Hi, all. Today's report features:
Behind the Scenes at "In Performance": Join John Legend behind the scenes with performers including Jamie Foxx, Sheryl Crow, Nick Jonas, Seal, Gloriana, Jordin Sparks and more in the green room during rehearsal and backstage during production of "In Performance at the White House: The Motown Sound"."
The Commencement Challenge: The Commencement Challenge invites public high schools across the country to demonstrate how their school best prepares them for college and a career; John Legend encourages schools to get involved.
EPA Update: Economic, environmental and health benefits of the Clean Air Act; EPA Administrator Jackson discusses women in science; EPA and Justice announce $4 million penalty for coal supplier that violated Clean Water Act.
Creating Green Jobs: Transportation Secretary LaHood reports on an electric bus manufacturer that, thanks to federal investment, has developed zero-emissions transit buses and added hundreds of new jobs in South Carolina.
White House Press Briefing: Mr. Carney takes questions on Libya, the President's upcoming visit to Florida, budget talks and other issues.
Foreign Policy Update: Secretary of State Clinton testifies on "Assessing U.S. Foreign Policy Priorities and Needs Amidst Economic Challenges" before the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
BEHIND THE SCENES AT "IN PERFORMANCE"
White House, March 1, 2011:
Behind the Scenes at "In Performance at the White House: The Motown Sound"
Go behind the scenes with John Legend during the production of "In Performance at the White House: The Motown Sound". This celebration at the White House brought together recording artists to perform classic Motown hits in the East Room of the White House.
White House Blog, March 1, 2011:
Behind-the-Scenes Video: The Motown Sound At The White House
Posted by Kori Schulman
Continuing a favorite White House tradition, the President and First Lady welcomed renowned musical artists to the White House to celebrate music that’s at the heart of the American story. As Black History Month drew to a close, Thursday’s performance fittingly paid tribute to the legendary sound of Motown. Smokey Robinson and Stevie Wonder took the stage alongside those influenced by generations of Motown musicians.
Join John Legend for a rare glimpse behind the scenes with performers including Jamie Foxx, Sheryl Crow, Nick Jonas, Seal, Gloriana, Jordin Sparks and more in the green room during rehearsal and backstage for the performance....
While the East Room of the White House has hosted some of the most talented musicians in the world representing an array of genres, the President pointed out that Motown is different, sharing a bit of its history:
"No one knows exactly when jazz began. Nobody knows who the first person was to sing a freedom song. But we know where Motown came from. We know it was born in the basement of a house on West Grand Boulevard in the Motor City -- Detroit. (Applause.) And we know it started with a man named Berry Gordy, who is here with us tonight. Stand up, Berry. (Applause.)
Now, apparently Berry tried a lot of things before following his heart into music. A high school dropout, he failed as a record store owner, competed as an amateur boxer, finally took a job earning $85 a week on the assembly line at the local Lincoln-Mercury plant. And it was there, watching the bare metal frames transformed into gleaming automobiles, that Berry wondered why he couldn’t do the same thing with musicians, and help turn new talent into stars.
And before long, he quit his job at the plant, borrowed $800, and set up shop in a little house with a banner across the front that read “Hitsville, U.S.A.” His family thought he was delusional. (Laughter.) But as Berry said, “People thought the Wright Brothers had a stupid idea, so I say, ‘Bring on the stupid ideas.’”
As it turned out, Berry could recognize talent and potential better than anybody else in the business. It began with Smokey Robinson, who stopped by the Motown house with a group of friends calling themselves the Miracles. Then came one of Smokey’s neighbors -– a high school senior named Diana Ross, who started out working as a secretary. One of the Miracles brought along his little brother, who invited a 10-year-old blind kid named Stephen Hardaway Judkins to tag along. (Laughter.) And then there was a group called the Jackson Five, fresh from amateur night at the Apollo, that Gladys Knight told Berry he just had to see.
Pretty soon, the basement studio was turning out hits faster than Detroit was turning out cars. From 1961 to 1971, Motown produced 110 Top 10 hits from artists like Marvin Gaye, The Temptations, The Four Tops and The Supremes. In the process, Motown’s blend of tight lyrics, catchy melodies and deep soul began to blur the line between music that was considered either “black” or “white.” As Smokey Robinson said, “I recognized the bridges that were crossed, the racial problems and the barriers that we broke down with music. I recognized that because I lived it.”
Along the way, songs like “Dancing in the Streets” and “What’s Going On” became the soundtrack of the civil rights era. Black artists began soaring to the top of the pop charts for the first time. And at concerts in the South, Motown groups literally brought people together –- insisting that the ropes traditionally used to separate black and white audience members be taken down.
So, today, more than 50 years later, that’s the Motown legacy. Born at a time of so much struggle, so much strife, it taught us that what unites us will always be stronger than what divides us. And in the decades since, those catchy beats and simple chords have influenced generations of musicians, from Sheryl Crow to the Jonas Brothers."
THE COMMENCEMENT CHALLENGE
White House, March 1, 2011:
Ten Days Left to Apply for the 2011 Commencement Challenge
Posted by Katelyn Sabochik
The application deadline for the 2011 Race to the Top Commencement Challenge is March 11 – just ten days away! The Commencement Challenge invites public high schools across the country to demonstrate how their school best prepares them for college and a career, helping America win the future by out-educating our competitors and achieving President Obama’s goal of having the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020. President Obama will travel to the winning school to deliver their commencement address this spring!
Earlier today, Good Morning America ran a segment on the Commencement Challenge featuring Simon Boehme, a member of Kalamazoo Central’s class of 2010, last year’s Challenge winner, and Melody Barnes, Director of the Domestic Policy Council. Check out the video on ABCNews.com.
Last week, musician John Legend was at the White House as part of the “The Motown Sound: In Performance at the White House” event, and he took a few moments to encourage high schools around the country to get involved in the Commencement Challenge:
White House, March 1, 2011:
John Legend on The Commencement Challenge
Musician John Legend visits the White House and takes a moment to talk about the 2011 Commencement Challenge. The application deadline is March 11, 2011. Learn more at http://whitehouse.gov/commencement.
