, there’s no P.E., there are no sports programs. And there were always those when I was growing up. You played outside before school. You had recess. You played out during lunch time. And you played in the playground after school. And now, kids are going straight home to sit in front of the TV, do their homework, usually watching TV, or on videogames.

And parents are much busier, right? Because of the economy, a lot of parents have to work. You guys know. Your parents would love to give you every single minute of their time but they’re trying to pay the bills. And that may mean that both parents or one parent has got two jobs. So parents are busy and it’s harder to get you guys where you have to go.

So things have changed in society, and slowly but surely I think that that’s affected how healthy kids are. And we’re eating more processed foods, we go out more, fast food is no longer a treat, right? It’s something that you do several times a week because it’s convenient. So we’ve changed the way we live and it affects you all. And we got to sort of dial that back. We have to rethink those kinds of things to figure out how do we create healthy lifestyles in the world that we live in today. How do we do that for you.

And again, you guys are going to be helpers in this because, you know, the question that I have for you is how do I get you to turn off the TV? How do I get you, in this culture of all this TV and all these videogames, what do I do as a mom to get you to move? I don’t know. I’m working on with it my kids. But you guys are going to have to help us figure out how to engage you in a way that’s going to make this fun and not work so that you want to do it and don’t feel like you’re being forced to do it, right?

So we’re going to need your help in figuring this out.

MS. SWAIN: We have about nine minutes left in our conversation with Mrs. Obama about childhood obesity. Who will be our next questioner? Let me get someone — you’re going to be next, right in front of the camera — okay, so just a second. And in between, we’re going to hear from Lauren Shatanof. Lauren is in Weston, Florida, Advanced Cable, Falcon Cove Middle School and a documentarian with the film titled “America’s Biggest Challenge: Obesity.” Lauren.

Q Hello. It is a great honor for me to speak with you, our First Lady. Mrs. Obama, my question is: A country facing challenging economic times, with limited resources to address childhood obesity, what measures will you take to ensure that this problem is prioritized?

MRS. OBAMA: Well, I think this initiative is one of the biggest ways that I think that I can help. Having the platform of the White House is really helpful in getting attention to stuff, right? A lot of times when I do something, a lot of cameras show up and people tend to watch and write about it. Sometimes they write about more than what I’m wearing. (Laughter.) So I think it’s my job to help shine the light on things that are already working. So that’s one of the reasons why I chose this as my initiative.

I also think that one of the ways that I think we can move this effort, one of the reasons why I think that we can be successful, is that it doesn’t require — I don’t believe, and others may have struggled a bit more — it doesn’t require whole-scale changes in your life. The beauty about kids, you guys, is that you’re young, your metabolisms are really healthy, which essentially means that once you start moving and eating right you’re going to — you guys change really quickly. You’re growing and everything is working right.

So if we make some little changes, get you guys moving more, a little more movement, a little less TV, if we take out sugary drinks, if we can make school lunches better, if we get you guys educated and your families about what to eat — these are all things we can control and it doesn’t take millions of dollars and a whole bunch of legislation to get it done. We don’t have to count on people passing stuff, thank God, to move this problem along. And if we all get pumped up and empowered, right, we can move this issue along.

And that’s why I’m so excited about it and that’s why I’m counting on all of you. Because my thing is that if we get you thinking differently now as middle schoolers and folks headed to college, you’re going to enter adulthood with a whole different baseline of understanding about nutrition. So you’re not going to carry these problems into your adulthood and you’re going to help your kids learn a bit differently.

So you guys are the beginning of the solution, right? Our goal with “Let’s Move” is to ensure that kids born today, right, grow up healthy. And that means you’re going to be taking the lead.

So if you’re thinking differently about how you eat, if you’re thinking about access and affordability to foods, if you’re thinking about growing your own foods, if you’re thinking consciously and making different choices and knowing that exercise isn’t a luxury, it’s like a necessity to keep up alive and you’ve got to find the thing that you’re going to do that gets you moving every day — if you’re growing up like that, then you’re not going to have the bad habits that a lot of us grown people have a hard time getting rid of.

So we’re trying to teach you guys differently. That doesn’t take — that’s not rocket science. That’s good information and a coordinated effort and I think that the country from what I can see is ready to respond. People around the country — I haven’t gotten a negative response from anybody — not people, members of Congress, not people in the media, entertainers. Everybody believes that this is an important issue and they think that they can help move it. And they’re ready to help make you guys healthier.

So if all of us are online, right, then there’s no reason why we shouldn’t be able to significantly change this trend in your lifetime.

MS. SWAIN: What’s your question? Would you stand up and tell your name, too?

Q My name is Robert. Good morning.

MRS. OBAMA: Good morning.

Q How do you feel about childhood obesity and adult obesity — do you think they’re the same problem?

MRS. OBAMA: You know, I am not an expert on sort of the science of this issue. What I do think is that it’s, as I said, it’s harder to break habits when you’re older. The longer you do something, right — eat a certain way, get adjusted to a certain kind of food, get used to a certain taste, get used to not exercising — it’s hard to break that habit. It’s hard for grownups to make changes. It just is.

You guys are still open. Your brains are still taking in new information. Trust me, you can learn to love vegetables — (laughter) — even though it doesn’t feel that way. Your taste buds change over time. Right now if you get used to the taste of a really sugary food, your taste buds are going to adjust to that as being normal, right? But if you start drinking more water and trying more vegetables, over time you’re taste buds will adjust to where that’s what you crave. So you can adjust yourself at a young age to want healthy things. But if all you’re eating is fast food and junk food, that’s just what you’re going to want.

So I just think it’s easier to help people change habits earlier. That doesn’t mean that it’s not hard for kids to make different choices. It’s just if it’s hard now, it’s going to really be hard when you get to be an adult. So why get there, right? Why not stop it now? Why not get you guys in the habit of exercising and moving now so that you’re not struggling with these issues for the rest of your life?

MS. SWAIN: Katie Romos (ph) is in Caro, Michigan, Charter Cable, and also a student documentarian. Katie, what’s your question?

Q Good morning, Mrs. Obama. How do you think parents should address the issue of obesity with their young children? Should they take a strong obvious approach or a more subtle approach that does not let the child know (inaudible) situation?

MRS. OBAMA: Yes. You know, I think it’s a real delicate balance because you want to make sure that kids feel good about themselves, right? And I think that all parents know their kids better than anyone. That’s one of those things where it’s — that’s not — you can’t get involved in how somebody deals with their kids.

But in the process, I think that we have to make sure that our kids still feel good about themselves no matter what their weight, no matter how they feel. We need to make sure that our kids know that we love them no matter who they are, what they look like, what they’re eating. That’s really important.

But what I found in my household is that making small changes and involving my kids in the changes without making it a problem, right — without saying we’re now — “Now you’re in trouble, now you’re no longer be able to do this or you’ll have to” — it’s not a punishment. I did it more as a, “Let’s figure out how we can do this. Do we really need this many sugary snacks, and have we thought about what’s in our food? Why don’t we think about this?” And I tried to engage them in the process so that it didn’t feel like you’re being punished for something and that they felt more ownership over it.

So, I don’t know, that might be viewed as a softer approach, but again, this isn’t about how our kids look — this is about how our kids feel and it’s about helping our kids take ownership over their lives and what they eat and making sure they have the information that they need to make those choices.

MS. SWAIN: Do you mind if we go over one minute for a student who’s been on the line for a long time?

MRS. OBAMA: I don’t mind at all.

MS. SWAIN: Okay. This is Reshad Jaji (ph) who is in Cohoes, New York, and Boght Hills Elementary School, a Time Warner community. Reshad, are you there?

Q Yes.

MS. SWAIN: Do you have a question for Mrs. Obama?

Q Yes.

MS. SWAIN: Go ahead and ask it please.

Q Good morning, Mrs. Obama.

MRS. OBAMA: How are you?

Q Fine. Good morning, Mrs. Obama.

MRS. OBAMA: Good morning. (Laughter.)

Q (Inaudible.)

MRS. OBAMA: I think it’s a great idea. I think that the more information, the better. That’s my bottom line on this issue. There isn’t a thing as too much information. The question is, what information and what format is right for what age and what community at what time. And that’s, again, why I think that decisions about what’s taught in the schools and how should be something that principals and teachers and parents in those schools really think through and make sure it makes sense and works for the kids in their community.

MS. SWAIN: Mrs. Obama told us how cameras follow her wherever she goes, which is why it’s easy to highlight an issue. I brought along a photograph from the newspaper from last week when she and her two daughters went to New York City and all of the photographers followed as they went to a pizza parlor. So I think the message here is it’s possible to eat pizza and still eat healthy?

MRS. OBAMA: Absolutely. Like I said, I don’t believe in any absolutes in this thing. It’s really about balance, right? Can you have junk food every day? No. You just can’t. I wish the answer was yes. We talk about this in my household all the time. Why on Earth is there not — why doesn’t healthy food taste like candy? And that’s really the question. And it’s one of those dilemmas of humankind. I mean, the thing that is best for us isn’t always the thing that tastes the best, right?

But that’s life, right? I mean, that’s — those are the beginnings of the lessons of life. There’s a lot of stuff that you really need to do that you don’t want to do, but you really need to do it. And I know you’re looking because I’m sure your parents have told you that, right — but they’re right. And eating right is one of those things.

So in my household there is no — there are no absolute nos. We eat a lot of great, fun stuff. We eat junk food, snack food — but it’s a balance. And desserts are on the weekend. We set up some basic rules. But sometimes you break that because if there’s a special occasion or a birthday party at school, there’s no way I’m going to tell my kids, “No, you can’t have that cake.“ It’s not going to work. It would never work.

So balance and moderation is really to me the key not just to how we eat and exercise but how we live in this country. And hopefully you guys develop those — that sense of balance. Know that you can’t have candy every day. And if you’re doing it, you’re ruining your teeth, you’re making your parents mad, and you’re not going to be healthy.

MS. SWAIN: Well, Matt Shimura, thank you for your documentary that brought all of us together today at the White House, and congratulations.

MRS. OBAMA: Thank you, Matt.

MS. SWAIN: And Mrs. Obama, on behalf of our students here and also watching around the country, thank you for your hospitality and the discussion.

MRS. OBAMA: Thank you, guys. Great questions. (Applause.)

