Statement by the President on the Long-Term Recovery Plan After the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
Statement by the President on the Long-Term Recovery Plan
After the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
“I appreciate the hard work, led by Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, to develop this recovery and restoration plan for the Gulf Coast. The BP oil spill has created significant environmental and economic challenges for the region. My Administration is committed to working with the people of the Gulf to help them restore the ecosystems that support them, rebuild their livelihoods and safeguard their health and safety.
“The Mabus report offers a commonsense proposal for a path forward, relying on the ideas and coordination of efforts at the local, state, tribal, and federal levels, as well as of nonprofits and the private sector. I will ask Congress to provide dedicated resources to bolster the recovery effort, but we will not allow the recovery to wait for congressional action. I have asked EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to lead a task force that will coordinate efforts to create healthier, more resilient ecosystems, while also encouraging economic recovery and long-term health issues. In the Gulf, the economy and the environment are locked intrinsically together.
“We recognize that the recovery effort will take new thinking, cooperation, and creativity. But, most of all, it will take time. In the days ahead, we will stand with the people of the Gulf to help restore, rehabilitate, and revitalize the region. And, together, we will finish the job.”
###
President Obama Names Kenneth F. Bohac to Serve as U.S. Marshal
President Obama Names Kenneth F. Bohac to Serve as U.S. Marshal
WASHINGTON- Today, President Obama Nominated Kenneth F. Bohac to serve as a United States Marshal for the Central District of Illinois.
“I am proud to nominate this dedicated public servant as a United States Marshal,” said President Obama. “I am confident that he will serve and protect the American people with distinction.”
Kenneth F. Bohac: Nominee for United States Marshal for the Central District of Illinois
Ken Bohac has dedicated his entire law enforcement career to the United States Marshals Service. In 1995 he became a Deputy U.S. Marshal in Chicago, and was promoted to the position of Senior Investigator in the Urbana Office in 1998. Bohac is also a member of the Marshals Service’s rapid-response unit known as the Special Operations Group (SOG), and in the past has traveled to Iraq in that capacity. He has most recently served as a Judicial Security Inspector with the Marshals Service in its Lexington, Kentucky office. Prior to joining the U.S. Marshals Service, Bohac worked as an accountant and financial systems analyst for several private companies. Bohac was born in Chicago, and received his B.A. in Accounting from Western Illinois University in 1977, and an M.B.A. from Lewis University in 1988.
###
President Obama Names Conner Eldridge to Serve as U.S. Attorney
President Obama Names Conner Eldridge to Serve as U.S. Attorney
WASHINGTON- Today, President Obama nominated Conner Eldridge to serve as the United States Attorney for Western District of Arkansas.
“I am pleased to nominate Conner Eldridge to serve the people of Arkansas as a United States Attorney,” said President Obama.
William Conner Eldridge, Jr.: Nominee for United States Attorney for the Western District of Arkansas
Conner Eldridge has served as a Special Deputy Prosecutor for the Prosecuting Attorney’s Office of Clark County, Arkansas since 2009. Eldridge previously worked for Summit Bank and Summit Bancorp, Inc., from 2004 to 2010, serving in various senior management positions. He was ultimately named Chief Executive Officer in 2008. Following law school, he was a law clerk for the Honorable G. Thomas Eisele of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas from 2003 to 2004. Eldridge graduated from Davidson College in 1999 and from the University of Arkansas School of Law in 2003.
###
President Obama Names Two to U.S. Circuit Courts
President Obama Names Two to U.S. Circuit Courts
WASHINGTON- Today, President Obama nominated Caitlin Halligan for a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and Jimmie V. Reyna to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
“At every step of their careers these individuals have performed with excellence and unwavering integrity,” said President Obama. “I am confident they will serve the American people with distinction on the Circuit Court bench.”
Caitlin Halligan: Nominee for the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Caitlin Halligan is General Counsel for the New York County District Attorney’s Office. She is a nationally-recognized appellate litigator who has practiced extensively before the Supreme Court of the United States, the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the appellate courts of the State of New York.
After graduating from law school, Ms. Halligan served as a law clerk to Judge Patricia M. Wald on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit from 1995 to 1996, and subsequently to Justice Stephen G. Breyer during the Supreme Court’s 1997-98 term. She was an associate at the law firm of Wiley, Rein, and Fielding in Washington, D.C., from 1996 to 1997, and at the law firm of Howard, Smith & Levin LLP in New York in 1998. In 1999, Ms. Halligan joined the Office of the New York State Attorney General, where she initially served as the Office’s first Chief of the Internet Bureau, overseeing legal matters regarding privacy, online consumer fraud and securities trading, and other Internet-related issues. In 2001, she became First Deputy Solicitor General of New York, and later that year was appointed Solicitor General of New York State. As Solicitor General through 2006, Ms. Halligan managed a staff more than 40 appellate attorneys representing New York in federal and state appellate courts. Her national peers selected her in each year from 2001 to 2005 to receive the “Best Brief” award from the National Association of Attorneys General. In 2007, Ms. Halligan became a partner at the firm of Weil, Gotshal and Manges, LLP, in New York, where she led the firm’s appellate practice until she returned to public service in her current role in January 2010.
Ms. Halligan has served as adjunct faculty at Columbia Law School since 2005, where she teaches an advanced seminar on federalism and constitutional law. From 2007 to 2009, she served as pro bono counsel to the Board of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, the entity that is overseeing the rebuilding of Lower Manhattan following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Ms. Halligan was born in Xenia, Ohio, and grew up in several different states, including Arkansas, Missouri, and Pennsylvania. She received her A.B. with honors from Princeton University in 1988 and her J.D. with high honors in 1995 from Georgetown University Law Center, where she served as managing editor of the Georgetown Law Journal.
Jimmie V. Reyna: Nominee for the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jimmie Reyna is a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of the law firm Williams Mullen, PC. He is a renowned international trade lawyer respected for his deep expertise in trade policy, business regulation, and compliance law. He also has a distinguished track record of leadership in the Hispanic legal community.
Reyna joined Williams Mullen as a partner in 1998. Previously, he practiced with the firm of Stewart and Stewart starting as an associate in 1986 and becoming a partner in 1993. His Washington, D.C.-based practice has emphasized work on antidumping and countervailing duty cases, as well as trade policy and trade negotiation matters. Reyna began his legal career in New Mexico as an associate at the insurance defense law firm of Shaffer Butt, Thornton & Baer from 1979-1981, and he had his own law practice in Albuquerque from 1981 to 1986, handling civil rights, domestic relations, immigration, and criminal law matters, in many instances on a pro bono basis.
As a recognized expert in the field of international trade law, Reyna has since 1994 been a U.S. panelist for disputes arising under Chapter 19 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), addressing antidumping and countervailing duty cases. He also has been on the U.S. Indicative List of Non-Governmental Dispute Settlement Panelists for disputes arising under the dispute settlement mechanism of the World Trade Organization (WTO) since 1995. He has published two books on international trade, and has a third, International Trade Laws and Customs Regulations of Latin America, slated for publication later this year.
Reyna served as National President of the Hispanic National Bar Association (HNBA) in 2006-07, and has held several leadership positions on American Bar Association (ABA) committees and sections. He has served on numerous boards and councils, including those of the Community Services for Autistic Adults and Children, the Advisory Council of the Mid-Atlantic Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the National Hispanic Leadership Agenda, the HNBA Foundation, the U.S.-Mexico Law Institute, the Albuquerque Hispano Chamber of Commerce, and the Hispanic Culture Foundation. He was honored with the HNBA’s Extraordinary Leadership award in 2007, and has been named to the “Super Lawyers” list in Washington, DC (2007, 2009, 2010) and nationally (2009), as well as to the “Best Lawyers in America” list (2010 and 2011).
Reyna was born and raised in New Mexico. He received his B.A. from the University of Rochester in 1975 and his J.D. from the University of New Mexico School of Law in 1978.
###
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT AT SIGNING OF THE SMALL BUSINESS JOBS ACT
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT SIGNING OF THE SMALL BUSINESS JOBS ACT
East Room
1:47 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, everybody. (Applause.) Please have a seat. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. I am thrilled to be here on what is an exciting day.
I want to begin by recognizing the members of Congress who fought so hard to pass this bill on behalf of America’s small businesses. A lot of work was involved in this, obviously, but there are a few folks who are here on stage I want to make sure to acknowledge.
First of all, my dear friend — and my senator — from the great state of Illinois, Senator Dick DurbIn. (Applause.) A champion for businesses in Louisiana and around the country, Senator Mary Landrieu is here. (Applause.) A champion of small businesses, Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington is here. (Applause.) And one of the deans of the Senate, and as thoughtful a person about industry and manufacturing as you’ll find — Senator Carl Levin of Michigan. (Applause.)
From the House side, we’ve got Representative Melissa Bean
– also my neighbor from Illinois. (Applause.) And Congressman Al Green from Texas is in the house. (Applause.)
We’ve got a couple of governors here — Governor O’Malley of Maryland, and somebody who has been working so hard on behalf of the great state of Michigan — we are proud of what she’s been doing because it’s really hard work in Michigan right now. But Governor Granholm I think, coming to the end of her term, has just done outstanding work and I want to acknowledge her. (Applause.)
We’ve also got some mayors in the house — and I’m not sure if they’re all here, but I’m going to go ahead and announce them: Mayor Coleman of Columbus, Ohio; Mayor Dickert from Racine, Wisconsin; Mayor Foxx from Charlotte, North Carolina; Mayor Pawlowski of Allentown, Pennsylvania; and Mayor Ravenstahl — whose Steelers won last night — from Pittsburgh. (Applause.) Give them all a big round of applause. (Applause.)
Finally, I want to thank members of my administration who are with us, including our Small Business Administrator and just a terrific advocate for small businesses, Karen Mills is here. Please give her a big round of applause. (Applause.) And our Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner — (applause) — as well as one of my top economic advisors, Gene Sperling, who worked so hard to get this legislation done. (Applause.) Where’s Gene? There he is back there. (Applause.)
And most of all, I want to thank and welcome all the small business owners from across the country who have come to the signing of this bill, many of whom, over the course of the last several months, I’ve had a chance to meet. I visited their facilities, everything from — I’ve seen trucks to pizza to websites to signs. (Laughter.) And we’ve talked about how essential it is that we got this bill done; that it was critical that we cut taxes and make more loans available to entrepreneurs.
And so, today, after a long and tough fight, I am signing a small business jobs bill that does exactly that. (Applause.) It’s good news. It’s good news. (Applause.)
This is important because small businesses produce most of the new jobs in this country. They are the anchors of our Main Streets. They are part of the promise of America –- the idea that if you’ve got a dream and you’re willing to work hard, you can succeed. That’s what leads a worker to leave a job to become her own boss. That’s what propels a basement inventor to sell a new product, or an amateur chef to open a restaurant. It’s this promise that has drawn millions to our shores and made our economy the envy of the world.