Applying for the 2011 Commencement Challenge is easy. The application includes three short essays and readily available data from each school that illustrate how schools are promoting college and career readiness for all students while establishing a culture of student success and academic excellence. Applications must be submitted by Friday, March 11 at 11:59 pm EST. Apply today!
EPA UPDATE
The Clean Air Act: Protecting Our Families and the Air We Breathe
Posted by Heather Zichal
Today, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a report estimating the economic, environmental and health benefits of the Clean Air Act over the period 1990 to 2020. This report, which is designed to provide Congress and the public with comprehensive, updated, and peer-reviewed information on the Act’s costs and benefits, reaches a clear conclusion: the Clean Air Act has been an incredible investment for America.
According to the study, the direct benefits of the Clean Air Act – in the form of cleaner air and healthier, more productive Americans – are estimated to reach nearly $2 trillion in the year 2020, exceeding the costs by a factor of more than 30 to one. But this report also reminds us that the common sense provisions under the Clean Air Act are about more than economics – they are ultimately about the health of our families.
According to the report, in 2010 alone, the reductions in fine particle and ozone pollution from the Clean Air Act prevented more than:
•160,000 premature deaths
•130,000 heart attacks
•13 million lost work days
•1.7 million asthma attacks
This report puts to rest the old argument that we can’t have a healthy economy and a healthy environment – and serves as an important reminder of the need to protect the Clean Air Act from attacks. For decades, it has brought cleaner air to our children and avoided billions in health care costs. And we need a strong Act to protect our children’s children for decades to come.
Environmental Protection Agency, March 1, 2011:
Women In Science: Administrator Lisa P. Jackson
By Administrator Lisa P. Jackson
March 1 is the first day of Women’s History Month, and EPA is celebrating by sharing the stories and perspectives of many talented women within our ranks. Over the next 30 days, this page will feature blogs by women scientists, engineers, and leaders who play an important role in helping EPA protect the health of the American people.
There is no doubt that environmental protection would not be where it is today without the extraordinary, groundbreaking work of amazing women. In the 1930s, a woman named Rosalie Edge showed people the importance of preservation and environmental protection. Edge was a pioneer who made it possible for others like Sylvia Earle, Marjory Stoneman Douglas and Jane Goodall to emerge as leading advocates for protecting health and the environment. Rachel Carson – a scientist – authored the book Silent Spring that changed environmentalism forever. It is no coincidence that her book was published in the early 1960s, and by 1970 we had a federal Environmental Protection Agency.
These women were an inspiration to today’s generation of women scientists – including myself. I majored in chemical engineering at Tulane University in my hometown of New Orleans, and received a master’s degree in Engineering at Princeton University before joining EPA as a staff level in 1987. It was a time when very few women were studying and working in scientific and engineering fields. When I graduated from Princeton, I was one of only two women in my class. I felt a call to service and to issues of health, and wanted to use my technical degree to make a difference in the world around me. I originally wanted to become a doctor to help people when they fell sick. While studying chemical engineering, I realized that I could use my scientific training to clean up or prevent pollution in our communities, helping people by ensuring they didn’t get sick in the first place.
Over time I witnessed the changes that took place and the doors that opened – not just to me but to all women. According to the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, around 154,000 women were pursuing masters degrees in science and engineering when I was in school. By 2003, that number jumped to around 270,000. Fifty years ago, women earned less than 10 percent of the science and engineering doctorates awarded in the United States. By 2006, that number climbed to 40 percent.
Scientific and technical advances are the foundations of our progress and prosperity. As the head of the government agency responsible for protecting human health and the environment, I’ve made clear that every decision we make on environmental issues must be guided by the best science possible.
The extraordinary women who work as researchers, technical experts, engineers, leaders and scientists at EPA give us the information we need to build the best health and environmental protections for the American people. I am proud to call them my colleagues, and I look forward to reading their contributions as we mark Women’s History Month with our series on women scientists at EPA.
Environmental Protection Agency, March 1, 2011:
Arch Coal to Pay $4 Million to Settle Clean Water Act Violations in Appalachian Mining Operations
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Justice Department announced today that Arch Coal Inc., the second largest supplier of coal in the United States, has agreed to pay a $4 million dollar penalty for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act in Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky. Under the settlement, Arch Coal will implement changes to its mining operations in Virginia, West Virginia and Kentucky to ensure compliance with the Clean Water Act.
“Violations at mining operations can have significant environmental and public health consequences, including the pollution of the waters that people use for drinking, swimming and fishing,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “It is critical that companies operating next door to homes, schools and other businesses meet the standards established to protect the health and the environment for these communities.”
“The measures required by this settlement will prevent pollutants from entering waterways and bring wide-ranging improvements to mining operations in four mining complexes across three states,” said Ignacia S. Moreno, assistant attorney general of the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice. “These changes will mean a healthier environment for local communities and will help ensure Arch Coal’s compliance with the Clean Water Act.”
As part of the settlement, Arch Coal has agreed to take measures that will prevent an estimated 2 million pounds of pollution from entering the nation’s waters each year. Arch will also implement a treatment system to reduce discharges of selenium, a pollutant found in mine discharges. Selenium runoff from mining operations can build up in streams and have an adverse impact on aquatic organisms.
Arch Coal has agreed to implement a series of inspections, audits and tracking measures to ensure treatment systems are working properly and that future compliance is achieved. The company is also required to develop and implement a compliance management system to help foster a top-down, compliance and prevention-focused approach to Clean Water Act issues.
A joint federal-state complaint filed in U.S. District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia by the United States, West Virginia, and Kentucky alleged numerous violations of Arch Coal’s permits that set limits on pollutants to be discharged into streams. The alleged excess discharges of iron, total suspended solids, manganese and other pollutants reflect deficiencies in operation and maintenance of wastewater treatment systems in place at four of the company’s mining facilities: Coal Mac, Inc; Lone Mountain Processing, Inc; Cumberland River Coal Co.; and Mingo Logan Coal Co.
Under the settlement, $2 million of the $4 million civil penalty will be paid to the United States and the remaining $2 million will be divided between West Virginia and Kentucky based on the percentage of alleged violations in each state. The consent decree is subject to a 30-day public comment period and final court approval.