END
12:04 P.M. EDT

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.07.10 12:48 PM

President Obama called the University of Connecticut Huskies women’s basketball team today from the Oval Office to congratulate them on their second straight NCAA Championship and back-to-back undefeated seasons. The President commended Coach Geno Auriemma and the team on their achievement and said he was looking forward to seeing all of them at the White House again soon.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.07.10 01:03 PM

The Vice President spoke today to U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Chris Hill, U.S. Forces-Iraq Commanding General Ray Odierno, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on recent developments in Iraq. In his calls with Talabani and al-Maliki, the Vice President conveyed sympathy and condolences for the victims of recent attacks. The Vice President expressed confidence in the capabilities of the Iraqi Security Forces, reiterated U.S. readiness to provide all necessary support and stated his conviction that, notwithstanding these attempts at intimidation, the Iraqis will not be deterred from moving forward. The Vice President also expressed respect for Iraqi sovereignty during the ongoing government formation process and encouraged all sides to work together to form an inclusive and representative government.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.07.10 01:55 PM

WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues:

Lonnie Ali, Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical IssuesAnita L. Allen, Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical IssuesBarbara Atkinson, Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical IssuesNita A. Farahany, Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical IssuesAlexander G. Garza, Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical IssuesChristine Grady, Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical IssuesStephen L. Hauser, Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical IssuesRaju Kucherlapati, Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical IssuesNelson Michael, Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical IssuesDaniel Sulmasy, Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical IssuesThe Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues will advise the President on bioethical issues that may emerge from advances in biomedicine and related areas of science and technology. It will work with the goal of identifying and promoting policies and practices that ensure scientific research, health care delivery, and technological innovation are conducted in an ethically responsible manner. These candidates will join the current Chair, Amy Gutmann, and Vice-Chair, James Wagner, as Members on the Commission.

President Obama said, “I am grateful that these impressive individuals have decided to dedicate their talent and experience to this important Commission. I look forward to their recommendations in the coming months and years.”

President Obama announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to key administration posts:

Lonnie Ali, Appointee for Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues
Lonnie Ali is the wife of Muhammad Ali and has been an outspoken advocate working to raise awareness of Parkinson’s disease as well as increase funding for research. In December of 2009, she and her husband opened the Lonnie and Muhammad Ali Pavilion which houses the Muhammad Ali Parkinson’s Center on the campus of Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix, Arizona. The Center’s mission is to provide excellence in treatment, research, and education for patients and families affected by Parkinson’s disease and other movement disorders. She also helped found the Muhammad Ali Center in Louisville, Kentucky in 2005, where she serves on the Board of Directors. In 1992, Mrs. Ali formed the Greatest of All Time, Inc. (G.O.A.T.) to manage the licensing and business of her husband’s intellectual properties and personal appearances. She served as G.O.A.T.’s Vice President and Treasurer until 2006 when the company was sold and renamed to Muhammad Ali Enterprises. Mrs. Ali remains on the board of Muhammad Ali Enterprises. Mrs. Ali has also served on the Board of Directors for the Michael J. Fox Foundation. She currently serves on the Michael J. Fox Foundation Founder’s Council and the Emory Neurosciences Community Advisory Board. Mrs. Ali holds a B.A. degree from Vanderbilt University and an M.B.A. from U.C.L.A.’s Anderson School of Management.

Anita L. Allen, Appointee for Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues
Anita L. Allen is the Henry R. Silverman Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. She also serves as Deputy Dean for Academic Affairs of the school, and is Senior Fellow in the Bioethics Department, School of Medicine. A distinguished scholar of privacy law and practical ethics, Ms. Allen is recognized for her work on confidentiality in medicine, genetics and research, racial justice, and women’s health. She recently sat on the Executive Committee of the Association for Practical and Professional Ethics. In Philadelphia, Ms. Allen serves on the boards of the Maternity Care Coalition and the West Philadelphia Alliance for Children. Allen served on the original National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research and its Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications Working Group in the 1990s. She is presently on the Board of the Bazelon Center for Mental Health, collaborates with Penn’s Scattergood Program for the Applied Ethics of Mental Health, and has written about how American families cope with addiction and mental disorders. Ms. Allen began her academic career an Assistant Professor at Carnegie-Mellon and the University of Pittsburgh, and was the Associate Dean for Research and Scholarship at Georgetown Law Center. Ms. Allen holds both a J.D. from Harvard Law School and a Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Michigan. Her B.A. is from New College, Florida.

Barbara Atkinson, Appointee for Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues
Barbara Atkinson became Executive Vice Chancellor of the University of Kansas Medical Center in 2005. She also concurrently serves as the Executive Dean of the University of Kansas School of Medicine and has done that since 2002. In these roles, she oversees the education of 3,000 students, as well as 2,500 faculty and staff and a budget of $225 million. Dr. Atkinson began her career at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, where she was Assistant and then Associate Professor and Director of the hospital’s cytopathology laboratory from 1978 to 1987. She served as Professor and Chair of the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine at the Medical College of Pennsylvania from 1987 to 1994 and at the Medical College of Pennsylvania and Hahnemann University from 1994 to 1996. From 1996 to 1999, she was the Annenberg Dean of the MCP Hahnemann School of Medicine, now Drexel College of Medicine. She has held numerous national positions including Trustee and President of the American Board of Pathology and currently is a member of the Board of Directors of the American Association of Academic Health Centers. She has been a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences since 1997. She received her M.D. from the Jefferson Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University.

Nita A. Farahany, Appointee for Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues
Nita A. Farahany is an Associate Professor of Law and Philosophy at Vanderbilt University. Her research focuses on the legal, philosophical, and social issues arising from developments in the biosciences, particularly behavioral genetics and neuroscience. She has presented her work on bioethics, neuroethics, criminal law, and behavioral health law and policy, to wide-ranging audiences including the Second Circuit Judicial Conference, the National Judicial College, the Global Women’s Forum, the Stanford Center for the Integration of Research on Genetics and Ethics, the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy. Dr. Farahany is a member of the New York Bar, the American Academy for the Advancement of Science, and the Society for Neuroethics. Before joining the Vanderbilt faculty, Dr. Farahany clerked for the Honorable Judith W. Rogers on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. She graduated from Dartmouth College with a B.A. in genetics, cell and developmental biology, and from Harvard University with an A.L.M. in biology. She earned her J.D., M.A., and Ph.D. in Philosophy of Biology and Jurisprudence at Duke University.

Alexander G. Garza, Appointee for Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues
Dr. Alexander Garza is the Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs and Chief Medical Officer for the Department of Homeland Security. He has had an impressive career in medicine and public health issues in both civilian and military roles, specializing in emergency medicine. Prior to his time at DHS, he served as a staff physician of the Level I trauma center of Washington Hospital Center. Previously, he has also served as the Director of Military Programs at the ER One Institute at the Washington Hospital Center, the Associate Medical Director of Emergency Medical Services for the State of New Mexico, and as the Medical Director of Emergency Medical Services for the Kansas City Health Department. His military roles have included the Public Health Team Chief for Operation Flintlock in Dakar, Senegal, the Public Health Team Chief for Operation Iraqi Freedom I, a battalion surgeon, and as a special investigator/medical expert for MG Ray Odierno. He holds an M.D. from University of Missouri-Columbia School of Medicine and a Masters in Public Health from St. Louis University School of Public Health.

Christine Grady, Appointee for Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues
Christine Grady is currently the Acting Chief of the Department of Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center. Her research focuses on research subject recruitment, incentives, vulnerability, and international research ethics. She is also a senior research fellow at the Kennedy Institute of Ethics and was elected as a fellow at both the American Academy of Nursing and the Hastings Center. She has previously served as a consultant to UNAIDS and the Pan American Health Organization and as a staff member to the President’s Commission on HIV Infection. Dr. Grady has authored over 75 papers in bioethics, HIV disease, and nursing, and has authored or edited several books. She graduated with a B.S. in nursing and biology from Georgetown University, a M.S.N. in community health nursing from Boston College, and a Ph.D. in philosophy from Georgetown.

Stephen L. Hauser, Appointee for Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues
Stephen L. Hauser, M.D. is the Robert A. Fishman Distinguished Professor and Chair of the Department of Neurology at the University of California – San Francisco. A neuroimmunologist, Dr. Hauser’s research has focused on the genetic basis, immune mechanisms, and treatment of multiple sclerosis. Dr. Hauser is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the American Academy of Physicians, a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences (currently Chair of the Committee on Gulf War and Health Outcomes), an editor of the textbook Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine, and editor-in-chief of Annals of Neurology. He is a former President of the American Neurological Association and President of the Medical Staff at UCSF. He also serves on several scientific advisory boards for nonprofit organizations. Dr. Hauser has received numerous awards and honors for his work, including the Jacob Javits Neuroscience Investigator Award and the John Dystel Prize for Multiple Sclerosis Research. He trained in internal medicine at the New York Hospital–Cornell Medical Center, in neurology at the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), and in immunology at Harvard Medical School and the Institute Pasteur in Paris, France, and was a faculty member at Harvard Medical School before moving to UCSF. Dr. Hauser is a graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (S.B., 1971, Phi Beta Kappa) and the Harvard Medical School (M.D. 1975, Magna Cum Laude).

Raju Kucherlapati, Appointee for Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues
Dr. Raju Kucherlapati, Ph.D. is the Paul C. Cabot Professor in the Harvard Medical School Department of Genetics. He is also a professor in the Department of Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. Dr. Kucherlapati was the first Scientific Director of the Harvard Medical School-Partners Healthcare Center for Genetics and Genomics. His research focuses on gene mapping, gene modification, and cloning disease genes. From 1989-2001 , Dr. Kucherlapati was the Lola and Saul Kramer Professor of Molecular Genetics and Chairman of the Department at the Yeshiva University Albert Einstein College of Medicine. He was previously a professor in the Department of Genetics at the University of Illinois, College of Medicine. He began his research as an assistant professor in the Department of Biochemical Sciences at Princeton University. He has chaired numerous NIH committees and served on the National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research and the NCI Mouce Models for Human Cancer Consortium. He is also a member of the Cancer Genome Atlas project of the National Institutes of Health. He is a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National academy of sciences and a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Dr. Kucherlapati received his B.S. and M.S. in Biology from universities in India, and he received his Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Urbana, as well as conducting post-doctoral work at Yale University.

Nelson Michael, Appointee for Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues
Dr. Nelson Michael is the Director of the Division of Retrovirology at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research and the Director, U.S. Military HIV Research program (MHRP). Dr. Michael began with the Division in 1989. He has also served as the Chief of the Department of Molecular Diagnostics and Pathogenesis for eight years where he led the HIV Diagnostic Laboratory. Dr. Michael’s research interests include HIV molecular pathogenesis and host genetics, HIV clinical research, and HIV vaccine development. He is concurrently an Associate Professor of Medicine, Uniformed Services University and is a Diplomat, American Board of Internal Medicine. Dr. Michael currently serves various NIH committees dealing with AIDS research and vaccines. He graduated summa cum laude from University of California, Los Angeles in 1979 with a degree in biology and from Stanford University with M.D. and Ph.D. (cancer biology) degrees in 1986. He trained in internal medicine at Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital from 1986-1989.