Yet, along with the middle class, small businesses have borne the greatest brunt of this recession. They — you — were hit by a one-two punch. The downturn has meant people are spending less, so there’s less demand. And the financial crisis made it difficult for small businesses to get loans.
So when I took office, I put in place a plan — an economic plan to help small businesses. And we were guided by a simple idea: Government can’t guarantee success, but it can knock down barriers to success, like the lack of affordable credit. Government can’t replace — can’t create jobs to replace the millions that we lost in the recession, but it can create the conditions for small businesses to hire more people, through steps like tax breaks.
That’s why we cut taxes for small businesses eight times. We passed a new tax credit for companies that hire unemployed workers –- which is benefiting several of the people with us here today. Guy Brami, from Gelberg Signs, is here in Washington. And he’s making use of this tax break after he hired six workers. Cherrelle Hurt, who runs the As We Grow Child Care and Learning Center in Virginia, has been able to add three new employees.
We also increased the exemption on capital gains taxes for key small business investments to 75 percent. We passed a tax cut so companiescould immediately write off more expenses like new equipment. And as part of health reform, 4 million small business owners could be eligible this year for a health care tax credit worth perhaps tens of thousands of dollars.
Our economic plan has also helped to free up credit, supporting nearly 70,000 new loans to small businesses through expanded SBA lending. This includes some of the business owners who are here today, like Joe Fugere of Tutta Bella Pizzeria in Seattle. I still haven’t tasted the pizza, but he promises I’m going to get some at some point. (Laughter.)
We also waived fees on SBA loans to save folks money on payments. And the emergency steps we took to stabilize the financial system helped to get credit flowing again.
So all told, these steps have made a real difference. But as far as we’ve come, everybody in this room understands we’ve still got a long way to go. I don’t have to tell folks here that small businesses still face hardships, and it’s still too difficult for many creditworthy small business owners to get loans. So there is more we can do to help them grow and to help them hire. And that’s why I began fighting for months to pass this jobs bill –- the most significant step on behalf of our small businesses in more than decade. And once I sign it, it’s going to speed relief to small businesses across this country right away.
So let me just outline what’s in here. First, on top of the eight tax breaks we’ve already passed, we’re adding eight more, which will accelerate more than $55 billion in tax relief over the next year to businesses across the country. Capital gains taxes will be completely eliminated for key investments in small businesses –- driving capital to as many as one million small firms across America –- and, by the way, honoring a promise that I made as a candidate for President.
Four and a half million small businesses and individuals will be immediately — will be eligible to immediately write off more expenses. And that may benefit Ruth Glesser, who is here today and who is opening another restaurant in Alexandria, Virginia.
Two million self-employed Americans will be able to receive a new deduction for health insurance. And we’re also increasing the tax break for anyone looking to open up a business. That’s a $10,000 deduction to help entrepreneurs afford what can often be pretty discouraging start-up costs, because our future prosperity in part depends on whether or not we are creating an environment in which folks can test new ideas, bring new products to market, and generate new businesses.
And that’s not just a challenge for government. It’s a challenge that requires businesses, and leaders, and universities, others to seek out new ways to promote entrepreneurship across this country.
Now, the second thing this bill does is we’re going to make more loans available to small businesses. Right now, there is a waiting list for SBA loans more than 1,400 names long. These are people who are ready to hire and expand, who’ve been approved by their banks, but who’ve been waiting for this legislation to pass. Well, when I sign this bill, their wait will be over. (Applause.) Their wait will be over. Virtually every person on that list will receive the loan they need in a matter of weeks.
Several of the small business owners standing with me today are on this list, including Tony Scovazzo of AJS Consulting Engineers. Where’s Tony? Raise your hand. Tony is right here. (Laughter.) With Tony’s loan, he’ll be able to buy new office space and hire three people to do energy-efficient HVAC work. Terry Dunlap of Tactical Network Solutions — Terry, raise your hand. Terry is on the list. He plans to use his loan to hire as many as five more people.
Noel and Glen Mouritzen are also here. They’ll be able to use a loan to set up a repair shop for helicopters and hire four or five workers. Herb Caudill is on this list. And Herb’s company, Caudill Web, has a good problem: They’ve got more work than they can accept. So with this loan from SBA, he’ll be able to bring one or two new web programmers and designers to take on some new projects.
On top of these loans that will be freed up right away, we’re also more than doubling the size limits of the most popular SBA loans — like the ones that have benefited many of the business owners who are with us here today. Plus, through this bill, we’ll take other steps to promote lending. And this includes our new Small Business Lending Fund designed to help Main Street banks lend to Main Street small businesses across this country. And this bill will also encourage additional private sector lending through innovative efforts at the state level to promote small business and manufacturing — efforts that have too often been constrained by state budget cuts.
So this law will do two big things: It’s going to cut taxes, and it’s going to make more loans available for small business. It’s a great victory for America’s entrepreneurs. (Applause.) It is a great victory for America’s entrepreneurs.
Now, I have to admit, I regret that this bill –- which was based on ideas from both Democrats and Republicans, and drawing support from business groups that don’t normally support me — (laughter) — I regret that this was blocked for months by the Republican minority in the Senate, and that needlessly delayed this relief. But I do want to thank the two Republican senators who bucked this partisanship to help pass this bill, and, obviously, I want to thank all the Democrats who worked so hard to get it passed.
At this difficult time in our country, it’s essential that we keep up the fight for every job, for every new business, for every opportunity to strengthen this economy. That’s what’s being done at the state level by Governor Granholm and Governor O’Malley and governors all across the country. That’s what’s being done by the mayors who are here today, who are fighting day-in, day-out, to help start new businesses that can bring prosperity to their communities.
We’ve got to keep moving forward. That’s why I fought so hard to pass this bill. And that’s why I’m going to continue to do everything in my power to help small businesses open up and hire and expand. And that’s why, with these small business owners standing with me today, I am extraordinarily proud to sign this bill into law. (Applause.)
(The bill is signed.)
THE PRESIDENT: This is the tricky part. (Laughter.) You start running out of letters. (Laughter.) There you go. It’s done. (Applause.)
END 2:04 P.M. EDT
Statement by the Press Secretary on H.R. 6102 and S. 3656
Statement by the Press Secretary on H.R. 6102 and S. 3656
On Monday, September 27, 2010, the President signed into law:
H.R. 6102, which extends a certification deadline related to the Secretary of the Navy’s authority to enter into multiyear contracts for F/A-18E/F and EA-18G fighter aircraft; and
S. 3656, the “Mandatory Price Reporting Act of 2010,” which extends the Livestock Mandatory Price Reporting Act through September 20, 2015, and amends that and other related provisions.
###
President Barack Obama Holds News Conference – September 10, 2010
PRESS CONFERENCE BY PRESIDENT OBAMA
East Room
11:02 A.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Have a seat, everybody. Good morning. Before I take your questions, I just want to talk a little bit about our continuing efforts to dig ourselves out of this recession and to grow our economy.
As I said in Cleveland on Wednesday, I ran for President because I believed the policies of the previous decade had left our economy weaker and our middle class struggling. They were policies that cut taxes, especially for millionaires and billionaires, cut regulations for corporations and for special interests, and left everyone else pretty much fending for themselves. They were policies that ultimately culminated in a financial crisis and a terrible recession that we’re still digging out of today.
We came into office with a different view about how our economy should work. Instead of tax cuts for millionaires, we believe in cutting taxes for middle-class families and small business owners. We’ve done that. Instead of letting corporations play by their own rules, we believe in making sure that businesses treat workers well and consumers friendly, and play by the same rules as everyone else. So we’ve put in place common-sense rules that accomplish that.
Instead of tax breaks that encourage corporations to create jobs overseas, we believe in tax breaks for companies that create jobs right here in the United States of America. And so we’ve begun to do that. We believe in investments that will make America more competitive in the global economy: investments in education and clean energy, in research and technology. And we’re making those investments.
So these are the principles that have guided us over the last 19 months. And these are the principles that form the basis of the additional economic proposals that I offered this week. Because even though the economy is growing again, and we’ve added more than 750,000 private sector jobs this year, the hole the recession left was huge and progress has been painfully slow. Millions of Americans are still looking for work. Millions of families are struggling to pay their bills or the mortgage. And so these proposals are meant to both accelerate job growth in the short term and strengthen the economy in the long run.
These proposals include a more generous, permanent extension of the tax credit that goes to companies for all the research and innovation that they do here in America. And I’ve proposed that all American businesses should be allowed to write off all the investments they do in 2011. This will help small businesses upgrade their plants and equipment, and will encourage large corporations to get off the sidelines and start putting their profits to work in our economy.
We also announced a six-year plan to rebuild America’s roads and railways and runways. Already our investments in infrastructure are putting folks in the construction industry back to work. And this plan would put thousands more back to work, and it would help us remain competitive with countries in Europe and Asia that have already invested heavily in projects like high-speed railroads.
But one thing we can do next week is end a month-long standoff on a small business jobs bill that’s been held up in the Senate by a partisan minority. I realize there are plenty of issues in Washington where people of good faith simply disagree on principle. This should not and is not one of those issues.
This is a bill that does two main things: It gives small business owners tax cuts, and it helps them get loans. It will eliminate capital gains taxes for key investments in 1 million small businesses. It will provide incentives to invest and create jobs for 4 million small businesses. It will more than double the amount some small business owners can borrow to grow their companies. It’s a bill that’s paid for, a bill that won’t add to the deficit. It has been written by Democrats and Republicans. It’s a bill that’s been praised by the Chamber of Commerce. And yet a minority of Republican senators have been using legislative tactics to prevent the bill from even getting to a vote.
Now, I was pleased to see that yesterday, Republican Senator George Voinovich of Ohio said he would refuse to support this blockade any longer. Senator Voinovich said, “This country is really hurting,” and “We don’t have time anymore to play games.” I could not agree more.
I understand there’s an election coming up. But the American people didn’t send us here to think about our jobs. They sent us here to think about theirs. And there are small businesses right now who are putting off plans to hire more workers because this bill is stalled. That’s not the kind of leadership this country deserves. And I hope we can now move forward to get small business owners the relief they need to start hiring and growing again.
And while we’re on the subject of economics, I also want to make an announcement about my economic team. This week, Christina Romer returned to Berkeley after a tireless, outstanding tenure as Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers. Christy is brilliant, she is dedicated, and she was part of the team that helped save this country from a depression. So we’re going to miss her dearly. But today, I’m happy to announce Austan Goolsbee as her replacement.
Austan has been one of my good friends and close economic advisors for many years. He’s one of the finest economists in the country, and he’s worked as a member of the Council of Economic Advisers since we arrived here in Washington. He’s not just a brilliant economist, he’s someone who has a deep appreciation of how the economy affects everyday people, and he talks about it in a way that’s easily understood. He already knows and works with the rest of the team very well. I have complete confidence he’s going to do an outstanding job as CEA Chair.