More information on the settlement.
CREATING GREEN JOBS
Department of Transportation, March 1, 2011:
A South Carolina plant shows how we can invest in tomorrow and create jobs today
By Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood
Today, I want to share a terrific new video, called "Transporting America: Proterra," which tells the story of Proterra, Inc., an electric bus manufacturer in Greenville, South Carolina. Thanks to federal investment, this company has been able to develop incredible zero-emissions transit buses and add hundreds of new jobs in South Carolina.
Transporting America: Proterra
Proterra was founded in 2004 to build the "bus of tomorrow." And with the help of the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Federal Transit Administration, the company has succeeded--creating an electric bus that can be recharged in under ten minutes.
But Proterra is doing more than just creating a greener, cleaner mode of transportation--it's creating jobs and boosting economic development in Greenville, South Carolina.
For more information, please visit www.fastlane.dot.gov.
Last month Deputy Secretary John Porcari penned a blog for us on "Good, Green Jobs." He wrote that, "We know Americans can adopt environmentally friendly practices and create good jobs in the process."
Nowhere is that demonstrated more clearly than in Greenville, South Carolina, where Proterra, Inc., has begun manufacturing electric transit buses. More important to the Greenville community is the fact that Proterra has hired more than 120 workers, with plans to reach up to 350 workers by the end of this year and more than 1,300 by 2015.
Although Federal Tranist Administration grants had helped the company develop its fuel-cell technology, Proterra did not make the leap from a research and development company into a full-fledged manufacturer until FTA grants made it possible for cash-strapped transit agencies across the country to order new buses.
In January, I visited the Proterra plant and met with some of the newly hired workers. Are they excited about their future and the stability the good jobs at Proterra offer? You bet they are. But when you listen to them, you begin to see they're also excited about building good, clean transportation for communities across America.
For example, when you watch our new video you'll meet Julie Shepherd, who, after being hired and trained by Proterra, finally bought her first home. I hope you'll feel the same relief she and her daughter Autumn feel. More importantly, I hope you'll feel the tremendous pride she has for the good work they do at Proterra and for the role Proterra workers see themselves playing in creating a better, brighter American future.
The Obama Administration is investing in tomorrow and creating jobs today. And the video we're presenting today demonstrates that, with a little support from DOT, Proterra is hiring South Carolinians and helping America win the future.
WHITE HOUSE PRESS BRIEFING
White House, March 1, 2011:
3/1/11: White House Press Briefing
White House Press Briefings are conducted most weekdays from the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room in the West Wing.
Office of the Press Secretary< March 1, 2011:
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 3/1/2011
MR. CARNEY: I just have a couple of things I'd like to start with if I may. First, as you know, on Friday the President is traveling to Florida. He will visit Miami Central High School in Florida, with Education Secretary Arne Duncan and former Governor Jeb Bush. Governor Bush will be traveling with the President. (Information provided later: Governor Bush will travel locally in South Florida with President Obama but will not fly on Air Force One.).... Reforming our education system and preparing the next generation of young people to compete globally is not a Democratic or a Republican issue. Miami Central High School was recommended by former Governor Bush because it tells an incredible story of the impact successful turnaround strategies and models can have on persistently low-performing schools. Governor Bush is obviously -- former Governor Bush, rather, was committed and remains committed to bipartisan education reform. The President is, as well. He’s looking forward to that visit.
I'd also just like to tell you, inform you that the President, about 40 minutes ago, made a phone call to Speaker of the House John Boehner to discuss the progress being made on the negotiations for a continuing resolution. It was about a 10-12 minute phone call, a good phone call. And you will ask, but I will not divulge any more details about that phone call, but I just wanted you to know that that had taken place....
Q: .... On the spending standoff -- you just mentioned there, the House is moving ahead with its two-week stopgap bill. Is the White House engaged at all in trying to prevent this from becoming a two-week after two-week cycle where the government stays afloat but there’s really no long-term continuity?....
MR. CARNEY: Well, the White House is obviously engaged at various levels, including at the presidential level, as I just noted. We believe some progress has been made. We believe that there is a focus in Congress now on cuts that we all can agree on. The President, as you know, is committed to reducing spending. As he made clear with his 2012 budget proposal and as he has made clear in these negotiations on the continuing resolution that he is committed to spending cuts. We can agree on those.
We also believe that this process should be one in which we are -- there is enough time allowed for all sides to come together to reach an agreement on a long-term continuing resolution, so that we can fund the government for the remainder of the year. That, in turn, will allow us to focus on the many other challenges that we face and that the American people want us to work on. So without getting into what is acceptable or unacceptable, our goal here is that we get a continuing resolution that is clean, that deals with the spending cuts we can agree on.
We do believe that if $4 billion in cuts over two weeks is acceptable, that $8 billion over four or five weeks is something that we could agree on. Again, if it was a clean continuing resolution, that would also allow the time. But our point here is not this amount of time versus that amount of time, but our focus is on moving beyond the short-term CR and focusing on negotiations for a longer-term CR that allows us to tighten our belts, live within our means, and continue to invest in the areas of the economy we think are essential to invest in, in order to keep growing and creating jobs....
Well, I think I just mentioned that another option would be a longer CR with substantially more spending cuts included, as essentially -- spending cuts that would go into an escrow against the long term -- the total number of cuts in a longer-term deal. Again -- but the point is, whether it’s two weeks, two weeks and two days, three weeks, four weeks -- the point is that what we do not believe would be helpful, in fact, we believe it would be harmful to the economy, and therefore, not something the American people would support, is that if we created a tollbooth where we are negotiating again and again on continuing resolutions to fund the government for two weeks or another short-term period.
There may be a process where we do that once or twice, but the focus needs to be on the longer-term deal so that we can come to an agreement, work -- find common ground, and then put that in place so that we can focus on the longer-term issues that we all realize the nation faces and that the American people want us to grapple with....
Q: When you want -- when you say you want the bill to be clean, what do you mean by that?
MR. CARNEY: We want it to focus on the spending and spending cuts that we can all agree on, and not to include extraneous policy issues that are not priorities right now in terms of focusing on this -- on the continuing resolution and continuing to fund the government in the way that the American people want.