Daniel Sulmasy, Appointee for Member, Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues
Dr. Daniel Sulmasy, a Franciscan Friar, holds the Kilbride-Clinton Chair in Medicine and Ethics in the Department of Medicine and Divinity School and is associate director of the MacLean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics at the University of Chicago. He was appointed by Governor Pataki to the New York State Task Force on Life and the Law in 2005. He serves as Editor-in-Chief of the journal, Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, and is the author of four books. Dr. Sulmasy’s research interests include both theoretical and empirical studies of ethics and spirituality in medicine. He received his A.B. and M.D. degrees from Cornell University and completed his residency, chief residency, and post-doctoral fellowship in General Internal Medicine at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. He received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Georgetown University in 1995.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.07.10 02:14 PM

Earlier today, the Vice President and Dr. Jill Biden visited Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, Texas. The Bidens visited with rehabilitating servicemembers, many of whom were injured while serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, at the Center for the Intrepid. They also met with active duty military doctors, nurses and staff to thank them for the steadfast care they are providing to their patients every single day. The Bidens concluded their visit by spending time with inpatients and their families, and thanking them for their service to and sacrifice for our country.

To view a photograph of the Bidens’ visit to Brooke Army Medical Center, please click HERE.

###

ABOUT THE CENTER FOR THE INTREPID

The Center for the Intrepid is a rehabilitation facility that treats amputees and burn victims. It was specifically built to provide care for United States servicemen and women who have served in military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Veterans from previous conflicts are also eligible to receive treatment, as well as military personnel who have sustained injuries in other operations, training exercises, or in non-combat situations.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.07.10 03:01 PM

On this 16th commemoration of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, we devote our thoughts to those who were lost and honor those who survived. More than 800,000 men, women, and children were killed and countless others continue to live with the pain and trauma of their memories and their loss. It is not enough to say “never again.” We must renew our commitment and redouble our efforts to prevent mass atrocities and genocide. We are inspired by the spirit of the Rwandan people to move forward and we stand with the people of Rwanda and the international community in commemorating the genocide.

The United States is committed to its partnership with Rwanda and will continue to support efforts to promote sustainable development, respect for human rights, and sustainable peace in Rwanda and the region.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.07.10 03:42 PM

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE

SUBJECT: Delegation of a Reporting Authority

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I hereby delegate to you the functions and authority conferred upon the President by section 301 of the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009, Public Law 111-73, to make the specified report to the Congress.

You are authorized and directed to notify the appropriate congressional committees and publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.07.10 04:00 PM

Presidential Determination
No. 2010-05

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE

SUBJECT: Waiver of and Certification of Statutory Provisions Regarding the Palestine Liberation Organization Office

Pursuant to the authority and conditions contained in section 7034(b) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2010 (Division F, Public Law 111-117), I hereby determine and certify that it is important to the national security interests of the United States to waive the provisions of section 1003 of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987, Public Law 100-204.
This waiver shall be effective for a period of 6 months. You are hereby authorized and directed to transmit this determination to the Congress and to publish it in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.07.10 04:01 PM

Presidential Determination
No. 2010-06

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE

SUBJECT: Waiver of Restriction on Providing Funds to the Palestinian Authority

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 7040(b) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2010 (Division F, Public Law 111-117) (the "Act"), I hereby certify that it is important to the national security interests of the United States to waive the provisions of section 7040(a) of the Act, in order to provide funds appropriated to carry out Chapter 4 of Part II of the Foreign Assistance Act, as amended, to the Palestinian Authority.

You are directed to transmit this determination to the Congress, with a report pursuant to section 7040(d) of the Act and to publish the determination in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.08.10 02:19 AM

Aboard Air Force One
En Route Prague, Czech Republic

8:41 A.M. CEST

MR. GIBBS: Good morning. So we’re just going to take you quickly through the day, answer a few questions. We have not a ton of time because they’ve got to do a meeting in here with the President in a little more than about 10 minutes.

Q We could just stay.

MR. GIBBS: He appreciates the offer to share his conference room.

Just have Ben walk you guys through what the President has on his schedule, what he’ll see. I will say this — I’ll send around a post that went up on the White House blog overnight from Brian McKeon, who is with the Office of the Vice President, but also works for the NSC. Brian was formerly the chief counsel for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and will be heading up our efforts to see the treaty ratified through the Senate. So there’s a blog posted that discusses a little bit about what’s in the treaty, what the use of terms like unilateral language means, and some particulars around that.

The treaty will be made publicly available later today. We will post that.

Q Is that something you send around, or how does that get posted?

MR. GIBBS: I assume it’s rather large, so we’ll put it up

— I believe they’re going to put it up on the Internet. And then starting later today members of our negotiating team will begin briefing on the specifics of the treaty to the Senate.

I’ve said this a few times in my briefings and I’ll get you these exact years and votes, but if you look back at previous nuclear reduction treaties in the late ‘80s, the early ‘90s, and even as late at 2003, these are documents that enjoy vast bipartisan majorities — votes in the ‘90s. We are hopeful that reducing the threat of nuclear weapons remains a priority for both parties.

So with that, let me have Ben walk you guys through a little bit of what you’ll see today.

MR. RHODES: Sure. And just to add to what Robert said, we’ll have fact sheets on different parts of the treaty, different key areas of the treaty that we should be able to share with you. And then I’d just also add, too, that the consultations with the Senate have been ongoing, so we’ve been in consultation obviously throughout this process. And today we’ll have a chance to brief on the full text of the treaty and the protocol.

So just to walk through the day, when we arrive we’ll go to the Prague Castle, where there will be a welcome ceremony with President Klaus. Obviously we’re being hosted by our very close friend and ally, the Czech Republic, and President Klaus will greet President Obama in a signing ceremony there.

Then the President will head right into his bilateral meeting with President Medvedev. This will be an opportunity of course to mark the conclusion of the START treaty, to discuss some issues related to that, but also to cover a broad agenda of issues between the United States and Russia on which we’re cooperating.

The President will have a smaller bilateral meeting with President Medvedev and then an expanded bilateral meeting with —

(the President comes in.)

THE PRESIDENT: I was going to say, he’s doing a really good job. (Laughter.) I was impressed. It sounded like he knew what he was talking about. (Laughter.)

Q Do you want to take over, Mr. President? (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: No, I’m good. (Laughter.)

MR. RHODES: So they’ll have a bilateral — I think we’ll have a spray at the top of that, but they’re obviously going to be making their statements later.

Then they’ll proceed to the signing ceremony, which is also at the Castle there. President Medvedev and President Obama will sign the treaty. Then they’ll both make statements and have a press conference. After the signing ceremony there’s a ceremonial lunch, and that is the United States, Russia and the Czech Republic will be at that lunch to mark the occasion.

Around this time, again –after the treaty is signed, I think that is when it will be released. And again, I expect it will be posted on the web, and we’ll see about having paper copies available. And again, this is the treaty and the protocol. So this will be the first time that that text has been made fully available.

Then there’s a bit of a break and at that time we’ll I think have the opportunity to brief you more fully on the treaty with some of our negotiating team who will be there with us, as well as the bilateral meeting that the President had with President Medvedev. I think we’re going to head back to the hotel and do the briefing there.

Then the final event of the day for the President is we are hosting a dinner for Central and Eastern European heads of state and heads of government. There will be 11 leaders there: Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Lithuania, Slovenia, Poland, the Slovak Republic, Latvia, Estonia, Romania, and then of course, the Czech Republic, and both the Prime Minister and the President will be there from the Czech Republic.

The President wanted to take this opportunity since he was in Prague to have a dinner and multilateral discussion with these 11 close allies of the United States, to, again, discuss a range of issues on which we cooperate closely with them from the global economy to European security, to how we’re cooperating around the world, in Afghanistan and other places. These are all, of course, NATO allies.

And that’s it. At that dinner I think we’ll have a pooled arrival and then the dinner itself will be a closed working dinner where they’ll have an opportunity to discuss a range of issues. I imagine we’ll have some kind of a readout to the dinner as well for you guys.

So that’s the day. And then the next morning, before we leave the President will have a bilateral meeting with the Czechs, with both the President and Prime Minister together, before we take off on Friday morning.

So that the schedule, and I’ll take a couple of questions if anybody has any.

Q — expects the bilateral meeting with Medvedev to focus heavily on Iran. How much progress do you expect the President to be able to make on that issue with the Russians?

MR. RHODES: Well, the Russians have been a close partner with us throughout the process of the P5-plus-1 negotiations. I think you’ve seen President Medvedev be in line with President Obama in both his statements and his approach in terms of providing Iranians with an opportunity to change course but also saying that there will have to be consequences if they don’t.

The Russians are currently negotiating with us for a multilateral sanctions regime in New York, so currently we’re in multilateral negotiations where we believe we’ll have a sanctions resolution this spring. This will be an opportunity for them to discuss those negotiations and discuss recent developments as it relates to Iran, but again, those negotiations are now in a multilateral basis in New York. So while — it’s an important opportunity for them to consult and I think to continue to discuss the progress of those negotiations.

And again, what we’ve said and what I think we’d underscore again today is that when the President took office relations with Russia were at a — really at a post-Cold War low, and that in the pursuit of the START treaty I think says something about an important landmark in terms of arms control nuclear policy, but it also demonstrates that we believe we can work together with the Russians on issues of common interest. And that would of course include Iran. And we believe we’ve worked constructively with them on Iran. That would include Afghanistan. It would also include economic and trade issues that we’ll also be discussing as well.

So there will be a range of issues discussed, to include Iran. And we believe that, again, the Russians have been good partners throughout this process at the P5-plus-1.

Q What is issue number one? What’s issue number one? Is it Iran?

MR. RHODES: Well, first of all, I think really issue number one is coming here to sign this treaty. I mean, President Medvedev and President Obama really worked personally together on this. I mean, a lot of you travel with us. I mean, they — I think they met seven times bilaterally, both in Moscow but then on the margins of multiple summits. They spoke on the phone an additional seven times.

Q So is this eight?

MR. RHODES: This would be eight, yes. This should be their eighth meeting. So this is something that the two of them personally invested a lot of time and effort in. So I think it was important for them to mark that achievement.

The President, of course — so there’s a discussion of the kind of completion of that treaty and look to the future cooperation on these issues.

President Medvedev is obviously coming to the nuclear security summit, and obviously President Obama just released an important document in the Nuclear Posture Review, which we’ve consulted with the Russians in. So there’s a range of nuclear non-proliferation and security issues I think they’ll discuss.

Iran is obviously one of those, because as you’ve heard us say many times, for the non-proliferation regime to work effectively those who break the rules and fail to live up to their obligations have to be held accountable. So I think Iran will be discussed in that context of a shared commitment that they have to non-proliferation and nuclear security.

So it’s an important issue. I think there will be also a broader range of issues discussed. Russia is cooperating in Afghanistan. The recent terrorist attacks in Russia, President Obama was able to express his condolences personally to President Medvedev by the phone. I’m sure that he’ll have an opportunity to do that again in person today. And then some issues related to economic growth and the G20 as well.

Q And on Iran, what’s your best-case scenario coming out of this meeting, going into the meeting next week with Hu Jintao?

MR. RHODES: I think these are important opportunities to discuss Iran bilaterally; to discuss Iran’s continued failure to live up to their obligations. But again, what I would underscore is that we’re into a period of intense negotiations in New York. The Chinese are a part of those negotiations, as you’ve seen recently reported. So a lot of those — the details of that sanctions regime are being worked through in New York.