And finally, tomorrow we will commemorate not only the heartbreak of September 11th, but also the enduring values and resilient spirit of America. Both Michelle and I will be joining our fellow citizens in remembering those who were lost on that day and honoring all who exhibited such extraordinary heroism in the midst of tragedy. I’ll have further remarks tomorrow, but for now let me just note that tomorrow is a National Day of Service and Remembrance and I hope each of us finds a way to serve our fellow citizens — not only to reaffirm our deepest values as Americans, but to rekindle that spirit of unity and common purpose that we felt in the days that followed that September morning.
And now I’d be happy to take some questions, and I’m going to start with Darlene Superville of AP.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. You said this week that Democrats wouldn’t do well in the November elections if it turns out to be a referendum on the economy. But with millions of people out of work and millions of people losing their homes, how could it not be a referendum on the economy and your handling of it, and why would you not welcome that?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the — what I said was that if it was just a referendum on whether we’ve made the kind of progress that we need to, then people around the country would say we’re not there yet. If the election is about the policies that are going to move us forward versus the policies that will get us back into a mess, then I think the Democrats will do very well. And here’s why.
As I just indicated, middle-class families had been struggling for a decade, before I came into office. Their wages and incomes had flat-lined. They were seeing the cost of everything from health care to sending their kids to college going up. Job growth was the weakest of any economic expansion between 2001 and 2008 since World War II. The pace was slower than it’s been over the last year.
So these policies of cutting taxes for the wealthiest Americans, of stripping away regulations that protect consumers, running up a record surplus to a record deficit — those policies finally culminated in the worst financial crisis we’ve had since the Great Depression. And for 19 months, what we have done is steadily worked to avoid a depression, to take an economy that was contracting rapidly and making it grow again; a situation where we were losing 750,000 jobs a month, and now we’ve had eight consecutive months of private sector job growth; and made investments that are going to strengthen the economy over the long term.
But we’re not there yet. We lost 4 million jobs in the six months before I was sworn in, and we lost 8 million jobs total during the course of this recession. That is a huge hole to dig ourselves out of. And people who have lost their jobs around the country and can’t find one, moms who are sending out resumes and not getting calls back, worried about losing homes and not being able to pay bills — they’re not feeling good right now. And I understand that.
And I ran precisely because I did not think middle-class families in this country were getting a fair shake. And I ran because I felt that we had to have a different economic philosophy in order to grow that middle class and grow our economy over the long term.
Now, for all the progress we’ve made, we’re not there yet. And that means that people are frustrated and that means people are angry. And since I’m the President and Democrats have controlled the House and the Senate, it’s understandable that people are saying, what have you done.
But between now and November, what I’m going to remind the American people of is that the policies that we have put in place have moved us in the right direction, and the policies that the Republicans are offering right now are the exact policies that got us into this mess. It’s not a situation where they went and reflected, and said to themselves, you know what, we didn’t do some things right and so we’ve got a whole bunch of new ideas out here that we want to present to you that we think are going to help put us on the path of strong growth — that’s not what happens. The chairman of their committee has said, we would do the exact same things as we did before Obama took office. Well, we know where that led.
And a perfect example is the debate we’re having on taxes right now. I have said that middle-class families need tax relief right now. And I’m prepared to work on a bill and sign a bill this month that would ensure that middle-class families get tax relief. Ninety-seven percent of Americans make less than $250,000 a year — $250,000 a year or less. And I’m saying we can give those families — 97 percent permanent tax relief. And by the way, for those who make more than $250,000, they’d still get tax relief on the first $250,000; they just wouldn’t get it for income above that.
Now, that seems like a common-sense thing to do. And what I’ve got is the Republicans holding middle-class tax relief hostage because they’re insisting we’ve got to give tax relief to millionaires and billionaires to the tune of about $100,000 per millionaire, which would cost over the course of 10 years, $700 billion, and that economists say is probably the worst way to stimulate the economy. That doesn’t make sense, and that’s an example of what this election is all about.
If you want the same kinds of skewed policies that led us to this crisis, then the Republicans are ready to offer that. But if you want policies that are moving us out, even though you may be frustrated, even though change isn’t happening as fast as you’d like, then I think Democrats are going to do fine in November.
Caren.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. You’re looking for Republican help on the economic proposals that you unveiled this week, and you also mentioned the small business bill. But you’re at odds with them over tax cuts. Is there room for a middle ground whereby, for example, the tax cuts on the wealthy could be extended for a period of time, and then allowed to expire?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, certainly there is going to be room for discussion. My hope is, is that on this small business bill that is before the Senate right now, that we actually make some progress. I still don’t understand why we didn’t pass that two months ago. As I said, this was written by Democrats and Republicans. This is a bill that traditionally you’d probably get 90 percent or 100 percent Republican support. But we’ve been playing politics for the last several months. And if the Republican leadership is prepared to get serious about doing something for families that are hurting out there, I would love to talk to them.
Now, on the high-income tax cuts, my position is let’s get done what we all agree on. What they’ve said is they agree that the middle class tax cut should be made permanent. Let’s work on that. Let’s do it. We can have a further conversation about how they want to spend an additional $700 billion to give an average of $100,000 to millionaires. That, I think, is a bad idea. If you were going to spend that money, there are a lot better ways of spending it. But more to the point, these are the same folks who say that they’re concerned about the deficits. Why would we borrow money on policies that won’t help the economy and help people who don’t need help?
But setting that aside, we’ve got an area of agreement, which is, let’s help families out there who are having a tough time. As I said, we could, this month, give every American certainty and tax relief up to $250,000 a year. Every single American would benefit from that. Now, people who make $250,000 a year or less, they’d benefit on all their income. People who make a million dollars would benefit on a quarter of their income. But the point is, is that that’s something that we can all agree to. Why hold it up? Why hold the middle class hostage in order to do something that most economists don’t think makes sense?
Q So are you ruling out a deal with Republicans on tax cuts for the wealthiest?
THE PRESIDENT: What I’m saying is let’s do what we agreed to and that the Americans — people overwhelmingly agreed to, which is let’s give certainty to families out there that are having a tough time.
Chip Reid.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. On the economic package that you rolled out earlier this week, first on the business tax cuts. Why did you wait until this superheated campaign season to roll it out? A lot of your critics and even some Democrats say, well, clearly he’s just using this for political purposes, he doesn’t have any expectation it’s actually going to be passed, it’s a political weapon. Why did you wait so long to bring that out?
And on the stimulus part, we can’t get people in the White House to say it is a stimulus — $50 billion for roads and other infrastructure, but they avoid the word “stimulus” like the plague. Is that because the original stimulus is so deeply unpopular? And if so, why is it so unpopular?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me — let me go back to when I first came into office. We had an immediate task, which was to rescue an economy that was tipping over a cliff. And we put in place an economic plan that 95 percent of economists say substantially helped us avoid a depression.
A third of those were tax cuts, by the way. A third of that economic plan was tax cuts for individuals and for small businesses. So we haven’t — this notion that we waited until now to put forward a series of plans, Chip, we’ve — just on the small business issue alone, we have cut taxes for small businesses eight times during the course of the last 18 months. So we’re hardly Johnnie-come-latelys on this issue.
Now, when you put all the things we’ve done together, it has made a difference. Three million people have jobs that wouldn’t have them otherwise had we not taken these steps. The economy would be in much worse shape. But as I said before, we’re not where we need to go yet — which means that if we’re not there yet, what else can we do?
And the proposals that we’ve put forward are ones that historically, again, have garnered bipartisan support: a research and development tax credit so that companies that are investing in research here in the United States — which is part of what’s going to keep us growing and keep us innovative — let’s make sure that companies are strongly incentivized to do that. Making sure that their expensing accelerated business depreciation is happening in 2011, so that if companies are sort of sitting on the sidelines right now, not sure whether they should invest, let’s give them incentive to go ahead and invest now to give that a jumpstart.
On infrastructure, we’ve got a highway bill that traditionally is done every six years. And what we’re saying is let’s ramp up what we’re doing, let’s beef it up a little bit — because we’ve got this infrastructure all across the country that everybody from governors to mayors to economists to engineers of all political stripes have said is holding us back in terms of our long-term competitiveness — let’s get started now rebuilding America.
And in terms of paying for some of these things, let’s stop giving tax breaks to companies that are shipping jobs overseas, let’s stop incentivizing that. Let’s give tax breaks to companies that are investing right here in the United States of America.
Those are all common-sense approaches. Historically, as you know, you’ve been around this town for a long time — usually, Republicans and Democrats agree on infrastructure. Usually, Republicans and Democrats agree on making sure that research and development investments are made right here in the United States. And so let’s get it done.
It has nothing to do with the notion that somehow what we did previously didn’t work. It worked. It just hasn’t done as much as we need it to do. We’ve still got a long ways to go and we’re going to keep on doing it.
Q So this is a second stimulus? (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Here’s how I would — there is no doubt that everything we’ve been trying to do — everything we’ve been trying to do is designed to stimulate growth and additional jobs in the economy. I mean, that’s our entire agenda. So I have no problem with people saying the President is trying to stimulate growth and hiring. Isn’t that what I should be doing? I would assume that’s what the Republicans think we should do, to stimulate growth and jobs. And I will keep on trying to stimulate growth and jobs for as long as I’m President of the United States.
Hans Nichols.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. (Inaudible) — I’ll ask my real question. It’s now been more than two months since the financial reg reform bill has passed. A centerpiece of that was what you talked about as a consumer financial protection bureau. And yet you haven’t named a head. Is Elizabeth Warren still a leading candidate? And if not, are you worried about some sort of Senate hurdle for her confirmation? Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: This is a great opportunity to talk to the American people about what I do think is going to be hugely helpful to middle-class families in the years and decades to come, and that is an agency that has been set up, an independent agency, whose sole job is to protect families in their financial transactions. So if you are getting a credit card, we are going to have an agency that makes sure that that credit card company can’t jack up your rates without any reason — including on old balances. And that could save American consumers tens of billions of dollars just in the first couple of years.
If you are out there looking for a mortgage — and we all know that part of the problem with the financial crisis was that folks were peddling mortgages that were unstable, that had these huge balloon payments that people didn’t fully understand well. Now there’s going to be some oversight in terms of how mortgages are shaped, and people are going to actually have to know what they’re getting and what they’re buying into. That’s going to protect the economy, as well as individual consumers.
So this agency I think has the capacity to really provide middle-class families the kind of protection that’s been lacking for too long.
Now, the idea for this agency was Elizabeth Warren’s. She’s a dear friend of mine. She’s somebody I’ve known since I was in law school. And I have been in conversations with her. She is a tremendous advocate for this idea. It’s only been a couple of months, and this is a big task standing up this entire agency, so I’ll have an announcement soon about how we’re going to move forward. And I think what’s fair to say is, is that I have had conversations with Elizabeth over the course of these — over these last couple of months. But I’m not going to make an official announcement until it’s ready.
Q Are you unofficially concerned about a Senate confirmation?