Q: Jay, following up on this whole issue, if the House does pass this CR today, which they look likely to do, will the President support it?
MR. CARNEY: It is a process, as you know, where the House has already passed something that the President has made very clear he would not support, and that was a proposal that they put out on the table, and now they putting another on the table. The Senate has to agree to something, as well. And those negotiations are ongoing. So I’m not going to say yes or no from here to a proposal that may be voted today but may not represent what is ultimately agreed upon in Congress.
And the principles I just discussed about what our goals are we think are widely shared. What is very apparent in this process is that the President is committed to making tough choices on spending. He is equally committed to not going down a road in terms of spending cuts that does harm to the economy, potentially does harm to our national security and doesn’t address the kind of investments that we need to make to keep our economy growing and innovating and educating so that we can win the future in the 21st century.
Those are his priorities, and he believes that there is plenty of common ground, that there are reasonable proposals out there -- some of which I just discussed -- that Democrats and Republicans working together -- House members, Senate members -- can come together on and agree on, on behalf of the American people. And I think we all know that that's what they want. They don't want debate about extraneous issues. They want agreement on common ground, and I think we can get there.
Q: Switching gears, just one follow-up question. What message is the U.S. trying to send to Qaddafi by moving warships closer to Libya?
MR. CARNEY: We are, the United States, preparing for contingencies by moving some assets into the region, primarily focused on the potential humanitarian contingencies that are out there. But as I have said and others have said, our U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations said yesterday, we obviously aren’t taking any options off the table. But this is contingency planning, essentially.
Q: .... What else can the U.S. do? What else does the White House intend to do?
MR. CARNEY: Jake, I think we have done already quite a lot unilaterally and working with our international partners through the United Nations and the EU and other places. The unilateral sanctions that we imposed on Friday have already led the Treasury to block access to $30 billion of assets held by the Libyan regime, by members of the regime. That's a pretty strong message about the consequences of this continued behavior.
The United Nations has, with incredible speed, made clear that it will refer to the International Criminal Court the abuses of human rights that are being proven to have happened in Libya and continue to happen, and that that will -- that demonstrates the international community’s commitment to hold accountable those who would perpetrate the kind of violations that we've been seeing and hearing about. That produces, we believe, pressure on the regime. And as I said yesterday, those who are around Colonel Qaddafi who are wondering which way they should go and whether or not they should continue to support this leader who no longer has credibility at home or anywhere in the world, they ought to think twice about it, because the consequences of continuing to support Colonel Qaddafi are quite severe. They will be held accountable.
Q: Last week we saw a rash of Libyan ambassadors and some ministers and others separating themselves, removing themselves from the Libyan regime. We have not seen that in recent days, even as the U.S. has upped the pressure. ...
MR. CARNEY: I would say, first of all, I understand that -- and that's a fair question. I understand that as we all watch the events in the Middle East and Libya and other countries that the drama we are witnessing creates in us a sense of urgency. But when you say you don't see a sense of momentum, my goodness, would anyone have predicted two weeks ago or three weeks ago that Colonel Qaddafi would be in this position that he is in now where great swaths --
Q: I just mean based on those around him.
MR. CARNEY: -- great swaths of the country are no longer in the control of his regime; where the entire international community, including Arab nations, have arrayed against him and called him illegitimate and not credible as a leader --
Q: I only meant, in terms of momentum, I was just talking about those in the regime leaving the regime.
MR. CARNEY: Again, you're talking about a matter of days since -- or if that -- hours maybe since high-level officials around him have separated themselves from him, so I don't -- I’m not sure I can accept the premise that there is a lack of momentum....
Jake, what I’m saying is that the rapidity of events in the last 10 days is rather remarkable, so the idea that things are moving slowly I just don't think is credible.
Yes, Dan.
Q: Is the administration surprised at all that Qaddafi doesn’t appear to be getting the message? I mean despite the sanctions -- and I know it’s only been last Friday, but still, as Jake was pointing out, no sign that he’s backing down. So is there surprise that these sanctions or whatever -- these other options they have on the table so far are not making him budge?
MR. CARNEY: I would -- I won’t bore you by repeating exactly what I said to Jake.
Q: -- change a bit. (Laughter.)
MR. CARNEY: But the point -- I could mix it up, use some new verbs. But the point is the same, that events have moved with remarkable speed and we have reacted -- both the United States, President Obama, the international community -- with remarkable speed.
And not everything we do comes in the form of a speech or an announcement. One of the reasons why we had so much success -- we and our partners -- in moving the international process forward so quickly is because of the intense diplomacy, the quiet diplomacy that that entailed. And you can be sure, as I said yesterday, that the President and all senior members of the national security team are focused on this intensely and continue to be.
So I just think you cannot reasonably measure momentum in this situation and in terms of hours and days when the speed -- the momentum has been almost blinding in terms of what we’ve seen in the region and in Libya specifically.
Q: On the phone conversation with Mr. Boehner, did the President -- I know you don't want to talk about specifics, but was there a commitment at all from Mr. Boehner about a long-term solution....
MR. CARNEY: Without addressing the specifics or the content of that conversation, I will go back to what I said before, which is our general concern -- without going to whether two weeks was acceptable or 16 days or 21 days -- is that there is a focus by all parties on the need to resolve this in a way that -- where we get the spending cuts that we call can agree on, that funds the government with those spending cuts for the end of the year, fiscal year, and then allows us to move on and address the other important issues facing us....
Q: Did you say who called whom?
MR. CARNEY: The President called Speaker Boehner....
I see no reason, and I don’t believe we see any reason why we cannot engage -- as we have been, by the way, at the staff level prior to this -- but as have Democrats on the Hill, Democrats and Republicans together in this process going forward. We -- the American people expect us to come together.
The President has made very clear in his -- that he is also committed to cutting spending. There’s no longer -- there’s no debate here about the need to cut spending. The question is where do you cut in a way that doesn’t harm the economy, doesn’t throw it in reverse, doesn’t reduce job growth, job creation, and it protects the investments that are so key to longer-term economic growth in this country. And the President thinks there’s common ground there.