So this is an opportunity for the President to consult on a leader-to-leader basis with his Russian counterpart. He’ll have that opportunity with President Hu, and he also recently met with President Sarkozy. He talked to Prime Minister Brown on the phone. And I think we’ll also have an opportunity to talk to Chancellor Merkel. So I think he’ll be meeting with each of the leaders to discuss the progress that’s being made, but also the focal point of the negotiations right now is in New York, given the fact that all the P5-plus-1 is now at the table on this.

MR. GIBBS: I’d just underscore that — because this goes to both the relationship that we have bilaterally with Russia but also the engagement that the President has undertaken over the course of 15 months, has brought us to the point where, as Ben just said, the P5-plus-1 is all actively at the table negotiating this, something that — again, 15 months ago, the problem of Iran existed; what didn’t exist was an international framework in the P5-plus-1 to deal with it.

Through the President’s both engagement with these countries bilaterally, multilaterally, and by the offers that have been made to Iran that have been turned down, the world has been brought together at a point that it wasn’t at only a short time ago.

Q Well, I guess that’s the exact reason to ask these kinds of questions, is because you’ve got these intense negotiations, you’ve got all the parties at the table, so here the President is meeting with the two most important players in those negotiations in the span of, I don’t know, four days or five days, if I’m doing the math right. And so he’s got to want something out of that. It can’t just be, hey, there’s stuff happening in New York.

MR. RHODES: No, I think — look, I think — well, no, but the point of New York is that that’s where the details — I mean, we’re in a period of —

Q But this is how you get to the end, is leaders come together and they figure out ways you can break through those talks, right?

Q I guess are you guys hoping that when the bilat ends today that President Medvedev says something specific to push —

MR. GIBBS: He’s there. We’re at that point. We’re no longer coming out of these meetings where people are looking for whether the Russians or whether the Chinese are at a point where —

Q (Inaudible.)

MR. GIBBS: I understand, but — and I don’t —

MR. RHODES: — negotiate the specifics of a sanctions resolution.

MR. GIBBS: They’re not going to come out of here today and say, we’ve reached an agreement on — because —

MR. RHODES: It’s a bilateral meeting, and —

Q But can they make any progress on Iran today? Are they hoping to?

MR. GIBBS: I think they’ll discuss it, but again, I don’t — again, they’re at a point where what wasn’t possible many months ago now is. But again, I don’t expect any pronouncements today coming out of this meeting. I do think the meeting upcoming with the Chinese leader is important and demonstrates, again, the approach that we’ve taken to bring all our partners, including the Chinese, into these negotiations, and to have his important participation in the nuclear security summit, which, in many ways, builds off both the Nuclear Posture Review and the START treaty that we signed today, moving the agenda on reducing the threat of nuclear weapons forward.

MR. RHODES: I’d just add to that, I mean, echoing what Robert said, President Medvedev has been clear for a time — we would come out of these meetings, and he’s been supportive of the need to move to sanctions if the Iranians continue to fail to live up to their obligations. So we believe the Russians are onboard with the sanctions effort.

I think that you’ve heard the President express the importance of getting this done. Of course, it’s an opportunity for them to discuss the importance of holding Iran accountable. But what I would also say, though, is that, just echoing what Robert said, these consultations further isolate the Iranians. I think the Nuclear Posture Review we released, which focused upon the Non-Proliferation Treaty as the central dividing line between those states that will have a negative security assurance and those states that don’t, further isolates the Iranians and sends a message to them that they will not find greater security through the pursuit of a nuclear weapon.

So there’s a range of actions we’re taking, of course, ongoing unilateral sanctions that we have on the Iranians, whose enforcement we’ve tightened, and then of course these multilateral efforts at the United Nations, which, again, we believe should and will conclude this spring.

So I think there’s a whole range of ways in which the international community is working to isolate Iran. And I think that they’ll cover that broad range in their discussions. But of course the sanctions regime that is being negotiated will be a topic. But again, as Robert said, the Russians are already committed to the notion of holding Iran accountable through the multilateral sanctions regime, and that’s being worked hard in New York too.

So I’m not trying to downplay. I’m just — we believe that they have —

Q So you’ve got everybody onboard with maybe — with talking about sanctions. Then you’ve got the really hard process of what do they look like; what can everybody agree on they’ll say and they’ll do. And that’s the really difficult part that you’re in right now.

MR. GIBBS: Right, and quite frankly it will play out in many places. You know, Bill Burns and others actively engaged with their counterparts in the P5-plus-1; Ambassador Rice at the United Nations; as well as the President and his counterparts.

So these are discussions that are happening I would say simultaneous, but it will be 3:00 a.m. on the East Coast, so maybe that would be too cute by half.

We’ve got about one or two more minutes and then we’ve got to get the —

Q Has the President been briefed on the situation in Kyrgyzstan and will that be playing any part in the discussions with various leaders?

MR. RHODES: Yes, the President has been kept informed about the situation in Kyrgyzstan throughout the day — the day and a half. And I do expect that that would come up, given the fact that both the United States and Russia have relations with Kyrgyzstan so I expect it will be a topic of discussion.

Q How much of a fight are you guys expecting in the Senate for the START treaty?

MR. RHODES: Well, again, I think when the agreement was announced — and again, I said this, I don’t want to pre-judge votes here, but obviously the very strong statement that Senator Lugar issued about moving this process through the Senate quickly, which I know is important to many, including President Obama — as I said, this is an issue that President Obama got involved in as a senator through a partnership with Senator Lugar. Brian McKeon as I said, on the Vice President’s staff and working with the NSC, will head up our efforts to get this through the Senate.

And I would say again, this is an issue that, from Reagan to Clinton to Bush, has enjoyed bipartisanship. It’s why leaders like Secretary of State Kissinger, George Shultz, Sam Nunn, Bill Perry put out supportive statements upon our conclusion a few weeks ago of this treaty.

So I think it’s the President’s hope and expectation, one, that the Senate will ratify this treaty this year, and secondly, that what has always been a strong bipartisan issue will continue to be so. And I’ll send around the votes. Again, the last three prominent nuclear reduction treaties that have gone through the Senate have passed with no less than 93 votes. So we’ll get an opportunity to see.

MR. RHODES: I’d just add one thing to that. Secretary Gates said this when the treaty rolled out, but we’ve consulted with the Senate throughout this. A couple of issues were of interest to a number of senators, included the missile defense and the stockpile management. The treaty places no constraints on the development of our missile defense in Europe. And similarly we’ve made significant investments in the stockpile that we’re very confident that we can actually strengthen the infrastructure of the stockpile and have a reliable nuclear deterrent with these reductions in deployed weapons and launchers.

So we’re confident that based upon our consultations with the Senate throughout this process that the final product of this treaty is very much in line with some of the issues that were expressed just by senators.

Q Do you think before the August recess —

MR. GIBBS: I don’t know that I would set a timetable of before August.

All right. Thanks, guys.

END
9:03 A.M. CEST

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.08.10 05:36 AM

Prague Castle
Prague, Czech Republic

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you very much, everybody. President Klaus, and to the people of the Czech Republic, thank you for your extraordinary hospitality.

To President Medvedev, Dmitry, we have learned to work together, and I’m extraordinarily grateful for your leadership and your clarity. And I think it has served us extraordinarily well during the course of these negotiations.

And to our teams, on both the Russian and the American side, I could not be prouder of the diligence and meticulousness and the degree of effort that all of you poured into crafting what I think is a extraordinarily important document that not only has helped to reset in a very concrete and tangible way U.S.-Russian relations, but I think is going to help lay the foundation for a safer world for generations to come.

We gather today in a magnificent castle, surrounded by history and the relics of thousands of years; a castle that’s seen empires rise and fall; that have witnessed great movements in the arts and music and culture; spires that have survived world wars and a Cold War; and that now grace a capital of a vibrant democracy.

And so I think it’s an indication of how we are not just creatures of fate; we can determine our fates. And that when men and women of good will, regardless of previous differences, regardless of history, regardless of a past, determined that they want to seize a better future, they can do so.

I think the Czech Republic is a testament to that ability to seize the future. I think the direction that President Medvedev has moved the Russian Federation is a testimony to the impulse to seek a new future.

In the United States, we are constantly wanting to remake our economy and our politics and our culture in ways that looks forward, even as it’s grounded in the deep traditions of our past.

And so today, what I’d like to do is to propose a toast not only to the extraordinary work that’s been done by the men and the women in this room, but also a toast to the vision of a future in which we are defined not just by our differences but increasingly defined by our common aims, our common goals, and our common hopes for our children and our grandchildren. And I think this treaty hopefully is one brick on that path towards a brighter future for all mankind.

So, thank you.

(A toast is offered.)

END

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.08.10 06:42 AM

Prague Castle
Prague, Czech Republic

12:37 P.M. CEST

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Good afternoon, everyone. I am honored to be back here in the Czech Republic with President Medvedev and our Czech hosts to mark this historic completion of the New START treaty.

Let me begin by saying how happy I am to be back in the beautiful city of Prague. The Czech Republic, of course, is a close friend and ally of the United States, and I have great admiration and affection for the Czech people. Their bonds with the American people are deep and enduring, and Czechs have made great contributions to the United States over many decades — including in my hometown of Chicago. I want to thank the President and all those involved in helping to host this extraordinary event.

I want to thank my friend and partner, Dmitry Medvedev. Without his personal efforts and strong leadership, we would not be here today. We’ve met and spoken by phone many times throughout the negotiations of this treaty, and as a consequence we’ve developed a very effective working relationship built on candor, cooperation, and mutual respect.

One year ago this week, I came here to Prague and gave a speech outlining America’s comprehensive commitment to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and seeking the ultimate goal of a world without them. I said then — and I will repeat now — that this is a long-term goal, one that may not even be achieved in my lifetime. But I believed then — as I do now — that the pursuit of that goal will move us further beyond the Cold War, strengthen the global non-proliferation regime, and make the United States, and the world, safer and more secure. One of the steps that I called for last year was the realization of this treaty, so it’s very gratifying to be back in Prague today.

I also came to office committed to “resetting” relations between the United States and Russia, and I know that President Medvedev shared that commitment. As he said at our first meeting in London, our relationship had started to drift, making it difficult to cooperate on issues of common interest to our people. And when the United States and Russia are not able to work together on big issues, it’s not good for either of our nations, nor is it good for the world.

Together, we’ve stopped that drift, and proven the benefits of cooperation. Today is an important milestone for nuclear security and non-proliferation, and for U.S.-Russia relations. It fulfills our common objective to negotiate a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. It includes significant reductions in the nuclear weapons that we will deploy. It cuts our delivery vehicles by roughly half. It includes a comprehensive verification regime, which allows us to further build trust. It enables both sides the flexibility to protect our security, as well as America’s unwavering commitment to the security of our European allies. And I look forward to working with the United States Senate to achieve ratification for this important treaty later this year.

Finally, this day demonstrates the determination of the United States and Russia — the two nations that hold over 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons — to pursue responsible global leadership. Together, we are keeping our commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which must be the foundation for global non-proliferation.