THE PRESIDENT: I’m concerned about all Senate confirmations these days. I mean, if I nominate somebody for dog catcher –
Q But with respect to Elizabeth Warren, are you –
THE PRESIDENT: Hans, I wasn’t trying to be funny. I am concerned about all Senate nominations these days. I’ve got people who have been waiting for six months to get confirmed who nobody has an official objection to and who were voted out of committee unanimously, and I can’t get a vote on them.
We’ve got judges who are pending. We’ve got people who are waiting to help us on critical issues like homeland security. And it’s very hard when you’ve got a determined minority in the Senate that insists on a 60-vote filibuster on every single person that we’re trying to confirm, even if after we break the filibuster, it turns out that they get 90 votes. They’re just playing games. And as I think Senator Voinovich said very well, it’s time to stop playing games.
All right. Chuck Todd.
Q Given the theme, I think, of all of your answers, I’ve just got a short question for you. How have you changed Washington?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I’ll tell you how we’ve changed Washington. Prior to us getting here, as I indicated before, you had a set of policies that were skewed toward special interests, skewed towards the most powerful, and ordinary families out there were being left behind. And since we’ve gotten here, whether it’s making sure that folks who can’t get health insurance because of preexisting condition can now get health insurance, or children who didn’t have coverage now have coverage; whether it’s making sure that credit card companies have to actually post in understandable ways what your credit card rates are and they can’t jack up existing balances in arbitrary ways; whether it’s making sure that we’ve got clean water and clean air for future generations; whether it’s making sure that tax cuts go to families that need it as opposed to folks who don’t — on a whole range of issues over the last 18 months, we’ve put in place policies that are going to help grow a middle class and lay the foundation for long-term economic growth.
Now, if you’re asking why haven’t I been able to create a greater spirit of cooperation in Washington, I think that’s fair. I’m as frustrated as anybody by it. I think part of it has to do with the fact that when we came into office, we came in under very tough economic circumstances, and I think that some of the Republican leaders made a decision, we’re going to sit on the sidelines and let the Democrats try to solve it. And so we got a lot of resistance very early.
I think what’s also true is that when you take on tough issues like health care or financial regulatory reform, where special interests are deeply entrenched, there’s a lot of money at stake for them, and where the issues are so complicated that it drags on for a long time, you end up having a lot of big fights here in town. And it’s messy. And it’s frustrating.
Q (Inaudible) –
THE PRESIDENT: Well — and so there is no doubt that an option that was available to me when I came in was not to take on those issues. I mean, we could had decided, you know what, even though we know that the pace of accelerating health care costs is going to bankrupt this economy and bankrupt businesses and bankrupt individuals, and even though we know that there are 30 million people, and that’s a growing number of people, who don’t have health insurance, we could have said, you know what, that’s just too controversial, let’s not take it on. And we could have said with respect to financial regulatory reform, you know what, we’re just going to get too much resistance from Republicans, we shouldn’t take that on.
I don’t think that’s the kind of leadership that the American people would want from their President. And are there things that I might have done during the course of 18 months that would at the margins have improved some of the tone in Washington? Probably. Is some of this just a core difference in approach in terms of how we move this forward between Democrats and Republicans? I’d say the answer is a lot more the latter.
Anne Kornblut.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Nine years after the September 11th attacks, why do you think it is that we are now seeing such an increase in suspicion and outright resentment of Islam, especially given that it has been one of your priorities to increase — to improve relations with the Muslim world?
THE PRESIDENT: I think that at a time when the country is anxious generally and going through a tough time, then fears can surface, suspicions, divisions can surface in a society. And so I think that plays a role in it.
One of the things that I most admired about President Bush was after 9/11, him being crystal-clear about the fact that we were not at war with Islam. We were at war with terrorists and murderers who had perverted Islam, had stolen its banner to carry out their outrageous acts. And I was so proud of the country rallying around that idea, that notion that we are not going to be divided by religion; we’re not going to be divided by ethnicity. We are all Americans. We stand together against those who would try to do us harm.
And that’s what we’ve done over the last nine years. And we should take great pride in that. And I think it is absolutely important now for the overwhelming majority of the American people to hang on to that thing that is best in us, a belief in religious tolerance, clarity about who our enemies are — our enemies are al Qaeda and their allies who are trying to kill us, but have killed more Muslims than just about anybody on Earth. We have to make sure that we don’t start turning on each other.
And I will do everything that I can as long as I am President of the United States to remind the American people that we are one nation under God, and we may call that God different names but we remain one nation. And as somebody who relies heavily on my Christian faith in my job, I understand the passions that religious faith can raise. But I’m also respectful that people of different faiths can practice their religion, even if they don’t subscribe to the exact same notions that I do, and that they are still good people, and they are my neighbors and they are my friends, and they are fighting alongside us in our battles.
And I want to make sure that this country retains that sense of purpose. And I think tomorrow is a wonderful day for us to remind ourselves of that.
Natasha Mozgovaya of Haaretz. Is she here? Natasha — there you are back there.
Q Mr. President, back in the region, the Palestinian and Israeli leaders, they sound a bit less ready for this historic compromise. President Abbas, for example, said the Palestinians won’t recognize Israel as a Jewish state. The question is, if these talks fail at an early stage, will this administration disengage? Or maybe you’re ready to step up and deepen your personal involvement.
THE PRESIDENT: President Abbas and Prime Minister Netanyahu were here last week, and they came with a sense of purpose and seriousness and cordiality that, frankly, exceeded a lot of people’s expectations. What they said was that they were serious about negotiating. They affirmed the goal of creating two states, living side by side in peace and security. They have set up a schedule where they’re going to meet every two weeks. We are actively participating in that process. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be flying to the Middle East for the first series of next meetings on September 14th and 15th.
And so what we’ve done is to bring the parties together to try to get them to recognize that the path for Israeli security and Palestinian sovereignty can only be met through negotiations. And these are going to be tough negotiations. There are enormous hurdles between now and our endpoint, and there are going to be a whole bunch of folks in the region who want to undermine these negotiations. We saw it when Hamas carried out these horrific attacks against civilians — and explicitly said, we’re going to try to do this to undermine peace talks. There are going to be rejectionists who suggest that it can’t happen, and there are also going to be cynics who just believe that the mistrust between the sides is too deep.
We understood all that. We understood that it was a risk for us to promote these discussions. But it is a risk worth taking. Because I firmly believe that it is in America’s national security interests, as well as Israel’s national security interests, as well as in the interests of the Palestinian people, to arrive at a peace deal.
Part of the reason that I think Prime Minister Netanyahu was comfortable coming here was that he’s seen, during the course of 18 months, that my administration is unequivocal in our defense of Israel’s security. And we’ve engaged in some unprecedented cooperation with Israel to make sure that they can deal with any external threats. But I think he also came here understanding that to maintain Israel as a Jewish state that is also a democratic state, this issue has to be dealt with.
I think President Abbas came here, despite great misgivings and pressure from the other side, because he understood the window for creating a Palestinian state is closing. And there are a whole bunch of parties in the region who purport to be friends of the Palestinians and yet do everything they can to avoid the path that would actually lead to a Palestinian state, would actually lead to their goal.
And so the two parties need each other. That doesn’t mean it’s going to work. Ultimately it’s going to be up to them. We can facilitate; we can encourage; we can tell them that we will stand behind them in their efforts and are willing to contribute as part of the broader international community in making this work. But ultimately the parties have to make these decisions for themselves.
And I remain hopeful, but this is going to be tough. And I don’t want anybody out there thinking that it’s going to be easy. The main point I want to make is it’s a risk worth taking because the alternative is a status quo that is unsustainable.
And so if these talks break down, we’re going to keep on trying. Over the long term, it has the opportunity, by the way, also to change the strategic landscape in the Middle East in a way that would be very helpful. It would help us deal with an Iran that has not been willing to give up its nuclear program. It would help us deal with terrorist organizations in the region. So this is something in our interest. We’re not just doing this to feel good. We’re doing it because it will help secure America as well.
Jake Tapper.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. A couple questions. First, were you concerned at all when you — when the administration had Secretary of Defense Gates call this pastor in Florida that you were elevating somebody who is clearly from the fringe?
And then more substantively, on health care reform, this is six months since health care passed. You pledged, A, that you would bend the cost curve, and B, that you Democrats would be able to campaign on this. And CMS reported yesterday that the cost curve is actually bending up, from 6.1 percent to 6.3 percent, post-health care legislation. And the only Democrats I’ve seen talking about health care legislation are running TV ads saying that they voted against it.
Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: With respect to the individual down in Florida, let me just say — let me repeat what I said a couple of days ago. The idea that we would burn the sacred texts of someone else’s religion is contrary to what this country stands for. It’s contrary to what this country — this nation was founded on. And my hope is, is that this individual prays on it and refrains from doing it.
But I’m also Commander-in-Chief, and we are seeing today riots in Kabul, riots in Afghanistan, that threaten our young men and women in uniform. And so we’ve got an obligation to send a very clear message that this kind of behavior or threats of action put our young men and women in harm’s way. And it’s also the best imaginable recruiting tool for al Qaeda.
And although this may be one individual in Florida, part of my concern is to make sure that we don’t start having a whole bunch of folks all across the country think this is the way to get attention. This is a way of endangering our troops — our sons and daughters, fathers and mothers, husbands and wives who are sacrificing for us to keep us safe. And you don’t play games with that.
So I hardly think we’re the ones who elevated this story. But it is, in the age of the Internet, something that can cause us profound damage around the world, and so we’ve got to take it seriously.
With respect to health care, what I said during the debate is the same thing I’m saying now and it’s the same thing I will say three or four years from now. Bending the cost curve on health care is hard to do. We’ve got hundreds of thousands of providers and doctors and systems and insurers. And what we did was we took every idea out there about how to reduce or at least slow the costs of health care over time.
But I said at the time, it wasn’t going to happen tomorrow, it wasn’t going to happen next year. It took us decades to get into a position where our health care costs were going up 6, 7, 10 percent a year. And so our goal is to slowly bring down those costs.
Now, we’ve done so also by making sure that 31 million people who aren’t getting health insurance are going to start getting it. And we have now implemented the first phase of health care in a way that, by the way, has been complimented even by the opponents of health care reform. It has been smooth. And right now middle-class families all across America are going to be able to say to themselves, starting this month, if I’ve got a kid who is under 26 and doesn’t have health insurance, that kid can stay on my health insurance. If I’ve got a child with a preexisting condition, an insurer can’t deny me coverage. If I get sick and I’ve got health insurance, that insurance company can’t arbitrarily drop my coverage.
There are 4 million small businesses around the country who are already eligible and in some cases will be receiving a 35 percent tax break on health care for their employees. And I’ve already met small businesses around the country who say, because of that, I’m going to be able to provide health care for my employees, I thought it was the right thing to do. So –
Q — the CMS study from February predicted a 6.1 percent increase, and now, post-health care, 6.3 percent. So it seems to have bent it up.