We have made clear that we could accept, even over a relatively short period of time, $8 billion in cuts that we can agree on. I think that’s a substantial number and demonstrates our -- his commitment to the need to tighten our belts, as long as we protect essential functions of government, national security, and don’t do anything that would hurt our ability to grow and create jobs.
Q: Was this a pleasant call or was it as they say, “frank and direct”?
MR. CARNEY: It was a good call. I’m not going to use the diplomatic-ese. It was a good call and, from what I understand, very productive.
Q: Could you update us on what the President’s latest thinking is on whether he’s going to give a speech on the Middle East overall? And secondly, have you heard him talk recently about what he believes is the common element in all of these different uprisings all through Northern Africa and the Middle East? What makes them all similar? What do they all have in common?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I don’t even -- I have heard him discuss this recently, and I would simply say that -- I’ve spoken to this quite a bit from this podium, because the elements of his perspective on this are contained within the speech he gave in Cairo early in his presidency that talked about the need for the countries in the region to be -- to hear the voices of their peoples, to be responsive to their aspirations, and to reform their political systems in a way that meets those aspirations -- and precisely for the reason that more democracy, more pluralism, more participation by the peoples in these countries, in that region, is a way to prevent the kind of instability and unrest that inevitably comes when entire populations feel that they’re not being heard or respected and that their aspirations aren’t being met and their grievances not being legitimately considered.
So his principles in dealing with all of these situations in these countries again go back to non-violent response to peaceful demonstrations; to respect for the universal rights of the peoples in the region who -- the right to free speech, the right to free assembly, the right to access to information; and then the need to engage in a political process, a reform process, that brings in the people of the region in these countries to participate in their government and in a way that gives them a greater voice....
There are many ways that the President can, has and will address what's been happening in the Middle East. He has spoken now, I believe, four times on this issue, and will speak again on this issue. In fact, I expect he’ll speak on it -- is it Thursday that the President of Mexico will be here? You may hear from him on that day about this. As for other plans, we’re always looking at different options.
Q: A Hill report from the Republicans says the expansion of Medicaid will cost the states $115 billion through 2023. Do you have any reaction to that?
MR. CARNEY: Well, first, Mike, we are committed to working with governors to help them manage their Medicaid costs, their Medicaid programs, and the Department of Health and Human Services has been an active and constructive partner with the states, with the governors, to answer their questions and ensure they are aware of the substantial flexibility that exists in the Affordable Care Act.
It’s important to remember that the Affordable Care Act will cover the overwhelming majority of the costs associated with the Medicaid expansion and will, in fact, reduce the amounts they spend to care for the uninsured. A lot of independent experts have actually estimated that the states will have a net savings in their Medicare program because of the Affordable Care Act.
But again, we are working with the states. Secretary Sebelius is committed to working with the states to help them explore the flexibility they have to reduce costs. And we’ll continue to do that. The President, actually just this week in his meeting with the governors, asked them to name a bipartisan group of governors to work with Secretary Sebelius on ways to lower costs and improve the quality of care for these Americans.
So we’re on it. And again, I would just say we want to be a partner of the states in dealing with this issue.
Q: Does the White House believe Guantanamo Bay will still be open next year, Jay?
MR. CARNEY: As you know, Mike, the President is committed to closing Guantanamo Bay. I don't have a timetable for you on that process.
Q: Jay, let me read this directly. President Saleh in Yemen .... he said this: “I am going to reveal a secret. There is an operations room in Tel Aviv with the aim of destabilizing the Arab world. And that operations room is in Tel Aviv and run by the White House.” ....
MR. CARNEY: Well, we’ve made clear to the leadership in Yemen, as we have with the leadership in other countries, that they need to focus on the political reforms that they need to implement to respond to the legitimate aspirations of their people. And we don't think scapegoating will be the kind of response that the people of Yemen or the people in other countries will find adequate.
So, again, I think the focus needs to be, in Yemen as it needs to be in other countries, on opening their society, working with countries -- I mean, working with the peoples in their country to bring them in to a political process that's democratic and inclusive.
Q: Given that al Qaeda AP is such a threat to the United States, comments like this -- is this becoming -- does this bring to the forefront a possible national security problem -- if this is what he believes about the American government?
MR. CARNEY: Again, we think that he needs to focus on what he needs to do in terms of political reform in his country. And in terms of al Qaeda, I think one thing that has been abundantly clear in these last several weeks and months is that the unrest we’ve seen in the region is not inspired by al Qaeda, but is in fact demonstrative of a movement within this region of the world that is wholly counter to everything that al Qaeda believes in and to the methods that they believe change -- the methods by which they believe change should come about: peaceful, non-violent, pluralistic, non-sectarian demonstrations in -- that's not in the al Qaeda manual. And it is a powerful response, we believe -- or a powerful message, we believe, to those who think that change needs to come about through horrific violence and attacks on innocent people.
Q: Quick follow-up on the Boehner phone call. When was the last time the President spoke to Senator Reid?
MR. CARNEY: (Information provided later: The President last met with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at a meeting at the White House on February 16, 2011. Senior White House staff typically speaks with Leader Reid on a daily basis.)....
Q: One thing, Jay. The President is pushing ahead with his plan to travel on Friday. Does that mean that he is confident the fix is in and this is going to be settled? There's not going to be a government shutdown?
MR. CARNEY: I’m not sure I’d describe it “the fix is in.” (Laughter.) I think that the President remains confident that we can find common ground to avoid a shutdown that nobody wants, that the leaders of both parties in Congress have said they do not want, that the President does not want, because the American people don't want it and because of the impact on the economy that it would have, the negative impact. So we are still in discussions. The Senate and the House are in discussions on how we reach an agreement on the continuing resolution, but we remain confident that we can get there.
Q: So would it be one -- a two-week this week, and then the President and the Congress are both leaving town on the 18th -- when are you going to get around to the longer-term CR?
MR. CARNEY: Well, Ann, again, I don't want to say that we’re doing this for however many weeks and then another thing for another number of weeks. We -- but you make a good point about the fact that Congress will be leaving town for a week in this period and -- which is why we believe that whatever agreement we come to for the short term, we need to be mindful of the fact that the next stage really does have to be -- or does soon have to be a focus and a commitment to deal with the longer-term continuing resolution so we can fund the government through the end of the year and focus on the other issues....