While the New START treaty is an important first step forward, it is just one step on a longer journey. As I said last year in Prague, this treaty will set the stage for further cuts. And going forward, we hope to pursue discussions with Russia on reducing both our strategic and tactical weapons, including non-deployed weapons.

President Medvedev and I have also agreed to expand our discussions on missile defense. This will include regular exchanges of information about our threat assessments, as well as the completion of a joint assessment of emerging ballistic missiles. And as these assessments are completed, I look forward to launching a serious dialogue about Russian-American cooperation on missile defense.

But nuclear weapons are not simply an issue for the United States and Russia — they threaten the common security of all nations. A nuclear weapon in the hands of a terrorist is a danger to people everywhere — from Moscow to New York; from the cities of Europe to South Asia. So next week, 47 nations will come together in Washington to discuss concrete steps that can be taken to secure all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world in four years.

And the spread of nuclear weapons to more states is also an unacceptable risk to global security — raising the specter of arms races from the Middle East to East Asia. Earlier this week, the United States formally changed our policy to make it clear that those [non]-nuclear weapons states that are in compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and their non-proliferation obligations will not be threatened by America’s nuclear arsenal. This demonstrates, once more, America’s commitment to the NPT as a cornerstone of our security strategy. Those nations that follow the rules will find greater security and opportunity. Those nations that refuse to meet their obligations will be isolated, and denied the opportunity that comes with international recognition.

That includes accountability for those that break the rules — otherwise the NPT is just words on a page. That’s why the United States and Russia are part of a coalition of nations insisting that the Islamic Republic of Iran face consequences, because they have continually failed to meet their obligations. We are working together at the United Nations Security Council to pass strong sanctions on Iran. And we will not tolerate actions that flout the NPT, risk an arms race in a vital region, and threaten the credibility of the international community and our collective security.

While these issues are a top priority, they are only one part of the U.S.-Russia relationship. Today, I again expressed my deepest condolences for the terrible loss of Russian life in recent terrorist attacks, and we will remain steadfast partners in combating violent extremism. We also discussed the potential to expand our cooperation on behalf of economic growth, trade and investment, as well as technological innovation, and I look forward to discussing these issues further when President Medvedev visits the United States later this year, because there is much we can do on behalf of our security and prosperity if we continue to work together.

When one surveys the many challenges that we face around the world, it’s easy to grow complacent, or to abandon the notion that progress can be shared. But I want to repeat what I said last year in Prague: When nations and peoples allow themselves to be defined by their differences, the gulf between them widens. When we fail to pursue peace, then it stays forever beyond our grasp.

This majestic city of Prague is in many ways a monument to human progress. And this ceremony is a testament to the truth that old adversaries can forge new partnerships. I could not help but be struck the other day by the words of Arkady Brish, who helped build the Soviet Union’s first atom bomb. At the age of 92, having lived to see the horrors of a World War and the divisions of a Cold War, he said, “We hope humanity will reach the moment when there is no need for nuclear weapons, when there is peace and calm in the world.”

It’s easy to dismiss those voices. But doing so risks repeating the horrors of the past, while ignoring the history of human progress. The pursuit of peace and calm and cooperation among nations is the work of both leaders and peoples in the 21st century. For we must be as persistent and passionate in our pursuit of progress as any who would stand in our way.

Once again, President Medvedev, thank you for your extraordinary leadership. (Applause.)

PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: (As translated.) A truly historic event took place: A new Russia-U.S. treaty has been signed for the further reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms. This treaty has a 10-year duration. It will supersede the START treaty, which has expired, as well as another existing treaty, Russia-U.S. treaty on the reduction of strategic offensive capabilities.

And first of all, I’d like to thank my colleague, President of the United States of America, for the successful cooperation in this very complex matter, and for the reasonable compromises that have been achieved, thanks to the work of our two teams — we have already thanked them, but let me do it once again in the presence of the media and the public. We thank them for their excellent work.

And I would also like to thank the leadership of the Czech Republic, Mr. President, for the invitation to hold this signing ceremony here in this beautiful city, in this beautiful springtime, thereby creating a good atmosphere for the future. And I believe that this signature will open a new page for cooperation between our two countries — among our countries — and will create safer conditions for life here and throughout the world.

One word — we aimed at the quality of the treaty. And indeed, the negotiating process has not been simple, but again, our negotiation teams have been working in a highly professional, constructive way that has been lots of work and very often they worked 24 hours a day. And that enabled us to do something that just a couple of months looked like mission impossible; within a short span of time we prepared a full-fledged treaty and signed it.

As a result, we obtained a document that in full measure maintains the balance of interest of Russia and the United States of America. What matters most is that this is a win-win situation. No one stands to lose from this agreement. I believe that this is a typical feature of our cooperation — both parties have won. And taking into account this victory of ours, the entire world community has won.

This agreement enhances strategic stability and, at the same time, enables us to rise to a higher level for cooperation between Russia and the United States. And although the contents of the treaty are already known, let me point out once again what we have achieved, because this is very important thing: 1,550 developed weapons, which is about one-third below the current level; 700 deployed ICBMs — intercontinental ballistic missile — and anti-ballistic missiles and heavy bombers, and this represents more than twofold reduction below the current levels; and 800 deployed and non-deployed launchers for such missiles — deployed and non-deployed heavy bombers, which again represents a twofold reduction below the level that existed prior to the signature on this treaty.

And at the same time, each party can use its own discretion to defend the makeup and structure of its strategic offensive potential.

The treaty also includes provisions concerning data exchange. We are quite experienced now in this matter with my colleague and we are great experts on this matter — perhaps the greatest experts in the world. And the treaty also includes provisions concerning conversion and elimination, inspection provisions and verification provisions as well as confidence-building measures.

The verification mechanism has been significantly simplified and much less costly, as compared with the previous START treaty. At the same time, it ensures the proper verification, irreversibility and transparency of the entire process of reducing strategic offensive arms.

We believe — and this is our hope and position — we believe that the treaty can be viable and can operate only provided there is no qualitative or quantitative (inaudible) in place in the capabilities, something that could, in the final analysis, jeopardize the strategic offensive weapons on the Russian side. This is the gist of the statement made by the Russian Federation in connection with the signature on this treaty.

The main task of the full signature period we regard as achieving the ratification of the treaty, as mentioned by my colleague, Mr. President of the United States, and it is also important to synchronize the ratification process. Our American partners, as I understand, intend to proceed quickly to present this document to the Senate for ratification. We also will be working with our Federal Assembly to maintain the necessary dynamics of the ratification process.

By and large, we are satisfied with what we’ve done. The result we have obtained is good. But today, of course, we have discussed not only the fact of signing this treaty; we have also discussed a whole range of important key issues of concern to all the countries. Of course, we would not omit the Iranian nuclear problem. Regrettably, Iran is not responding to the many constructive proposals that have been made and we cannot turn a blind eye to this. Therefore I do not rule out the possibility of the Security Council of the United Nations will have to review this issue once again.

Our position is well known. Let me briefly outline it now. Of course, sanctions by themselves seldom obtain specific results, although it’s difficult to do without them in certain situations. But in any case, those sanctions should be smart and aimed not only at non-proliferation but also to resolve other issues — rather than to produce (inaudible) for the Iranian people.

(Audio is lost)

I am convinced that all that has been done so far is just the beginning of a long way, long way ahead. I wouldn’t like to see the Russian Federation and the United States be narrowed down to just limiting strategic offensive arms.
To be sure, we shoulder specific responsibility, a special responsibility, in that respect, and we —

(Audio is lost)

And let me once again thank President Barack Obama for the cooperation in this area. Thank you.

(Audio is lost)

PRESIDENT OBAMA: We recognize, however, that Russia has a significant interest in this issue, and what we’ve committed to doing is to engaging in a significant discussion not only bilaterally but also having discussions with our European allies and others about a framework in which we can potentially cooperate on issues of missile defense in a way that preserves U.S. national security interests, preserves Russia’s national security interests, and allows us to guard against a rogue missile from any source.

So I’m actually optimistic that having completed this treaty, which signals our strong commitment to a reduction in overall nuclear weapons, and that I believe is going to strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty regime, that sends a signal around the world that the United States and Russia are prepared to once again take leadership in moving in the direction of reducing reliance on nuclear weapons and preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, as well as nuclear materials, that we will have built the kind of trust not only between Presidents but also between governments and between peoples that allows us to move forward in a constructive way.

I’ve repeatedly said that we will not do anything that endangers or limits my ability as Commander-in-Chief to protect the American people. And we think that missile defense can be an important component of that. But we also want to make clear that the approach that we’ve taken in no way is intended to change the strategic balance between the United States and Russia. And I’m actually confident that, moving forward, as we have these discussions, it will be part of a broader set of discussions about, for example, how we can take tactical nuclear weapons out of theater, the possibilities of us making more significant cuts not only in deployed but also non-deployed missiles. There are a whole range of issues that I think that we can make significant progress on. I’m confident that this is an important first step in that direction.

PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: (In Russian, then translation begins) — on that basis we will implement the newly signed treaty. It matters to us what will happen to missile defense. It is related to the configuration of our potential and our capacities, and we will watch how these processes develop. And the preamble has a language that, to a certain extent, replicates a legal principle of the unchangeability of circumstances that were basis for the treaty. But this is a flexible process, and we are interested in close cooperation over it with our American partners.

We have appreciated the steps by the current U.S. administration in terms of the decisions in the area of anti-missile defense of the present administration, and this has led to progress. It doesn’t mean that we’ll have no digressions in understanding, but it means that we’ll have will and wish to address these issues.

We offered to the United States that we help them establish a global anti-missile defense system, and we should think about this, given the vulnerability of our world, the terrorist challenges and the possibility of using nuclear arms by terrorists existing in this world.

And I am an optimist, as well as my American colleague, and I believe that we will be able to reach compromise on these issues.

Q (As translated.) I have two questions. To each of the Presidents, one. The first is to Mr. Obama. Moscow and Washington, not for the first time, agree on a reduction of strategic offensive arms, but as you have mentioned, Russia and the United States are not the only countries having nuclear weapons. So how specifically can the documents achieved — well, similar to today’s document on limitation on nuclear arms — how soon we will see others sign this document? And will you move along this track together with Russia?

And to the President of the Russian Federation, you have mentioned the fact that sometimes there’s an impression that Moscow and Washington are unable to agree on anything else but a mutual reduction of arms. So will we see any things that will counter such a statement? And what will the agreement be?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: First of all, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, the United States and Russia account for 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons. And given this legacy of the Cold War, it is critical for us to show significant leadership. That, I think, is what we’ve begun to do with this follow-on START treaty.

Other countries are going to have to be making a series of decisions about how they approach the issue of their nuclear weapons stockpiles. And as I’ve repeatedly said, and I’m sure Dmitry feels the same way with respect to his country, we are going to preserve our nuclear deterrent so long as other countries have nuclear weapons, and we are going to make sure that that stockpile is safe and secure and effective.