THE PRESIDENT: No, as I said, Jake, the — I haven’t read the entire study. Maybe you have. But if you — if what — the reports are true, what they’re saying is, is that as a consequence of us getting 30 million additional people health care, at the margins that’s going to increase our costs, we knew that. We didn’t think that we were going to cover 30 million people for free, but that the long-term trend in terms of how much the average family is going to be paying for health insurance is going to be improved as a consequence of health care.
And so our goal on health care is, if we can get, instead of health care costs going up 6 percent a year, it’s going up at the level of inflation, maybe just slightly above inflation, we’ve made huge progress. And by the way, that is the single most important thing we could do in terms of reducing our deficit. That’s why we did it. That’s why it’s important, and that’s why we’re going to implement it effectively.
Q Sorry, and then the House Democrats running against health care — if you could comment on that.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, there are — we’re in a political season where every candidate out there has their own district, their own makeup, their own plan, their own message. And in an environment where we’ve still got 9.5 percent unemployment, people are going to make the best argument they can right now. And they’re going to be taking polls of what their particular constituents are saying, and trying to align with that oftentimes. That’s how political races work.
April Ryan.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. I want to ask a couple questions. On the economy, could you discuss your efforts at reviewing history as it relates to the poverty agenda, meaning LBJ and Dr. King? And also, since Senate Republicans are holding up the issue of Cobell and Pigford, too, can you make any assurances before you leave office that you will make sure that those awards are funded?
THE PRESIDENT: Let me take the second question first. For those who aren’t familiar, Cobell and Pigford relate to settlements surrounding historic discrimination against minority farmers who weren’t oftentimes provided the same benefits as everybody else under the USDA.
It is a fair settlement. It is a just settlement. We think it’s important for Congress to fund that settlement. We’re going to continue to make it a priority.
With respect to the history of fighting poverty, I got my start in public service as a community organizer working in the shadow steel plants that had been closed in some of the poorest neighborhoods on the South Side of Chicago. That’s what led me to want to serve. And so I am constantly thinking about how do we create ladders for communities and individuals to climb into the middle class.
Now, I think the history of anti-poverty efforts is, is that the most important anti-poverty effort is growing the economy and making sure there are enough jobs out there — single most important thing we can do. It’s more important than any program we could set up. It’s more important than any transfer payment that we could have. If we can grow the economy faster and create more jobs, then everybody is swept up into that virtuous cycle. And if the economy is shrinking and things are going badly, then the folks who are most vulnerable are going to be those poorest communities.
So what we want to focus on right now is broad-based job growth and broad-based economic expansion. And we’re doing so against some tough headwinds, because, as I said, we are coming out of a very difficult — very difficult time. We’ve started to turn the corner but we’re not there yet.
And so that is going to be my central focus: How do I grow the economy? How do I make sure that there’s more job growth?
That doesn’t mean that there aren’t some targeted things we can do to help communities that are especially in need. And probably the most important thing we can do after growing the economy generally is how can we improve school systems in low-income communities. And I am very proud of the efforts that we’ve made on education reform — which have received praise from Democrats and Republicans. This is one area where actually we’ve seen some good bipartisan cooperation.
And the idea is very simple. If we can make sure that we have the very best teachers in the classroom, if we can reward excellence instead of mediocrity and the status quo, if we can make sure that we’re tracking progress in real, serious ways and we’re willing to make investments in what goes on in the classroom and not the school bureaucracy, and reward innovation, then schools can improve. There are models out there of schools in the toughest inner-city neighborhood that are now graduating kids, 90 percent of whom are going to college. And the key is how do we duplicate those?
And so what our Race to the Top program has done is it’s said to every state around the country, instead of just getting money based on a formula, we want you to compete. Show us how you are reforming your school systems to promote excellence, based on proven ideas out there. And if you do that, we’re going to reward you with some extra money. And just the competition alone has actually spurred 46 states so far to initiate legislation designed to reform the school system.
So we’re very proud of that, and that I think is going to be one of the most important things we can do. It’s not just, by the way, K-12. It’s also — it’s also higher education. And as a consequence of a battle that we had — and it was a contentious battle — in Congress, we’ve been able to take tens of billions of dollars that were going to banks and financial intermediaries in the student loan program and said we’re going to give that money directly to students so that they get more help going to college. And obviously poor kids are the ones who are going to benefit most from those programs.
Helene Cooper.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Two questions. One on Afghanistan. How can you lecture Hamid Karzai about corruption when so many of these corrupt people are on the U.S. payroll?
And on the Middle East, do you believe that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should extend the settlement moratorium as a gesture to peace? And if he doesn’t, what are you prepared to do to stop the Palestinians from walking?
THE PRESIDENT: Okay. On Afghanistan, we are in the midst of a very difficult but very important project. I just want to remind people why we’re there — the day before September 11th. We’re there because that was the place where al Qaeda launched an attack that killed 3,000 Americans. And we want to make sure that we dismantle al Qaeda, and that Afghanistan is never again used as a base for attacks against Americans and the American homeland.
Now, Afghanistan is also the second poorest country in the world. It’s got an illiteracy rate of 70 percent. It has a multiethnic population that mistrusts, oftentimes, each other. And it doesn’t have a tradition of a strong, central government.
So what we have done is to say we are going to, after seven years of drift, after seven years of policies in which, for example, we weren’t even effectively training Afghan security forces, what we’ve done is to say we’re going to work with the Afghan government to train Afghan security forces so they can be responsible for their own security. We are going to promote a political settlement in the region that can help to reduce the violence. We are going to encourage a Afghan government that can deliver services for its people. And we’re going to try to make sure that as part of helping President Karzai stand up a broadly accepted, legitimate government, that corruption is reduced.
And we’ve made progress on some of those fronts. I mean, when it comes to corruption, I’ll just give you an example. Four years ago, 11 judges in the Afghan legal system were indicted for corruption. This year, 86 were indicted for corruption. We have seen Afghan-led efforts that have gone after police commanders, significant business people in Afghanistan. But we’re a long way from where we need to be on that.
And every time I talk to President Karzai I say that, as important as it is for us to help you train your military and your police forces, the only way that you are going to have a stable government over the long term is if the Afghan people feel that you’re looking out for them. And that means making sure that the tradition of corruption in the government is reduced.
And we’re going to keep on putting pressure on them on that front. Is it going to happen overnight? Probably not. Are there going to be occasions where we look and see that some of our folks on the ground have made compromises with people who are known to have engaged in corruption? We’re reviewing all that constantly and there may be occasions where that happens.
And I think you’re certainly right, Helene, that we’ve got to make sure that we’re not sending a mixed message here. So one of the things that I’ve said to my national security team is let’s be consistent, in terms of how we operate, across agencies. Let’s make sure that our efforts there are not seen as somehow giving a wink and a nod to corruption. If we are saying publicly that that’s important, then our actions have to match up across the board. But it is a challenging environment in which to do that.
Now, with respect to Prime Minister Netayanhu and the Middle East, a major bone of contention during the course of this month is going to be the potential lapse of the settlement moratorium. The irony is, is that when Prime Minister Netanyahu put the moratorium in place, the Palestinians were very skeptical. They said this doesn’t do anything. And it turns out, to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s credit and to the Israeli government’s credit, the settlement moratorium has actually been significant. It has significantly reduced settlement construction in the region. And that’s why now the Palestinians say, you know what, even though we weren’t that keen on it at first or we thought it was just window dressing, it turns out that this is important to us.
What I’ve said to Prime Minister Netanyahu is that, given, so far, the talks are moving forward in a constructive way, it makes sense to extend that moratorium so long as the talks are moving in a constructive way. Because, ultimately, the way to solve these problems is for the two sides to agree what’s going to be Israel, what’s going to be the state of Palestine. And if you can get that agreement, then you can start constructing anything that the people of Israel see fit in undisputed areas.
Now, I think the politics for Prime Minister Netanyahu are very difficult. His coalition — I think there are a number of members of his coalition who’ve said, we don’t want to continue this. And so one of the things that I’ve said to President Abbas is, you’ve got to show the Israeli public that you are serious and constructive in these talks so that the politics for Prime Minister Netanyahu — if he were to extend the settlements moratorium — would be a little bit easier.
And one of the goals I think that I’ve set for myself and for my team is to make sure that President Abbas and Prime Minister Netanyahu start thinking about how can they help the other succeed, as opposed to how do they figure out a way for the other to fail. Because if they’re going to be successful in bringing about what they now agree is the best course of action for their people, the only way they’re going to succeed is if they are seeing the world through the other person’s eyes. And that requires a personal relationship and building trust. Hopefully, these meetings will help do that.
Ann Compton.
Q Mr. President, what does it say about the status of American system of justice when so many of those who are thought to be plotters for September 11th or accused, suspected terrorists are still awaiting any kind of trial? Are you — why are you still convinced that a civilian trial is correct for Sheikh — Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? And why has that stalled? And will Guantanamo remain open for another year?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we have succeeded on delivering a lot of campaign promises that we made. One where we’ve fallen short is closing Guantanamo. I wanted to close it sooner. We have missed that deadline. It’s not for lack of trying. It’s because the politics of it are difficult.
Now, I am absolutely convinced that the American justice system is strong enough that we should be able to convict people who murdered innocent Americans, who carried out terrorist attacks against us. We should be able to lock them up and make sure that they don’t see the light of day. We can do that. We’ve done it before. We’ve got people who engaged in terrorist attacks who are in our prisons, maximum security prisons, all across the country.
But this is an issue that has generated a lot of political rhetoric and people, understandably, are fearful. But one of the things that I think is worth reflecting on after 9/11 is this country is so resilient, we are so tough, we can’t be frightened by a handful of people who are trying to do us harm, especially when we’ve captured them and we’ve got the goods on them.
So I’ve also said that there are going to be circumstances where a military tribunal may be appropriate, and the reason for that is — and I’ll just give a specific example. There may be situations in which somebody was captured in theater, is now in Guantanamo. It’s very hard to piece together a chain of evidence that would meet some of the evidentiary standards that would be required in an Article III court. But we know that this person is guilty; there’s sufficient evidence to bring about a conviction. So what I have said is the military commission system that we set up — where appropriate for certain individuals that would make — it would be difficult to try in Article III courts for a range of reasons — we can reform that system so that it meets the highest standards of due process and prosecute them there.
And so I’m prepared to work with Democrats and Republicans. And we over the course of the last year have been in constant conversations with them about setting up a sensible system in which we are prosecuting where appropriate those in Article III courts. We are prosecuting others where appropriate through a military tribunal. And in either case, let’s put them in prisons where our track record is they’ve never escaped. And, by the way, just from a purely fiscal point of view, the costs of holding folks in Guantanamo is massively higher than it is holding them in a super maximum security prison here in the United States.
Q How long for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? Will that trial ever happen?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think it needs to happen. And we’re going to work with members of Congress — and this is going to have to be on a bipartisan basis — to move this forward in a way that is consistent with our standards of due process, consistent with our Constitution, consistent also with our image in the world of a country that cares about rule of law. You can’t underestimate the impact of that.