Again, I’m not going to say precisely what we will accept or what we won’t accept, except to note that the President has been very clear about what he will not accept, and I’ve been very clear about where we believe there is a great deal of room for common ground -- on the spending cuts that we all agree on, on the need to demonstrate spending restraint as we continue to fund the important areas that will allow us to out-educate, out-build and out-innovate the competition in the 21st century....
Yes.
Q: .... You’ve said several times that the President is very engaged on Libya. Could you give us a more specific sense of how and where this falls in the President’s day? ....
MR. CARNEY: Well, as you know, get a morning brief, the presidential daily brief, that has in recent days focused in some and often large part on the events in Libya. He is also getting additional updates. I think I mentioned from this podium a while ago, last week, perhaps even the week before, that as this unrest in the region began the President asked for more regular updates, approximately the morning update, midday, and end of the day updates. So he is fully informed of what’s happening. And if there are significant occurrences, events, things that happened that he needs to know about in between those times, he finds out about them. He’s very much on top of his.
Q: In terms of him being fully aware, yesterday you guys announced the $30 billion in assets, the freezing of the assets. Are you guys -- does the President know which entities, which U.S. financial institutions have those assets?
MR. CARNEY: I would refer you to the Department of Treasury which is overseeing that....
Q: .... What can you tell us about that in terms of trying to relieve the (oil) price pressure, assure the supply and so forth?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I’ll just say, first of all, that we are very conscious of the fact that a rise in gas prices has a direct effect on American and their wallets. And we’re very conscious of that and we’re monitoring that very closely. We also believe that the international -- the global system has the capacity to deal with a major disruption. And we have, I think I said in a previous briefing, been in discussions with the IEA and others about how you deal with disruptions. We do believe that we can -- we’re just monitoring this situation very carefully....
Q: David Cameron said today that it would be a good idea to find out a little more about the Libyan opposition before going any further with talk of any kind of military intervention. Does the President have any concrete sense of who’s in charge in eastern Libya, or at least who you should be talking to?
MR. CARNEY: Well, the United States is using many channels -- diplomatic, businesses, NGOs -- to reach out to those in Libya who are in the opposition who are interested in creating a government that respects the rights of the people and meets the aspirations of the people. It is -- and I think this must be -- I believe this is probably what the Prime Minister was getting at -- it’s a very fluid situation, but we are reaching out through these different channels to a variety of people who are in the position I just described and broadly describe as the opposition.
Q: I understand that most of the significant NGOs bear the name Qaddafi. Is that a problem?
MR. CARNEY: I don't -- I think the issue is we want to hear from and learn from and talk to those who have a desire to move towards a representative government that is responsive to the aspirations of the people and protects the rights of people. So what it’s called matters far less than what it supports and what it does....
Q: Thank you, Jay. In the last several days in China there’s been some violence against journalists and also detention of them...
MR. CARNEY: Well, what I’ll do in giving you a response now is use the same language we’ve used in response to violence against journalists in those parts of the world that you mentioned. We are aware of reports of foreign journalists being detained or physically harassed in Beijing and we find these reports disturbing. We call on the Chinese government to respect the rights of foreign journalists to report in China, and urge public security authorities to protect the safety and well-being of anyone who is subject to illegal harassment or intimidation.
I believe Ambassador Huntsman at our embassy in Beijing put out a statement, and I refer you to that for more information. But we obviously do not think this is acceptable for journalists not to be able to do their work and to be harassed or detained.
Sorry. Yes.
Q: Jake, I’ve heard you mention representative government and also moving towards democracy. Is it your position that the people in all these countries in the region deserve the right to elect their leaders through elections?
MR. CARNEY: We support democracy. We believe that the peoples of these countries should be able to decide the kind of government they want and pick the leaders -- and elect the leaders that they choose.
Every country is different, and the process for getting there is different. We are not here to dictate outcomes. It is very important we believe that it be recognized that the movements we’ve seen in the Middle East have not been driven by the United States or outside governments or forces; they’ve been internal. And the credibility they have has come because of that -- the organic nature of the unrest and the uprising.
Again, how you get there is different probably in many countries, but the overarching belief that we have is that pluralistic democratic societies that have inclusive governments that respect the rights of their people, that respond to the legitimate grievances of their people, have the potential to be both more prosperous and more stable, and that that in both cases would be a welcome development.
Sam.
Q: Jay, was the President aware of Speaker Boehner’s criticisms this morning before he placed the phone call to the Speaker?
MR. CARNEY: The President is paying very close attention to the debate and he is -- without going into what specific comments he might have been aware of, he’s very well briefed and read into what’s happening regarding the budget debates and the negotiations toward a resolution.
Q: Let me put it this way. Did the President call Speaker Boehner in response to the Speaker saying that the President wasn’t engaged?
MR. CARNEY: No. I was in the Oval Office and I can tell you that he called Speaker Boehner because he felt it was a good time to call him to discuss progress on discussions around a continuing resolution.
Q: Did he mention the comments?
MR. CARNEY: He did not.
Yes, David.
Q: Thanks, Jay. In talking about who the administration is talking to, to find people to deal with Libya, does that include any U.S. oil companies or transnational oil companies? Are you reaching out to them?
MR. CARNEY: Well, again, David, I would just point you to the fact that there are different channels through which we can reach people in the opposition, people who represent groups or who support the idea of a more democratic government, a government that would be responsive to the rights -- respect the rights of the Libyan people and be responsive to their aspirations.
Those channels include diplomatic, businesses, NGOs. So I’m not going to enumerate specifically the channels and who we’re going through or which potential businesses are included in that group, but they do include businesses.
Q: Let me follow up. Is the President satisfied -- has he been satisfied with the state of knowledge that the U.S. government had about internal circumstances within Libya in terms of who to try to talk to?
MR. CARNEY: I’ll just speak broadly that the President feels that his diplomatic corps as well as his intelligence community does an excellent job in informing him on the situations in these countries in the region that have experienced unrest.
Q: You recalled the U.S. ambassador to Libya.