But I do believe that as we look out into the 21st century, that more and more countries will come to recognize that the most important factors in providing security and peace to their citizens will depend on their economic growth, will depend on the capacity of the international community to resolve conflicts; it will depend on having a strong conventional military that can protect our nations’ borders; and that nuclear weapons increasingly in an interdependent world will make less and less sense as the cornerstone of security policy.

But that’s going to take some time, and I think each country is going to have to make its own determinations. The key is for the United States and Russia to show leadership on this front because we are so far ahead of every nation with respect to possession of nuclear weapons.

The primary concerns that we identified in a recent Nuclear Posture Review, essentially a declaratory statement of U.S. policy with respect to nuclear weapons, said that our biggest concerns right now are actually the issues of nuclear terrorism and nuclear proliferation — more countries obtaining nuclear weapons; those weapons being less controllable, less secure; nuclear materials floating around the globe. And that’s going to be a major topic of the discussion that we have in Washington on Monday.

The United States and Russia have a history already, a decade-long history, of locking down loose nuclear materials. I believe that our ability to move forward already on sanctions with respect to North Korea, the intense discussions that we’re having with respect to Iran, will increasingly send a signal to countries that are not abiding by their Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty obligations, that they will be isolated. All those things will go toward sending a general message that we need to move in a new direction. And I think leadership on that front is important.

Last point I’ll make, I will just anticipate or coach the question about other areas of cooperation. Our respective foreign ministers — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Lavrov — have been heading a bilateral commission that has been working intensively on a whole range of issue. And President Medvedev and myself identified a series of key areas on the economic front, in trade relations, the potential for joint cooperation on various industries, how we can work on innovation and sparking economic growth. We’ve already worked together closely in the G20; I think we can build on that bilaterally.

There are issues of counterterrorism that are absolutely critical to both of us, and I just want to repeat how horrified all of America was at the recent attacks in Moscow. We recognize that that’s a problem that can happen anywhere at any time, and it’s important for Russia and the United States to work closely on those issues.

And then there are people-to-people contacts and figuring out how we can make sure that there’s more interaction and exchange between our two countries on a whole range of issues within civil society.

So I’m very optimistic that we’re going to continue to make progress on all of these fronts. But I think we should take pride in this particular accomplishment because it speaks not only to the security of our two nations but also the security of the world as a whole.

PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: It’s always good to answer second. First of all, you know what your partner has said, and secondly, you can comment on what has been said by your interlocutor. As a matter of fact, I will say a couple of words on the first part of the question that was meant for my colleague.

Yes, we have 90 percent of all the stockpiles which is the heritage of the Cold War legacy and we’ll do all that we have agreed upon. Keep in mind special mission of Russia and the U.S. on this issue, and we do care about what is going on with nuclear arms in other countries of the world, and we can’t imagine a situation when the Russian Federation and the United States take efforts to disarm and the world would move towards a principled different direction away — in charge of our peoples and the situation in the world.

So all the issues related to the implementation of the treaty and non-proliferation and the threat of nuclear terrorism should be analyzed by us in a complex way, an integrated way. And I’d like this signing not to be regarded by other countries as their — well, stepping aside from the issue. On the contrary. They should be involved to the full and take an active participation in it. They should be aware what is going on.

So we welcome the initiative that has been proposed by the President of the United States to convene a relevant conference in Washington, and I will take part in it, which is good platform to discuss non-proliferation issues.

In this world we have a lot that brings us together, we and the United States as well. And today we have had a very good talk that has started not with the discussion of the documents to be signed — they were coordinated — and not with discussing Iran, North Korea, Middle East, and other pressing issues of foreign affairs, but we started with economic issues.

I have said that there is a gap in our economic cooperation. I have looked at the figures, how the cumulative investments of the United States in Russia is quite small — nearly $7 billion, and the figure has decreased a bit thanks to the world crisis. In terms of Russian investment into the U.S., well, it’s nearly the same, which testifies to areas of interests. It’s not with all countries that we have such volume of investment, but if we compare the figures with the figures of foreign investors’ presence in the American economy — I mean other countries, including states that can be compared with Russia in terms of volume of economy, so it’s the difference of 20 or 30 times. So we have a field to work upon.

To say nothing about the projects we talked about today — modernization, high-tech, economy, establishment, and in the Russian Federation we are open for cooperation and would like to use American experience to employ — these also include issues of energy, cooperation in transport, and I have suggested some time ago returning to the issue of creating a big cargo plane as such a unique experience — only two countries have, the U.S. and Russia. The issues of nuclear cooperation are important.

So there can be a lot of economic projects. It’s not the business of Presidents to deal with each of them, but some key issues are to be controlled by us, as the relations in business, relations between those who would like to develop active ties — depend on business ties — and humanitarian contacts, people-to-people contacts are important. And it’s significant that we do our best so that our citizens respect each other, understand each other better, so that they are guided by the best practices of American-Russian culture, and not perceive each other through the lens of information that sometimes is provided by mass media.

So we should more attentively, more thoughtfully — well, have a more thoughtful attitude towards each other. And I count on this.

Q Thank you, President Medvedev and President Obama. For President Obama first, could you elaborate on how the yearlong negotiations over the New START treaty have advanced U.S. cooperation with Russia on Iran, and give us a sense of when you will pursue, move forward in the United Nations and next week with sanctions discussions, and what those sanctions might look like?

And for President Medvedev, could you address whether Russia could accept sanctions against Iran specifically dealing with its energy industry and energy sector? Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Discussions about sanctions on Iran have been moving forward over the last several weeks. In fact, they’ve been moving forward over the last several months. We’re going to start seeing some ramped-up negotiations taking place in New York in the coming weeks. And my expectation is that we are going to be able to secure strong, tough sanctions on Iran this spring.

Now, I think there are two ways in which these START negotiations have advanced or at least influenced Russia-U.S. discussions around Iran. The first is obviously that President Medvedev and I have been able to build up a level of trust and our teams have been able to work together in such a way that we can be frank, we can be clear, and that helped to facilitate, then, our ability, for example, to work together jointly to present to Iran reasonable options that would allow it to clearly distance itself from nuclear weapons and pursue a path of peaceful nuclear energy.

That wasn’t just an approach that was taken by the United States and Russia, but it was an approach taken by the P5-plus-1 as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency, the IAEA.

So what we’ve seen from the start is that a host of countries, but — led by countries like the United States and Russia, have said to Iran, we are willing to work through diplomatic channels to resolve this issue. And unfortunately, Iran has consistently rebuffed our approach. And I think that Russia has been a very strong partner in saying that it has no interest in bringing down Iranian society or the Iranian government, but it does have an interest, as we all do, in making sure that each country is following its international obligations.

The second way in which I think the START treaty has influenced our discussions about Iran is it’s sent a strong signal that the United States and Iran — or the United States and Russia are following our own obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and that our interest in Iran or North Korea or any other country following the NPT is not based on singling out any one country, but rather sends a strong signal that all of us have an obligation, each country has an obligation to follow the rules of the road internationally to ensure a more secure future for our children and our grandchildren.

And so I think the fact that we are signing this treaty, the fact that we are willing, as the two leading nuclear powers, to continually work on reducing our own arsenals, I think should indicate the fact that we are willing to be bound by our obligations, and we’re not asking any other countries to do anything different, but simply to follow the rules of the road that have been set forth and have helped to maintain at least a lack of the use of nuclear weapons over the last several decades, despite, obviously, the Cold War.

And the concern that I have in particular, a concern that I think is the most profound security threat to the United States, is that with further proliferation of nuclear weapons, with states obtaining nuclear weapons and potentially using them to blackmail other countries or potentially not securing them effectively or passing them on to terrorist organizations, that we could find ourselves in a world in which not only state actors but also potentially non-state actors are in possession of nuclear weapons, and even if they don’t use them, would then be in a position to terrorize the world community.

That’s why this issue is so important, and that’s why we are going to be pushing very hard to make sure that both smart and strong sanctions end up being in place soon to send a signal to Iran and other countries that this is an issue that the international community takes seriously.

PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: Let’s ask ourselves a question: What do we need sanctions for? Do we need them to enjoy the very fact of reprising — imposing reprisals against another state, or is the objective another one? I am confident that all those present here will say that sanctions — we need sanctions in order to prompt one or another individual or state to behave properly, behave within the framework of international law, while complying with the obligations assumed.

Therefore, when we are speaking about sanctions, I cannot disagree with what has yet been said. And this has been the position of the Russian Federation from the very outset. If we are to speak about sanctions, although they are not always successful, those sanctions should be smart sanctions that are capable of producing proper behavior on the part of relevant sides.

And what sort of sanctions should we need? Today we have had a very open-minded, frank, and straightforward manner discussed what can be done and what cannot be done. And let me put it straightforward: I have outlined our limits for such sanctions, our understanding of these sanctions, and I said that in making decisions like that, I, as friend of the Russian Federation, will proceed from two premises. First, we need to prompt Iran to behave properly; and secondly, least but not least, aim to maintain the national interests of our countries.

So smart sanctions should be able to motivate certain parties to behave properly, and I’m confident that our teams that will be engaged in consultations will continue discussing this issue.

Q (As translated.) Now, everyone is concerned whether the treaty will be ratified by the parliaments. You have mentioned that you will be working with the parliamentarians to achieve such certification. Let me ask you what difficulty you see along this road, and what do you — how do you assess the chances for success? The question is addressed to both Presidents.

PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: Well, by all appearances, Barack believes that we might have more problems with ratification. Perhaps that’s true, but let me say what I think about this question.

Of course, such agreements of major importance, international agreements, under our constitution and under our legislation, are subject to ratification by our parliaments. And of course, for our part, we intend to proceed promptly and to do all the necessary procedures to ensure that our parliament, our State Duma, starts reviewing this treaty, discussing this treaty.

I will proceed from the following: I believe that we have to ensure the synchronization of this ratification process so that neither party feels in one way or another compromised. Earlier we had periods when one state ratified while another party said, sorry, the situation has changed; therefore we cannot do it.

So this is something we’re to avoid. That’s why I say we have to proceed simultaneously in the conditions of an open-minded and straightforward discussion with subsequent certification by our parliaments. That’s what we need. And we will not be found amiss in that regard.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: The United States Senate has the obligation of reviewing any treaty and, ultimately, ratifying it. Fortunately there is a strong history of bipartisanship when it comes to the evaluation of international treaties, particularly arms control treaties.

And so I have already engaged in consultation with the chairmen of the relevant committees in the United States Senate. We are going to broaden that consultation now that this treaty has been signed. My understanding is, is that both in Russia and the United States, it’s going to be posed on the Internet, appropriate to a 21st century treaty. And so people not only within government but also the general public will be able to review, in an open and transparent fashion, what it is that we’ve agreed to.

I think what they will discover is that this is a well-crafted treaty that meets the interests of both countries; that meets the interests of the world in the United States and Russia reducing its nuclear arsenals and setting the stage for potentially further reductions in the future.