Al Qaeda operatives still cite Guantanamo as a justification for attacks against the United States. Still to this day. And there’s no reason for us to give them that kind of talking point when, in fact, we can use the various mechanisms of our justice system to prosecute these folks and to make sure that they never attack us again.
Ed Henry.
Q Mr. President, you were talking about some of the al Qaeda leaders that you have captured. One that you have not is Osama bin Laden. Tomorrow is going to be nine years since he was the mastermind of 3,000 Americans being killed. And what you said — obviously, the last administration had seven years and couldn’t do it. But what you said as President-elect to CBS is, “I think capturing or killing bin Laden is a critical aspect of stamping out al Qaeda. He is not just a symbol. He is also the operational leader of an organization planning attacks against the U.S.”
Do you still believe it’s a critical part of your policy to capture or kill him? And do you think — isn’t it a failure of your administration that here it’s almost two years in — you campaigned saying you were going to run a smarter war on terror than the Bush administration. You haven’t captured him and you don’t seem to know where he is.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Ed, I think capturing or killing bin Laden and Zawahiri would be extremely important to our national security. It doesn’t solve all our problems, but it remains a high priority of this administration.
One of the things that we’ve been successful at over the last two years is to ramp up the pressure on al Qaeda and their key leaders. And as a consequence, they have been holed up in ways that have made it harder for them to operate. And part of what’s happened is bin Laden has gone deep underground. Even Zawahiri, who is more often out there, has been much more cautious.
But we have the best minds, the best intelligence officers, the best special forces, who are thinking about this day and night. And they will continue to think about it day and night as long as I’m President.
Q But, sir, do you think Americans are going to face another nine years of this terror threat, another generation? What’s your message to them?
THE PRESIDENT: Here’s what I think. I think that in this day and age, there are going to be — there is always going to be the potential for an individual or a small group of individuals, if they are willing to die, to kill other people. Some of them are going to be very well organized and some of them are going to be random. That threat is there. And it’s important, I think, for the American people to understand that, and not to live in fear. It’s just a reality of today’s world that there are going to be threats out there.
We have, I think, greatly improved our homeland security since 9/11 occurred. I am constantly impressed with the dedication that our teams apply to this problem. They are chasing down every thread not just from al Qaeda but any other actor out there that might be engaging in terrorism. They are making sure that even a — what might appear to be a lone individual who has very little organizational capacity — if they make a threat, they follow up.
But one of the things that I want to make sure we do as long as I’m President, and beyond my presidency, is to understand America’s strength in part comes from its resilience, and that we don’t start losing who we are or overreacting if, in fact, there is the threat of terrorism out there.
We go about our business. We are tougher than them. Our families and our businesses and our churches and mosques and synagogues and our Constitution, our values, that’s what gives us strength. And we are going to have this problem out there for a long time to come. But it doesn’t have to completely distort us. And it doesn’t have to dominate our foreign policy. What we can do is to constantly fight against it. And I think ultimately, we are going to be able to stamp it out. But it’s going to take some time.
MR. GIBBS: Last question.
THE PRESIDENT: Wendell.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. I wonder if I can get you to weigh in on the wisdom of building a mosque a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. We know that the organizers have the constitutional right. What would it say about this country if they were somehow talked out of doing that? And hasn’t the Florida minister’s threat to burn a couple hundred copies of the Koran, hasn’t the threat itself put American lives in danger, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, on the second — on your second question, there’s no doubt that when someone goes out of their way to be provocative in ways that we know can inflame the passions of over a billion Muslims around the world, at a time when we’ve got our troops in a lot of Muslim countries, that’s a problem. And it has made life a lot more difficult for our men and women in uniform who already have a very difficult job.
With respect to the mosque in New York, I think I’ve been pretty clear on my position here, and that is, is that this country stands for the proposition that all men and women are created equal; that they have certain inalienable rights — one of those inalienable rights is to practice their religion freely. And what that means is that if you could build a church on a site, you could build a synagogue on a site, if you could build a Hindu temple on a site, then you should be able to build a mosque on the site.
Now, I recognize the extraordinary sensitivities around 9/11. I’ve met with families of 9/11 victims in the past. I can only imagine the continuing pain and anguish and sense of loss that they may go through. And tomorrow we as Americans are going to be joining them in prayer and remembrance. But I go back to what I said earlier: We are not at war against Islam. We are at war against terrorist organizations that have distorted Islam or falsely used the banner of Islam to engage in their destructive acts.
And we’ve got to be clear about that. We’ve got to be clear about that because if we’re going to deal with the problems that Ed Henry was talking about, if we’re going to successfully reduce the terrorist threat, then we need all the allies we can get. The folks who are most interested in a war between the United States or the West and Islam are al Qaeda. That’s what they’ve been banking on.
And fortunately, the overwhelming majority of Muslims around the world are peace-loving, are interested in the same things that you and I are interested in: How do I make sure I can get a good job? How can I make sure that my kids get a decent education? How can I make sure I’m safe? How can I improve my lot in life? And so they have rejected this violent ideology for the most part — overwhelmingly.
And so from a national security interest, we want to be clear about who the enemy is here. It’s a handful, a tiny minority of people who are engaging in horrific acts, and have killed Muslims more than anybody else.
The other reason it’s important for us to remember that is because we’ve got millions of Muslim Americans, our fellow citizens, in this country. They’re going to school with our kids. They’re our neighbors. They’re our friends. They’re our coworkers. And when we start acting as if their religion is somehow offensive, what are we saying to them?
I’ve got Muslims who are fighting in Afghanistan in the uniform of the United States armed services. They’re out there putting their lives on the line for us. And we’ve got to make sure that we are crystal-clear for our sakes and their sakes they are Americans and we honor their service. And part of honoring their service is making sure that they understand that we don’t differentiate between them and us. It’s just us.
And that is a principle that I think is going to be very important for us to sustain. And I think tomorrow is an excellent time for us to reflect on that.
Thank you very much, everybody.
FACT SHEET: President Obama Has Signed Eight Small Business Tax Cuts Into Law, Pledges to Sign Eight New Tax Cuts Benefitting Millions of Small Businesses
FACT SHEET: President Obama Has Signed Eight Small Business Tax Cuts Into Law,
Pledges to Sign Eight New Tax Cuts Benefitting Millions of Small Businesses
I. President Obama Has Already Signed Into Law Eight Separate Small Business Tax Cuts: In the Recovery Act and subsequent legislation in 2009 and 2010, the President signed the following eight small business tax cuts into law:
1. A New Small Business Health Care Tax Credit
2. A New Tax Credit for Hiring Unemployed Workers
3. Bonus Depreciation Tax Incentives to Support New Investment
4. 75% Exclusion of Small Business Capital Gains
5. Expansion of Limits on Small Business Expensing
6. Five-Year Carryback of Net Operating Losses
7. Reduction of the Built-In Gains Holding Period for Small Businesses from 10 to 7 Years to Allow Small Business Greater Flexibility in Their Investments
8. Temporary Small Business Estimated Tax Payment Relief to Allow Small Businesses to Keep Needed Cash on Hand
II. The President Intends to Sign a Small Business Jobs Bill With Another Eight Tax Cuts Benefitting Millions of Small Businesses: For weeks, Republicans have been stalling progress of a Small Business Jobs Bill that would provide additional tax relief for millions of small businesses, including the following eight tax cuts:
1. Zero Capital Gains Taxes on Key Investments in Small Businesses:
2. The Highest Small Business Expensing Limit Ever– Up to $500,000
3. An Extension of 50% Bonus Depreciation
4. A New Deduction for Health Care Expenses for the Self-Employed
5. Tax Relief and Simplification for Cell Phone Deductions
6. An Increase in The Deduction for Entrepreneurs’ Start-Up Expenses
7. A Five-Year Carryback Of General Business Credits
8. Limitations on Penalties for Errors in Tax Reporting That Disproportionately Affect Small Business
III. President Obama is Proposing Tax Cuts for Millions of Real Small Businesses, While Republicans Are Using Pretext of Helping Small Business to Fight for An Average of $100,000 in Tax Cuts for Those with Incomes Over $1 Million
· The President’s Eight New Small Business Tax Cuts Would Directly Help Millions of Real Small Businesses:
o Make 4.5 million small businesses and individuals eligible to increase the amount of investments they can write off
o Extend bonus depreciation for 2 million businesses, small and large
o Make investments in 1 million small businesses eligible for zero capital gains taxes
o Allow 2 million self-employed to receive a deduction for health insurance costs on self-employment taxes
o Enable virtually all small business owners to more easily receive a deduction for their use of cell phones
· While Republicans Claim that Their Push for High Income Tax Relief is Motivated by Concern for Small Business, 84% of the Tax Relief Goes to Those Making Over $1 Million: Republicans are holding middle class tax cuts hostage to borrow $700 billion to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of earners. While they claim this effort is would help entrepreneurs and small businesses, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, 84% of the tax relief would go to taxpayers with incomes of over $1 million.
· The High Income Taxpayers They Are Fighting to Get Tax Relief For Are Hardly What Most Americans Think of as Small Businesses: While Congressional Republicans’ rhetoric would imply they are fighting for start-ups, mom-and-pop store owners and aspiring entrepreneurs, they count as “small businesses” making “small business income” any and all high income taxpayers with any type of partnership income, sole proprietor income, or S corporation income. Thus, under their definition, the following are all counted as small businesses:
o Each partner of a major corporate law firm
o Billionaire hedge fund managers
o Over 50% of the top 400 taxpayers with the highest adjusted gross income, according to the IRS – a group that averaged $344 million each in income in 2007
The Small Business Jobs Bill: Providing Tax Relief to Millions of Small Businesses
The President has called on Congress to pass a strong Small Business Jobs Bill so that millions of small businesses can get the tax relief and access to credit that they need to expand, grow and hire. Included in the Small Business Jobs Bill are the following eight tax cuts:
1. Zero Taxes on Capital Gains from Key Small Business Investments: Under the Recovery Act, 75 percent of capital gains on key small business investments were excluded from taxes. The Senate Small Business Jobs Bill temporarily puts in place for 2010 a provision called for by the President – elimination of all capital gains taxes on these investments. Key investments in 1 million small businesses would be eligible for this tax cut.
2. Extension and Expansion of Small Businesses’ Ability to Immediately Expense Capital Investments: The bill temporarily increases for 2010 and 2011 the amount of investments in new plants or equipment that 4.5 million small businesses would be eligible to immediately write off to $500,000 – its highest limit ever – while raising the level of investments at which the write-off phases out to $2 million.
3. Extension of 50% Bonus Depreciation: The bill extends through 2010– as the President proposed in his budget – a Recovery Act provision for 50 percent “bonus depreciation” for 2 million businesses, large and small, providing them with incentives to invest in plants and equipment by accelerating the rate at which they can deduct capital expenditures.
4. A New Deduction of Health Insurance Costs for Self-Employed: The bill would allow 2 million self-employed to deduct the cost of health insurance in 2010 for themselves and their family members in calculating their self-employment taxes. This provision is estimated to provide over $1.9 billion in tax cuts for these entrepreneurs.