MR. CARNEY: Yes, we did.
Yes, Sheryl.
Q: I have a follow-up, but first, Senator Lugar is cautioning that the State Department needs to be mindful of its funding request. The President has asked for an increase for the State Department of 8.4 percent. Senator Lugar says that given the economic situation we face, all foreign aid is going to have to meet a really tough test. Does the President think that in light of events in the Middle East and North Africa that we need to increase our foreign aid budget? And how does he reconcile that with the spending cut mood on Capitol Hill?
And then just separately, if you could just shed a little more light on how it came to be that Jeb Bush is riding on Air Force One on Friday. Appreciate that, too. (Laughter.)
MR. CARNEY: Well, on the Governor Bush portion of your question, I’ll just -- I’ll say that he recommended this school. He has a record of being engaged in and committed to education reform. Obviously, this is a high priority for the President and he believes very strongly that education reform is neither a Democratic, nor a Republican issue. And I think his pursuit of reform has demonstrated that.
His reforms already have generated a great deal of bipartisan support, and I think that's reflective of the fact that Americans believe it ought to be a priority....
I don't have a sequence of events. I do know that the Governor specifically recommended this school as a good one to showcase in terms of its turnaround efforts. But in terms of who called whom, I don't know....
Q: So on foreign aid, the administration is asking for an increase in the State Department budget. Senator Lugar is saying, hey, we’ve got to cut spending. How important is that increase to the President? What does he think in light of events?
MR. CARNEY: Well, I think the budget the President proposed for 2012 reflects his priorities. It also reflects the fact that he was willing to make very tough choices because he realizes that we all have to live within our means and the federal government needs to live within its means. It includes, as you know, a $400 billion cut over 10 years that's the result of a five-year freeze in non-defense discretionary spending that will bring that portion of our budget to its lowest level of spending as a portion of the overall GDP of any President since Dwight Eisenhower was in office.
And again I would say it reflects his priorities. I’m not going to negotiate line items in the budget, but I will say that it reflects his priorities, and I'll leave it at that.
All right. That's it. Thanks, guys.
FOREIGN POLICY UPDATE
Department of State, March 1, 2011:
Secretary Clinton: Assessing U.S. Foreign Policy Priorities, Needs Amidst Economic Challenges
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton testifies on "Assessing U.S. Foreign Policy Priorities and Needs Amidst Economic Challenges" before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on March 1, 2011.
Department of State, March 1, 2011:
Secretary Clinton's Opening Remarks Before the House Foreign Affairs Committee
Thank you very much, Madame Chairman, and congratulations on your assuming this post. And I want to thank you publicly for traveling to Haiti with our team on behalf of the efforts that the United States is pursuing there. And I also want to thank the Ranking Member for his leadership and support over these last years.
Late last night, I came back from round-the-clock meetings in Geneva to discuss the unfolding events in Libya. And I’d like to begin by offering a quick update.
We have joined the Libyan people in demanding that Qaddafi must go – now, without further violence or delay – and we are working to translate the world’s outrage into action and results.
Marathon diplomacy at the United Nations and with our allies has yielded quick, aggressive steps to pressure and isolate Libya’s leaders. USAID is focused on Libya’s food and medical supplies and is dispatching two expert humanitarian teams to help those fleeing the violence and who are moving into Tunisia and Egypt, which is posing tremendous burdens on those two countries. Our combatant commands are positioning assets to prepare to support these critical civilian humanitarian missions. And we are taking no options off the table so long as the Libyan Government continues to turn its guns on its own people.
The entire region is changing, and a strong and strategic American response is essential. In the years ahead, Libya could become a peaceful democracy, or it could face protracted civil war, or it could descend into chaos. The stakes are high. And this is an unfolding example of using the combined assets of smart power – diplomacy, development, and defense – to protect American security and interests and advance our values. This integrated approach is not just how we respond to the crisis of the moment. It is the most effective – and most cost-effective – way to sustain and advance our security across the world. And it is only possible with a budget that supports all the tools in our national security arsenal – which is what we are here to discuss.
The American people are justifiably concerned about our national debt. I share that concern. But they also want responsible investments in our future that will make us stronger at home and continuing our leadership abroad. Just two years after President Obama and I first asked you to renew our investment in development and diplomacy, we are already seeing tangible returns for our national security:
In Iraq, almost 100,000 troops have come home, and civilians are poised to keep the peace. In Afghanistan, integrated military and civilian surges have helped set the stage for our diplomatic surge to support Afghan-led reconciliation that can end the conflict and put al-Qaida on the run. We have imposed the toughest ever sanctions to rein in Iran’s nuclear ambitions. We have reengaged as a leader in the Pacific and in our own hemisphere. We have signed trade deals to promote American jobs and nuclear weapons treaties to protect our people. We have worked with Northern and Southern Sudanese to achieve a peaceful referendum and prevent a return to civil war. We are working to open up political systems, economies, and societies at a remarkable moment in the history of the Middle East, and to support peaceful, orderly, irreversible democratic transitions in Egypt and Tunisia.
Our progress is significant, but our work is far from over. These missions are vital to our national security, and I believe with all my heart now would be the wrong time to pull back.
The FY 2012 budget we discuss today will allow us to keep pressing ahead. It is a lean budget for lean times. I did launch the first-ever Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review to help us maximize the impact of every dollar we spend. We scrubbed this budget and made painful but responsible cuts. We cut economic assistance to Central and Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia by 15 percent. We cut development assistance to over 20 countries by more than half.
And this year, for the first time, our request is divided into two parts. Our core budget request of $47 billion supports programs and partnerships in every country but North Korea. It is essentially flat from 2010 levels. The second part of our request funds the extraordinary, temporary portion of our war effort the same way that the Pentagon’s request is funded: in a separate Overseas Contingency Operations account known as OCO. Instead of covering our war expenses through supplemental appropriations, we are now taking a more transparent approach that reflects our fully integrated civilian-military efforts on the ground. Our share of the President’s $126 billion request for these exceptional wartime costs in the frontline states is 8.7 billion.