And so I’m actually quite confident that Democrats and Republicans in the United States Senate, having reviewed this, will see that the United States has preserved its core national security interests, that it is maintaining a safe and secure and effective nuclear deterrent, but that we are beginning to once again move forward, leaving the Cold War behind, to address new challenges in new ways. And I think the START treaty represents an important first step in that direction, and I feel confident that we are going to be able to get it ratified.

All right? Thank you very much, everybody.

PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: Thank you, sir. Next time. (Applause.)

END 1:29 P.M. CEST

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.07.10 05:14 AM

The following op-ed by Vice President Joe Biden was published in today’s Los Angeles Times:

A Comprehensive Nuclear Arms Strategy

The administration’s Nuclear Posture Review outlines the means to achieve greater security from worldwide nuclear dangers. Nonproliferation and counter-terrorism are central to the strategy.

By Joe Biden
April 7, 2010

When I joined the Senate in 1973, crafting nuclear policy meant mastering arcane issues like nuclear stability and deterrence theory. With the end of the Cold War and a new relationship between our country and Russia, thankfully these subjects no longer dominate public discourse. Today, the danger of deliberate, global nuclear war has all but disappeared, but the nuclear threats we face from terrorists and non-nuclear states seeking to acquire such weapons are graver than ever.

On Tuesday, President Obama took an important step toward addressing these threats by releasing a plan that will reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy while ensuring that our nuclear arsenal remains safe, secure and effective for as long as it is needed. The Nuclear Posture Review outlines a strategy, supported unanimously by the national security cabinet, for greater security from nuclear dangers and implements the agenda that President Obama first outlined in Prague just over a year ago to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and to pursue the peace and security of a world without them.

This new strategy, a sharp departure from previous Nuclear Posture Reviews released in 2001 and 1994, leaves Cold War thinking behind. It recognizes that the greatest threat to U.S. and global security is no longer a nuclear exchange between nations, but nuclear terrorism by extremists and the spread of nuclear weapons to an increasing number of states. From now on, decisions about the number of weapons we have and how they are deployed will take nonproliferation and counter-terrorism into account, rather than being solely based on the objective of stable deterrence.

The review contains a clear rationale for the reductions called for under the New START treaty — a 30% reduction from the previous agreement. Because of advances in conventional capabilities and technologies such as missile defense, we need fewer nuclear weapons to deter adversaries and protect our allies than we did even a decade ago. Under the new review, we will retain only those weapons needed for our core requirements.

The plan also establishes a policy that the United States will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states, as long as they are party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and in compliance with their nuclear nonproliferation obligations. This approach provides additional incentive for countries to fully comply with nonproliferation norms. Those that do not will be more isolated and less secure.

The completion of a Nuclear Posture Review that is grounded in a commitment to American security will better protect us and our allies from nuclear threats. So will the signing of the New START treaty Thursday. And the unprecedented Nuclear Security Summit the president will host next week — with its focus on securing vulnerable nuclear materials around the world in four years — will advance these goals still further.

At the same time, the president is determined to ensure that our nuclear weapons remain absolutely safe, secure and effective. That is why he has asked Congress to increase funding for our nuclear complex by $5 billion over the next five years, allowing us to upgrade aging facilities and recruit and retain the highly skilled scientists and engineers needed to sustain our arsenal. Our plan reverses a decade-long erosion in support for the national laboratories. This commitment will ensure that our arsenal remains ready.

We can achieve these objectives while upholding this country’s nearly two-decade moratorium on nuclear tests and continuing our efforts to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. And although we will not develop new warheads or add military capabilities as we manage our arsenal for the future, we will pursue needed life-extension programs so the weapons we retain can be sustained. This approach has broad support, and, as Defense Secretary Robert Gates states in his preface to the Nuclear Posture Review, it is a "credible modernization plan necessary to sustain the nuclear infrastructure and support our nation’s deterrent."

The president and I made a promise to the American people to protect them from nuclear risks. We have no higher obligation. Our strategy delivers on that promise and tackles the most immediate threats our planet faces.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.06.10 12:42 PM

President Obama called Georgian President Saakashvili today to thank President Saakashvili for Georgia’s significant contribution to the international effort in Afghanistan, as the Georgian battalion deploys this month alongside American Marines in Helmand. The President relayed the strong support of the United States for Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. They discussed the importance of all sides avoiding provocative actions to build stability in the region. The President appreciated President Saakashvili’s continuing commitment to democratic and economic reforms in order to fulfill the promise of the Rose Revolution. They discussed their shared interest in achieving the historic goals set forth by the upcoming Nuclear Security Summit.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.06.10 01:23 PM

WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to key administration posts:

Marina C. McCarthy, Chair, Commission on Presidential Scholars José Miguel Amaya, Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars Michael A. Caplin, Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars Martha A. Darling, Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars I. King Jordan, Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars Colin Kippen, Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars Yvette Lewis, Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars Reginald Lewis, Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars Sheldon Pang, Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars Srinija Srinivasan, Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars Donald M. Stewart, Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars Cynthia Telles, Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars These individuals will join the National Teacher of the Year, Anthony Mullen, as members on the Commission.

President Obama said, “The Commission on Presidential Scholars is charged with recognizing the future leaders of our country and honoring them for their outstanding achievements. I am grateful that these impressive men and women have agreed to serve on this commission and help a new generation realize their potential and pursue their dreams.”

President Obama announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to key administration posts:

Marina C. McCarthy, Appointee for Chair, Commission on Presidential Scholars
Dr. Marina C. McCarthy has over three decades of research, teaching, administrative, and consulting experience in education. She has also taught courses in education at Harvard and Brown Universities and at Boston College. In addition, Dr. McCarthy has supervised student teachers in the Brown University teacher training program and has been a case writer for a University-wide faculty development program run by the Harvard Business School. She has served as an Allston Burr Senior Tutor (resident academic dean) at Harvard College and as a Study Group Leader on educational policy and politics at Harvard’s Institute of Politics and also taught in public and independent schools in the U.S. and Europe, and has served on a number of educational boards and committees including the MATCH Charter School in Boston. She holds an Ed.D. in Administration, Planning and Social Policy from Harvard.

José Miguel Amaya, Appointee for Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars
Dr. José Amaya is currently the Director of Diversity for Hy-Vee, Inc., an employee-owned retail corporation operating 230 retail stores in eight Midwestern states. From 1997-2005, he served as an Assistant Professor of English and Latino Studies at Iowa State University where he conducted research and taught courses in American literature and Latino studies. During Dr. Amaya’s tenure at Iowa State, he also served as the President of The State of Iowa Humanities Council and the Iowa Learns Education Council, an education council convened by former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack. Prior to his position at Iowa State University, he was an Assistant Professor of English at The Ohio State University. Dr. Amaya holds a Ph.D. and an M.A. in English from UCLA.

Michael A. Caplin, Appointee for Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars
Michael A. Caplin is an attorney and President of Turtle Island Consulting, which provides strategic planning advice to the non-profit community. He has been involved in a wide array of non-profit projects including programs in performing arts, social services, education, and environmental stewardship. His non-profit experience includes serving for 11 years as the Director of Eastern Operations for Childhelp USA. He also has worked as a public defender, a federal prosecutor, an educator, an entertainment attorney, and a music producer. Mr. Caplin currently serves as Chairman of the Board and a member of the faculty of the Phoenix Project, a non-profit that educates and empowers emerging social entrepreneurs; in addition, he is President of the Board of the New York Center for Children, a non-profit free clinic providing care and treatment for abused children. Mr. Caplin holds a B.A. from Swarthmore College, a J.D. from the University Virginia Law School, and an LL.M. from Georgetown University Law School.

Martha A. Darling, Appointee for Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars
For the past decade, Martha Darling has consulted on education issues for the National Academy of Sciences and other nonprofits. She retired from The Boeing Company in Seattle, having held senior management assignments in 747 Program Management, Government Affairs, and Boeing’s Corporate Offices where she supported the CEO on education policy. Previously, Ms. Darling was Vice President for Strategic Planning at Seattle-First National Bank and Executive Director of the Washington Business Roundtable’s Education Study. She has served as a White House Fellow and Executive Assistant to Secretary of the Treasury Michael Blumenthal and as a Senior Legislative Aide to U.S. Senator Bill Bradley. Earlier, she was a free-lance consultant to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and other international organizations for four years in Paris. Darling is a founding co-chair of Washtenaw County’s Success by Six early childhood initiative and serves on a variety of other boards. She is a graduate of Reed College and of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University.

I. King Jordan, Appointee for Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars
Dr. I. King Jordan was the first deaf President of Gallaudet University, the only university with all programs and services designed specifically for students who are deaf and hard of hearing. He first joined the faculty of Gallaudet’s Department of Psychology in 1973, in 1983 he became Chair of the Department, and three years later he was appointed Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. He served as the University’s President from 1988-2006 and is presently President Emeritus. Dr. Jordan is a recipient of the U.S. Presidential Citizen’s Medal and in 1990 was appointed as the Vice Chair of the President’s Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities; he was reappointed to this position in 1993. Dr. Jordan earned a B.A. in psychology from Gallaudet in 1970. The following year he earned an M.A., and in 1973 a Ph.D., both in psychology and both from the University of Tennessee.

Colin Kippen, Appointee for Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars
Colin Kippen is currently Executive Director of the Native Hawaiian Education Council, which aims to assess and coordinate innovative education programs for Native Hawaiians and make policy recommendations to improve the education and well being of Native Hawaiians. Mr. Kippen has worked most of his professional life as an advocate for Native Americans in a number of venues. He has served as Senior Counsel to the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs in the U.S. Senate, Deputy Administrator for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Chief Judge of the Suquamish Indian Tribe on the Port Madison Indian Reservation in Western Washington, Appellate Judge for several Indian tribes in Washington and Oregon, and trial attorney and Deputy Prosecutor in King County, Washington. Kippen is also the former Chairman of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation and Act (NAGPRA) Review Committee. Mr. Kippen holds a J.D. and a M.A. in Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Iowa.

Yvette Lewis, Appointee for Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars
Yvette Lewis is the founder and director of “So This is Opera,” a program that introduces young audiences to the world of opera in performance, workshop and residency settings. She is also a lyric soprano who has performed extensively, including appearances with the Washington Opera, the Baltimore Opera, the Opera Theatre of Northern Virginia, the Baltimore Symphony, and at the Spoleto Festival in Melbourne, Australia. Ms. Lewis has almost fifteen years experience as an elementary general music teacher in the Baltimore City and Montgomery County, Maryland Public Schools. She also worked for a period as a staff assistant at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Ms. Lewis holds a Mus.B. from Howard University and is a member of the American Guild of Musical Artists.