5. Tax Relief and Simplification for Cell Phone Deductions: The bill would change tax rules so that the use of cell phones can be deducted without burdensome extra documentation – making it easier for virtually every small business in America to receive deductions that they are entitled to.
6. An Increase in the Deduction for Entrepreneurs’ Start-Up Expenses: The bill would temporarily increase in 2010 the amount of start-up expenditures entrepreneurs can deduct from their taxes from $5,000 to $10,000 (with a phase-out threshold of $60,000 in expenditures), offering an immediate incentive for someone with a new business idea to invest in starting up a new small business.
7. A Five-Year Carryback Of General Business Credits: The bill would allow certain small businesses to “carry back” their general business credits to offset five years of taxes – providing them with an instant tax break – while also allowing these credits to offset the Alternative Minimum Tax, reducing taxes for these small businesses.
8. Limitations on Penalties for Errors in Tax Reporting That Disproportionately Affect Small Business: The bill would change the penalty for failing to report certain tax transactions from a fixed dollar amount – which was criticized for imposing a larger penalty on small businesses – to a percentage of the tax benefits from the transaction.
Lending Support to Small Businesses Still Struggling to Access the Credit They Need to Expand and Hire: With many creditworthy small businesses still struggling to get the credit they need to grow, the Small Business Jobs Bill would also:
· Create a new $30 billion Small Business Lending Fund
· Establish a State Small Business Credit Initiative to strengthen state programs that support private-sector lending to small businesses
· Extend successful Recovery Act provisions raising SBA loan guarantees and eliminating fees
· Double the maximum size of most SBA loans
President Barack Obama Announces Presidential Delegation to Mexico City to Attend the Bicentennial of the Independence of Mexico
President Barack Obama Announces Presidential Delegation to Mexico City to Attend the Bicentennial of the Independence of Mexico
President Barack Obama today announced the designation of a Presidential Delegation to Mexico City to attend the Bicentennial of the Independence of Mexico on September 14, 2010.
The Honorable Hilda L. Solis, Secretary, U.S. Department of Labor will be the head of the delegation.
Members of the Presidential Delegation:
The Honorable Carlos Pascual, U.S. Ambassador to Mexico
The Honorable Maria Otero, Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs, U.S. Department of State
The Honorable Julian Castro, Mayor of San Antonio
President Obama Appoints Austan Goolsbee as Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers
President Obama Appoints Austan Goolsbee as Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers
WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama designated Austan Goolsbee as the Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA).
Goolsbee, a long time economic advisor to President Obama, is currently a member of the Council of Economic Advisers and Chief Economist of the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board.
President Obama said, “Austan has been one of my good friends and close economic advisors for many years. He is one of the finest economists in the country, and he’s worked as a member of the Council of Economic Advisers since we arrived in office. He’s not just a brilliant economist, he’s someone who has a deep appreciation of how the economy affects everyday people, and he talks about it in a way that’s easily understood. He already knows and works with the rest of the team very well, and I have complete confidence he’ll do an outstanding job as CEA Chair.”
Goolsbee replaces Dr. Christina Romer as Chair, who last week returned to her teaching career at the University of California at Berkeley. Goolsbee was previously confirmed by the United States Senate as a member of the CEA and will not need to be reconfirmed by the Senate.
The President made the following announcement today:
Austan Goolsbee, Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers
Austan Goolsbee most recently served as a member of the Council of Economic Advisers. He also serves as chief economist of the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board. Goolsbee is the Robert P. Gwinn Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business. He was an economic adviser to Barack Obama’s 2004 Senate race before becoming a senior economic adviser to Senator Obama’s 2008 Presidential campaign. Goolsbee was also a member of the panel of Economic Advisers to the Congressional Budget Office, a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research, and a research fellow at the American Bar Foundation. In addition, Goolsbee was a Fulbright Scholar and a recipient of an Alfred P. Sloan Fellowship. Goolsbee was selected as one of The Financial Times’ six “Gurus of the Future”/Best under 40 (2005), named one of the Young Global Leaders at the 2005 World Economic Forum, and one of the 100 Global Leaders for Tomorrow at the 2002 World Economic Forum. He was born on August 18, 1969, in Waco, Texas. He received his B.A. summa cum laude in economics from Yale University in 1991, his M.A. in economics from Yale University in 1991, and his Ph.D in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1995. He is married with three children.
White House Announces the Release of Federal Agency Strategic Sustainability Performance Plans, Outlines Commitment to Achieve Environmental and Energy Goals
White House Announces the Release of Federal Agency Strategic Sustainability Performance Plans, Outlines Commitment to Achieve Environmental and Energy Goals
WASHINGTON, DC – Continuing a commitment to lead by example, the White House today announced the release of Federal Agency Strategic Sustainability Performance Plans, which work to achieve the environmental, economic and energy goals called for in the Executive Order on Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy and Economic Performance (Executive Order 13514) signed by President Obama on October 5, 2009. This announcement marks the first time agencies have developed and submitted Sustainability Plans, now available at www.whitehouse.gov/ceq.
Under the Executive Order, Federal agencies were required to submit their plans to the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Agencies were asked to develop, implement and annually update a plan that prioritizes sustainability actions based on a positive return on investment for the American taxpayer and to meet energy, water, and waste reduction targets.
The Federal government occupies nearly 500,000 buildings, operates more than 600,000 vehicles, employs more than 1.8 million civilians, and purchases more than $500 billion per year in goods and services. As the single largest energy consumer in the U.S. economy, the Federal Government spent more than $24.5 billion on electricity and fuel in 2008 alone.
The Executive Order also required Federal agencies to set a 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target, increase energy efficiency, reduce fleet petroleum consumption, conserve water, reduce waste, support sustainable communities, and leverage Federal purchasing power to promote environmentally-responsible products and technologies. To promote accountability, annual progress will be measured by the Office of Management and Budget and reported online to the public.
Previous announcements related to Executive Order 13514 include a goal of a 28 percent reduction by 2020 in direct greenhouse gas pollution, such as those from fuels and building energy use, and a 13 percent reduction by 2020 in indirect greenhouse gas pollution, such as those from employee commuting and landfill waste. Combined, these two goals could result in a cumulative reduction of 101 million metric tons of CO2 emissions equivalent to the emissions from 235 million barrels of oil.
UPDATED: President Obama to Deliver Back-to-School Speech September 14
UPDATED: President Obama to Deliver Back-to-School Speech September 14
WASHINGTON, D.C. – As students begin their school year, President Barack Obama will deliver his second annual Back-to-School Speech at 1:00 p.m. EDT on Tuesday, September 14 at Julia R. Masterman Laboratory and Demonstration School in Philadelphia, PA, a 2010 National Blue Ribbon School. The President’s Back-to-School Speech is an opportunity to speak directly to students across the country. Last year, President Obama encouraged students to study hard, stay in school, and take responsibility for their education.
“Every single one of you has something you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide,” President Obama said to students last year.
President Obama to Award Medal of Honor October 6, 2010
President Obama to Award Medal of Honor
On October 6, President Barack Obama will award Staff Sergeant Robert J. Miller, U.S. Army, the Medal of Honor for conspicuous gallantry. Staff Sergeant Miller will receive the Medal of Honor posthumously for his heroic actions in Afghanistan on January 25, 2008. He displayed immeasurable courage and uncommon valor – eventually sacrificing his own life to save the lives of his teammates and 15 Afghanistan National Army soldiers. Staff Sergeant Miller’s parents, Phil and Maureen Miller will join the President at the White House to commemorate their son’s selfless service and sacrifice.
PERSONAL BACKGROUND:
Robert Miller was born on October 14, 1983, in Harrisburg, Pa. He graduated from Wheaton North High School, Wheaton IL. Shortly after his family moved to Oviedo, Florida, he enlisted in the United States Army as a Special Forces candidate in August 2003. He attended Basic Training and Advanced Individual Training at Fort Benning, Georgia and later became a Green Beret in 2005. Staff Sergeant Miller served as a weapons sergeant in Alpha Company, 3rd Battalion, 3rd Special Forces Group (Airborne), which is based at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
His military decorations include: Meritorious Service Medal, Army Commendation Medal with “V” Device, Army Good Conduct Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, NATO Medal, Special Forces Tab, Ranger Tab and Parachute Badge.
He is survived by his parents, Phil and Maureen Miller; brothers Thomas, Martin and Edward; and sisters Joanna, Mary, Therese and Patricia.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
THE MEDAL OF HONOR:
The Medal of Honor is awarded to a member of the Armed Forces who distinguishes themselves conspicuously by gallantry above and beyond the call of duty while:
engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States;
engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force; or
serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.
The meritorious conduct must involve great personal bravery or self-sacrifice so conspicuous as to clearly distinguish the individual above his or her comrades and must have involved risk of life. There must be incontestable proof of the performance of the meritorious conduct, and each recommendation for the award must be considered on the standard of extraordinary merit.
Statement by the President on the Terrorist Bombing in Vladikavkaz, North Ossetia
Statement by the President on the Terrorist Bombing today in Vladikavkaz, North Ossetia
The United States strongly condemns the terrorist bombing that occurred today in Vladikavkaz, North Ossetia. Our hearts go out to the people of North Ossetia, who have already suffered so much from horrific acts of terrorism. We offer our deepest condolences, and stand with the people of Russia in this time of tragedy. This bombing further underscores the resolve of the United States and Russia to work together in combating terrorism and protecting our people.
Remarks By President Obama On The Economy
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
ON THE ECONOMY
Cuyahoga Community College West Campus
Parma, Ohio
2:06 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Ohio! Thank you, Cleveland! (Applause.) Thank you so much. Thank you very much, everybody. Everybody, please have a seat. Have a seat. We’ve got some business to do today. (Applause.) Thank you very much.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: We love you!
THE PRESIDENT: I love you back. Thank you.
Before we get started I want to just acknowledge some outstanding public servants who are here. First of all, somebody who I believe is one of the finest governors in this country — Ted Strickland is here. (Applause.) The lieutenant-governor and soon-to-be junior senator from the great state of Illinois — or Ohio — I was thinking about my own home — Lee Fisher is here. (Applause.)
I used to hear that line all the time about “senator from Illinois” — that would be me. (Laughter.)
Outstanding mayor of Cleveland, Frank Jackson is here. (Applause.) The mayor of Parma, Dean DePiero. (Applause.) Somebody who is fighting for working families each and every day, Senator Sherrod Brown is here. (Applause.) And three of the hardest-working and finest members of the House of Representatives — Dennis Kucinich, Marcia Fudge, and John Boccieri. (Applause.)
Good afternoon, everybody. It is good to be back in Ohio. (Applause.)
You know, in the fall of 2008, one of the last rallies of my presidential campaign was right here in the Cleveland area. (Applause.) It was a hopeful time, just two days before the election. And we knew that if we pulled it off, we’d finally have the chance to tackle some big and difficult challenges that had been facing this country for a very long time.