Let me walk you through a few of our key investments. First, this budget funds vital civilian missions in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, al-Qaida is under pressure as never before. Alongside our military offensive, we are engaged in a major civilian effort that is helping to build up the governments, economies, and civil societies of both countries and undercut the insurgency.
Now, these two surges, the military and civilian surge, set the stage for a third: a diplomatic push in support of an Afghan process to split the Taliban from al-Qaida, bring the conflict to an end, and help stabilize the region. Our military commanders are emphatic they cannot succeed without a strong civilian partner. Retreating from our civilian surge in Afghanistan with our troops still in the field would be a grave mistake.
Equally important is our assistance to Pakistan, a nuclear-armed nation with strong ties and interests in Afghanistan. We are working to deepen our partnership and keep it focused on addressing Pakistan’s political and economic challenges as well as our shared threats.
And as to Iraq, after so much sacrifice, we do have a chance to help the Iraqi people build a stable, democratic country in the heart of the Middle East. As troops come home, our civilians are taking the lead, helping Iraqis resolve conflicts peacefully and training their police.
Shifting responsibilities from soldiers to civilians actually saves taxpayers a great deal of money. For example, the military’s total OCO request worldwide will drop by $45 billion from 2010 as our troops come home. Our costs, the State Department and USAID, will increase by less than 4 billion. Every business owner I know would gladly invest $4 to save $45.
Second, even as our civilians help bring today’s wars to a close, we are working to prevent tomorrow’s. This budget devotes over $4 billion to sustaining a strong U.S. presence in volatile places where our security and interests are at stake. In Yemen, it provides security, development, and humanitarian assistance to deny al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula a safe haven and to promote the kind of stability that can lead to a better outcome than what might otherwise occur. It focuses on these same goals in Somalia. It helps Northern and Southern Sudan chart a peaceful future. It helps Haiti rebuild. And it proposes a new Global Security Contingency Fund that would pool resources and expertise with the Defense Department to respond quickly as new challenges emerge.
This budget also strengthens our allies and partners. It trains Mexican police to take on violent cartels and secure our southern border. It provides nearly $3.1 billion for Israel and supports Jordan and the Palestinians. It helps Egypt and Tunisia build stable and credible democracy, and it supports security assistance to over 130 nations.
Now, some may say, well, what does this get us in America? Let me give you one example. Over the years, these funds have created valuable ties with foreign militaries and trained, in Egypt, a generation of officers who refused to fire on their own people. And that was not something that happened overnight. It was something that happened because of relationships that had been built over decades. Across the board, we are working to ensure that all who share the benefits of our spending also share the burdens of addressing common challenges.
Third, we are making targeted investments in human security. We have focused on hunger, disease, climate change, and humanitarian emergencies because these challenges not only threaten the security of individuals – they are the seeds of future conflicts. If we want to lighten the burden on future generations, we have to make investments that makes our world more secure for them.
Our largest investment is in global health programs, including those launched by former President George W. Bush. These programs stabilize entire societies that have been and are being devastated by HIV, malaria, and other diseases. They save the lives of mothers and children and halt the spread of deadly diseases.
Global food prices are approaching an all-time high. Three years ago, this led to protests and riots in dozens of countries. Food security is a cornerstone of global stability, and we are helping farmers grow more food, drive economic growth, and turn aid recipients into trading partners.
Climate change threatens food security, human security, and national security. Our budget builds resilience against droughts, floods, and other weather disasters; promotes clean energy and preserves tropical forests. It also gives us leverage to persuade China, India, and other nations to do their essential part in meeting this urgent threat.
Fourth, we are committed to making our foreign policy a force for domestic economic renewal and creating jobs here at home. We are working aggressively to promote sustained economic growth, level the playing fields, and open markets. To give just one example, the eight Open Skies Agreements that we have signed over the last two years will open dozens of new markets to American carriers. The Miami International Airport, Madam Chairman, which supports nearly 300[i] jobs –including many in your district – will see a great deal of new business thanks to agreements with Miami’s top trading partners, Brazil and Colombia.
Fifth and finally, this budget funds the people and the platforms that make possible everything I’ve described. It allows us to sustain diplomatic relations with 190 countries. It funds political officers who are literally, right now, out working to defuse political crises and promote our values; development officers who are spreading opportunity and promoting stability; and economic officers who wake up every day thinking about how to help put Americans back to work.
Several of you have already asked our Department about the safety of your constituents in the Middle East. Well, this budget also helps fund the consular officers who evacuated over 2,600 people thus far from Egypt and Libya – and nearly 17,000 from Haiti. They issued 14 million passports last year and served as our first line of defense against would-be terrorists seeking visas to enter our country.
I’d like to say just a few words about the funding for the rest of 2011. As I told Speaker Boehner, Chairman Rogers, and many others, the 16 percent cut for State and USAID that passed the House last month would be devastating for our national security. It would force us to scale back dramatically on critical missions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
And as Secretary Gates, Admiral Mullen, General Petraeus have all emphasized to the Congress, we need a fully engaged and fully funded national security team, and that includes State and USAID.
Now, there have always been moments of temptation in our country to resist obligations beyond our borders. But each time we have shrunk from global leadership, events have summoned us back, often cruelly, to reality. We saved money in the short term when we walked away from Afghanistan after the Cold War. But those savings came at an unspeakable cost – one we are still paying, ten years later, in money and lives.
Generations of Americans, including my own, have grown up successful and safe because we chose to lead the world in tackling the greatest challenges. We invested the resources to build up democratic allies and vibrant trading partners. And we did not shy away from defending our values, promoting our interests, and seizing the opportunities of each new era.
I have now traveled more than any Secretary of State in the last two years, and I can tell you from firsthand experience the world has never been in greater need of the qualities that distinguish us: our openness and innovation, our determination, our devotion to universal values. Everywhere I travel, I see people looking to us for leadership. Sometimes I see them after they have condemned us publicly on their television channels and then come to us privately and say we can’t do this without America.
This is a source of great strength, a point of pride, and I believe an unbelievable opportunity for the American people. But it is an achievement. It is not a birthright. It requires resolve and it requires resources.
I look forward to working closely together with you to do what is necessary to keep our country safe and maintain American leadership in this fast-changing world. Thank you, Madam Chairman.