Reginald Lewis, Appointee for Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars
Reginald Lewis currently serves as the City Administrator for the City of East Orange, New Jersey, where he oversees the complete day-to-day operations of all municipal services for 70,000 residents. As the City’s Chief Operating Officer, Mr. Lewis manages a workforce of nearly 1,000 employees and an annual operating budget of $131 million. From 2005 to 2006, Mr. Lewis was Executive Vice President at the United Way in Newark, New Jersey. He also previously served in senior management roles in New Jersey State Government from 2002 to 2005 as Special Assistant and Director of the Commissioner’s Office of External Affairs in the Department of Human Services and as Special Assistant to the Assistant Commissioner for the Division of Abbott Implementation in the Department of Education. Mr. Lewis also spent nearly eight years serving on the program staffs of various foundations as Program Assistant to the Director of the Urban Poverty Program of the Ford Foundation in New York City, Program Officer at the Victoria Foundation in Montclair, New Jersey, Program Officer for Education at the Joyce Foundation in Chicago, and Director of Policy and Program Development at the Fund for New Jersey. Mr. Lewis holds a B.A. in Urban Studies from Morehouse College, and a M.A. in Social Service Administration from the University of Chicago.

Sheldon Pang, Appointee for Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars
Sheldon Pang is currently a Vice Chairman of RBC Capital Markets, a major part of the Royal Bank of Canada’s global business. From 2004-2006, he served as President of RBC Capital Markets Pacific Group, where he was involved in developing RBC’s business in the Asian Pacific region. Prior to joining RBC, Mr. Pang spent twelve years with AIG Trading Group, first as a Vice President then as a Managing Director, providing services to international clients in commodities, foreign exchange, and fixed income trading. He started his career as a Research Scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Mr. Pang has for years been involved in promoting educational causes, including the establishment of scholarships at MIT and Brown University, and supporting New York Huaxia Chinese School. Pang received an Sc.B. from Zhejiang University, an M.S. from Vanderbilt University, and an Sc.D. degree from MIT.

Srinija Srinivasan, Appointee for Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars
Srinija Srinivasan is Vice President and Editor in Chief at Yahoo!. Since joining the company as its fifth employee in 1995, Srinivasan has led a range of editorial and policy functions, beginning with the organization and evolution of the Yahoo! directory. She has overseen network editorial standards and original content development, guided the company’s corporate responsibility arm, and directed policy issues including privacy and data use, advertising standards, youth safety, community guidelines, and accessibility. Prior to joining Yahoo!, Srinivasan was involved with the Cyc Project, a ten-year artificial intelligence effort to build an immense database of human commonsense knowledge. She chairs the Board of Trustees for SFJAZZ, a non-profit organization dedicated to jazz creation, presentation, and education. She is also a member of the 2000 class of Henry Crown Fellows at the Aspen Institute. She holds a B.S. with distinction from Stanford University in Symbolic Systems, and was honored as a Presidential Scholar in 1989.

Donald M. Stewart, Appointee for Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars
Donald M. Stewart is currently a Visiting Professor at the University of Chicago’s Harris School of Public Policy Studies where he has taught since 2005. He previously served as CEO and President of the Chicago Community Trust. Prior to joining the Trust, Stewart was a Senior Program Officer and Special Advisor to the President at the Carnegie Corporation of New York. For over 12 years, Mr. Stewart was President and CEO of the College Board, which provides SAT and Advanced Placement assessments to help students make the transition from high school to college. Stewart is also former President of Spelman College, the 129 year old historically black women’s college in Atlanta. Stewart was a program officer in the Overseas Development Division of the Ford Foundation serving in Nigeria, Egypt and Tunisia. He is currently a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. He earned a B.A. from Grinnell College and a M.A. from Yale University as well as Master and Doctoral degrees in Public Administration from the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. He also completed the Advanced Management Program at the Harvard Business School.

Cynthia Telles, Appointee for Member, Commission on Presidential Scholars
Dr. Cynthia Ann Telles has been on the faculty of the University of California, Los Angeles School of Medicine Department of Psychiatry since 1986. She is currently the Director of the UCLA Neuropsychiatric Institute Spanish-Speaking Psychosocial Clinic where she is responsible for managing the clinical operations of this model psychiatric clinic, as well as the training program, research, and budget. Among many corporate, non-profit, and public service board memberships, Dr. Telles was also appointed to the National Advisory Council of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the advisory group on Health Care Reform, and the Regional Selection Panel for the White House Fellows Program during the Clinton Administration. Dr. Telles received her B.A. from Smith College and doctorate in Clinical Psychology from Boston University.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.06.10 01:37 PM

This afternoon, President Obama called Duke University men’s basketball coach Mike Krzyzewski to congratulate him and his team on their championship and to invite them to the White House. The President also spoke to members of the Butler University team and their coach Brad Stevens. He told them they played a great game, showed tremendous heart, and he hopes to get a chance to play with them.

A photograph of the President during his call to Duke Coach Krzyzewski is available HERE.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.06.10 11:24 AM

I am deeply saddened to hear of the passing of Wilma Mankiller today. As the Cherokee Nation’s first female chief, she transformed the Nation-to-Nation relationship between the Cherokee Nation and the Federal Government, and served as an inspiration to women in Indian Country and across America. A recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, she was recognized for her vision and commitment to a brighter future for all Americans. Her legacy will continue to encourage and motivate all who carry on her work. Michelle and I offer our condolences to Wilma’s family, especially her husband Charlie and two daughters, Gina and Felicia, as well as the Cherokee Nation and all those who knew her and were touched by her good works.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.06.10 07:02 AM

WASHINGTON D.C. – Vice President Joe Biden and Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board Chairman Earl Devaney announced today the release of a Presidential Memorandum directing agencies to further intensify their efforts to improve reporting compliance by recipients of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds. The Recovery Act requires recipients of funds to submit quarterly reports on how they are putting the funds to work. In the most recent quarter, the vast majority of recipients complied with the law, submitting spending reports on 65,429 Recovery awards. At the same time, however, recipients failed to file 1,036 reports. The Presidential Memorandum directs agencies to improve accountability for enforcing compliance with reporting requirements by reporting the identities of noncompliant recipients of Recovery Act funding. A copy of this Presidential Memorandum is attached.

“After more than a year implementing the Recovery Act, I can proudly say that we’re not only creating jobs across the country, but doing so responsibly and with a level of transparency never before seen in this town,” Vice President Biden said. “This Presidential Memorandum will continue to make sure that every dollar is accounted for and every official is held accountable.”

“I have been a strong advocate of compliance measures that would encourage recipients of Recovery funds to submit their spending reports to the Recovery Board, as required by the Recovery Act,” Recovery Board Chairman Devaney said. “The President’s decision to issue a memorandum to the senior officials of executive departments and agencies will go a long way toward helping the Board achieve our goal of 100 percent compliance.”

As the current recipient reporting period began on April 1st, the President issued a memorandum directing agencies to be aggressive in going after recipients who do not report. This Memorandum strongly reinforces the Administration’s emphasis on accountability and requires agencies to intensify their efforts by, wherever authorized and appropriate, terminating awards, reclaiming misused funds or pursuing suspension and disbarment of non-reporting grant recipients and contractors.

The independent Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board was created by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 with two goals. First, to provide transparency in relation to the use of Recovery-related funds. And second, to prevent and detect fraud, waste, and mismanagement. The Board maintains a “Recovery Operations Center” (ROC) designed to identify and combat potential fraudulent activities. Earl E. Devaney was appointed by President Obama to serve as chairman of the Recovery Board. Twelve Inspectors General from various federal agencies serve with Chairman Devaney.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.06.10 08:54 AM

One year ago yesterday in Prague, I outlined a comprehensive agenda to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and to pursue the peace and security of a world without them. I look forward to advancing this agenda in Prague this week when I sign the new START Treaty with President Medvedev, committing the United States and Russia to substantial reductions in our nuclear arsenals.

Today, my Administration is taking a significant step forward by fulfilling another pledge that I made in Prague—to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy and focus on reducing the nuclear dangers of the 21st century, while sustaining a safe, secure and effective nuclear deterrent for the United States and our allies and partners as long as nuclear weapons exist.

The Nuclear Posture Review, led by the Department of Defense, recognizes that the greatest threat to U.S. and global security is no longer a nuclear exchange between nations, but nuclear terrorism by violent extremists and nuclear proliferation to an increasing number of states. Moreover, it recognizes that our national security and that of our allies and partners can be increasingly defended by America’s unsurpassed conventional military capabilities and strong missile defenses.

As a result, we are taking specific and concrete steps to reduce the role of nuclear weapons while preserving our military superiority, deterring aggression and safeguarding the security of the American people.

First, and for the first time, preventing nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism is now at the top of America’s nuclear agenda, which affirms the central importance of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. We have aligned our policies and proposed major funding increases for programs to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons around the world. Our nuclear security summit next week will be an opportunity for 47 nations to commit to specific steps to pursue the goal of securing all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world within four years. And next month in New York, we will work with the wider world to strengthen the global non-proliferation regime to ensure that all nations uphold their responsibilities.

Second, we are further emphasizing the importance of nations meeting their NPT and nuclear non-proliferation obligations through our declaratory policy. The United States is declaring that we will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and in compliance with their nuclear nonproliferation obligations. This enables us to sustain our nuclear deterrent for the narrower range of contingencies in which these weapons may still play a role, while providing an additional incentive for nations to meet their NPT obligations. Those nations that fail to meet their obligations will therefore find themselves more isolated, and will recognize that the pursuit of nuclear weapons will not make them more secure.

Finally, we are fulfilling our responsibilities as a nuclear power committed to the NPT. The United States will not conduct nuclear testing and will seek ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The United States will not develop new nuclear warheads or pursue new military missions or new capabilities for nuclear weapons.

As I stated last year in Prague, so long as nuclear weapons exist, we will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal that guarantees the defense of the United States, reassures allies and partners, and deters potential adversaries. To that end, we are seeking substantial investments to improve infrastructure, strengthen science and technology, and retain the human capital we need to sustain our stockpile, while also strengthening the conventional capabilities that are an important part of our deterrent. The nuclear strategy we’re announcing today therefore reaffirms America’s unwavering commitment to the security of our allies and partners, and advances American national security.

To stop the spread of nuclear weapons, prevent nuclear terrorism, and pursue the day when these weapons do not exist, we will work aggressively to advance every element of our comprehensive agenda—to reduce arsenals, to secure vulnerable nuclear materials, and to strengthen the NPT. These are the steps toward the more secure future that America seeks, and this is the work that we are advancing today.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

04.05.10 03:13 PM

Dear Madam Speaker:

I ask the Congress to consider the enclosed amendment to Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 proposals in my FY 2011 Budget. In particular, I am requesting authority to allow the Department of Defense to transfer up to $50 million of funds that will expire in FY 2010 to the Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration for improvements to the Port of Guam. Modernization of the Port is a critical prerequisite for the military construction program supporting the realignment of U.S. Marine Corps forces from Japan to Guam, a part of the overall U.S. strategy for military forces in the Pacific region.

In addition, this transmittal contains a FY 2010 proposal for the Legislative Branch. As a matter of comity between branches, appropriations requests of the Legislative Branch are transmitted without change.

The details of this amendment are set forth in the enclosed letter from the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Sincerely,
BARACK OBAMA

White House.gov Press Office Feed