We also hoped for a chance to get beyond some of the old political divides -– between Democrats and Republicans, red states and blue states -– that had prevented us from making progress. Because although we are proud to be Democrats, we are prouder to be Americans -– (applause) — and we believed then and we believe now that no single party has a monopoly on wisdom.
That’s not to say that the election didn’t expose deep differences between the parties.
I ran for President because for much of the last decade, a very specific governing philosophy had reigned about how America should work: Cut taxes, especially for millionaires and billionaires. Cut regulations for special interests. Cut trade deals even if they didn’t benefit our workers. Cut back on investments in our people and in our future -– in education and clean energy, in research and technology. The idea was that if we just had blind faith in the market, if we let corporations play by their own rules, if we left everyone else to fend for themselves that America would grow and America would prosper.
And for a time this idea gave us the illusion of prosperity. We saw financial firms and CEOs take in record profits and record bonuses. We saw a housing boom that led to new homeowners and new jobs in construction. Consumers bought more condos and bigger cars and better TVs.
But while all this was happening, the broader economy was becoming weaker. Nobody understands that more than the people of Ohio. Job growth between 2000 and 2008 was slower than it had been in any economic expansion since World War II -– slower than it’s been over the last year. The wages and incomes of middle-class families kept falling while the cost of everything from tuition to health care kept on going up. Folks were forced to put more debt on their credit cards and borrow against homes that many couldn’t afford to buy in the first place. And meanwhile, a failure to pay for two wars and two tax cuts for the wealthy helped turn a record surplus into a record deficit.
I ran for President because I believed that this kind of economy was unsustainable –- for the middle class and for the future of our nation. I ran because I had a different idea about how America was built. (Applause.) It was an idea rooted in my own family’s story.
You see, Michelle and I are where we are today because even though our families didn’t have much, they worked tirelessly -– without complaint -– so that we might have a better life. My grandfather marched off to Europe in World War II, while my grandmother worked in factories on the home front. I had a single mom who put herself through school, and would wake before dawn to make sure I got a decent education. Michelle can still remember her father heading out to his job as a city worker long after multiple sclerosis had made it impossible for him to walk without crutches. He always got to work; he just had to get up a little earlier.
Yes, our families believed in the American values of self-reliance and individual responsibility, and they instilled those values in their children. But they also believed in a country that rewards responsibility; a country that rewards hard work; a country built on the promise of opportunity and upward mobility.
They believed in an America that gave my grandfather the chance to go to college because of the GI Bill; an America that gave my grandparents the chance to buy a home because of the Federal Housing Authority; an America that gave their children and grandchildren the chance to fulfill our dreams thanks to college loans and college scholarships.
It was an America where you didn’t buy things you couldn’t afford; where we didn’t just think about today -– we thought about tomorrow. An America that took pride in the goods that we made, not just the things we consumed. An America where a rising tide really did lift all boats, from the company CEO to the guy on the assembly line.
That’s the America I believe in. (Applause.) That’s the America I believe in. That’s what led me to work in the shadow of a shuttered steel plant on the South Side of Chicago when I was a community organizer. It’s what led me to fight for factory workers at manufacturing plants that were closing across Illinois when I was a senator. It’s what led me to run for President -– because I don’t believe we can have a strong and growing economy without a strong and growing middle class. (Applause.)
Now, much has happened since that election. The flawed policies and economic weaknesses of the previous decade culminated in a financial crisis and the worst recession of our lifetimes. And my hope was that the crisis would cause everybody, Democrats and Republicans, to pull together and tackle our problems in a practical way. But as we all know, things didn’t work out that way.
Some Republican leaders figured it was smart politics to sit on the sidelines and let Democrats solve the mess. Others believed on principle that government shouldn’t meddle in the markets, even when the markets are broken. But with the nation losing nearly 800,000 jobs the month that I was sworn into office, my most urgent task was to stop a financial meltdown and prevent this recession from becoming a second depression. (Applause.)
And, Ohio, we have done that. The economy is growing again. The financial markets have stabilized. The private sector has created jobs for the last eight months in a row. (Applause.) And there are roughly 3 million Americans who are working today because of the economic plan we put into place.
But the truth is progress has been painfully slow. Millions of jobs were lost before our policies even had a chance to take effect. We lost 4 million in the six months before I took office. It was a hole so deep that even though we’ve added jobs again, millions of Americans remain unemployed. Hundreds of thousands of families have lost their homes. Millions more can barely pay the bills or make the mortgage. The middle class is still treading water, and those aspiring to reach the middle class are doing everything they can to keep from drowning.
And meanwhile, some of the very steps that were necessary to save the economy -– like temporarily supporting the banks and the auto industry -– fed the perception that Washington is still ignoring the middle class in favor of special interests.
And so people are frustrated and they’re angry and they’re anxious about the future. I understand that. I also understand that in a political campaign, the easiest thing for the other side to do is to ride this fear and anger all the way to Election Day.
That’s what’s happening right now. A few weeks ago, the Republican leader of the House came here to Cleveland and offered his party’s answer to our economic challenges. Now, it would be one thing if he had admitted his party’s mistakes during the eight years that they were in power, if they had gone off for a while and meditated, and come back and offered a credible new approach to solving our country’s problems.
But that’s not what happened. There were no new policies from Mr. Boehner. There were no new ideas. There was just the same philosophy that we had already tried during the decade that they were in power — the same philosophy that led to this mess in the first place: Cut more taxes for millionaires and cut more rules for corporations.
Instead of coming together like past generations did to build a better country for our children and grandchildren, their argument is that we should let insurance companies go back to denying care for folks who are sick, or let credit card companies go back to raising rates without any reason. Instead of setting our sights higher, they’re asking us to settle for a status quo of stagnant growth and eroding competitiveness and a shrinking middle class.
Cleveland, that is not the America I know. That is not the America we believe in. (Applause.)
A lot has changed since I came here in those final days of the last election, but what hasn’t is the choice facing this country. It’s still fear versus hope; the past versus the future. It’s still a choice between sliding backward and moving forward. That’s what this election is about. That’s the choice you will face in November. (Applause.)
Now, we have a different vision for the future. See, I’ve never believed that government has all the answers to our problems. I’ve never believed that government’s role is to create jobs or prosperity. I believe it’s the drive and the ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, our small businesses; the skill and dedication of our workers — (applause) — that’s made us the wealthiest nation on Earth. (Applause.) I believe it’s the private sector that must be the main engine for our recovery.
I believe government should be lean; government should be efficient. I believe government should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices don’t hurt others. (Applause.)
But in the words of the first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, I also believe that government should do for the people what they cannot do better for themselves. (Applause.) And that means making the long-term investments in this country’s future that individuals and corporations can’t make on their own: investments in education and clean energy, in basic research and technology and infrastructure. (Applause.)
That means making sure corporations live up to their responsibilities to treat consumers fairly and play by the same rules as everyone else. (Applause.) Their responsibility is to look out for their workers, as well as their shareholders, and create jobs here at home.
And that means providing a hand-up for middle-class families –- so that if they work hard and meet their responsibilities, they can afford to raise their children, and send them to college, see a doctor when they get sick, retire with dignity and respect. (Applause.)
That’s what we Democrats believe in -– a vibrant free market, but one that works for everybody. (Applause.) That’s our vision. That’s our vision for a stronger economy and a growing middle class. And that’s the difference between what we and Republicans in Congress are offering the American people right now.
Let me give you a few specific examples of our different approaches. This week, I proposed some additional steps to grow the economy and help businesses spur hiring. One of the keys to job creation is to encourage companies to invest more in the United States. But for years, our tax code has actually given billions of dollars in tax breaks that encourage companies to create jobs and profits in other countries.
I want to change that. (Applause.) I want to change that. Instead of tax loopholes that incentivize investment in overseas jobs, I’m proposing a more generous, permanent extension of the tax credit that goes to companies for all the research and innovation they do right here in Ohio, right here in the United States of America. (Applause.)
And I’m proposing that all American businesses should be allowed to write off all the investment they do in 2011. And this will help small businesses upgrade their plants and equipment, and will encourage large corporations to get off the sidelines and start putting their profits to work in places like Cleveland and Toledo and Dayton. (Applause.)
Now, to most of you, I’ll bet this just seems like common sense. (Laughter.) But not to Mr. Boehner and his allies. For years, Republicans have fought to keep these corporate loopholes open. In fact, when Mr. Boehner was here in Cleveland he attacked us for closing a few of these loopholes -– and using the money to help states like Ohio keep hundreds of thousands of teachers and cops and firefighters on the job. (Applause.)
Mr. Boehner dismissed these jobs we saved –- teaching our kids, patrolling our streets, rushing into burning buildings -– as “government jobs” -– jobs I guess he thought just weren’t worth saving.
And I couldn’t disagree more. I think teachers and police officers and firefighters are part of what keeps America strong. (Applause.) And, Ohio, I think if we’re going to give tax breaks to companies, they should go to companies that create jobs in America -– not that create jobs overseas. (Applause.) That’s one difference between the Republican vision and the Democratic vision. That’s what this election is all about. (Applause.)
Let me give you another example. We want to put more Americans back to work rebuilding America -– our roads, our railways, our runways. When the housing sector collapsed and the recession hit, one in every four jobs lost were in the construction industry. That’s partly why our economic plan has invested in badly needed infrastructure projects over the last 19 months –- not just roads and bridges, but high-speed railroads and expanded broadband access. Altogether, these projects have led to thousands of good, private sector jobs, especially for those in the trades.
Mr. Boehner and the Republicans in Congress said no to these projects. Fought them tooth and nail. Though I should say it didn’t stop a lot of them from showing up at the ribbon-cuttings — (laughter) — trying to take credit. That’s always a sight to see. (Laughter.)
Now, there are still thousands of miles of railroads and railways and runways left to repair and improve. And engineers, economists, governors, mayors of every political stripe believe that if we want to compete in this global economy, we need to rebuild this vital infrastructure. There is no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains or the most modern airports -– we want to put people to work building them right here in America. (Applause.)
So this week, I’ve proposed a six-year infrastructure plan that would start putting Americans to work right away. But despite the fact that this has traditionally been an issue with bipartisan support, Mr. Boehner has so far said no to infrastructure. That’s bad for America -– and that, too, is what this election is all about.
I’ll give you one final example of the differences between us and the Republicans, and that’s on the issue of tax cuts. Under the tax plan passed by the last administration, taxes are scheduled to go up substantially next year — for everybody. By the way, this was by design. When they passed these tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, they didn’t want everybody to know what it would do to our deficit, so they pretended like they were going to end, even though now they say they don’t.
Now, I believe we ought to make the tax cuts for the middle class permanent. (Applause.) For the middle class, permanent. These families are the ones who saw their wages and incomes flat-line over the last decade -– you deserve a break. (Applause.) You deserve some help. And because folks in the middle class are more likely to spend their tax cut on basic necessities, that strengthens the economy as a whole.
But the Republican leader of the House doesn’t want to stop there. Make no mistake: He and his party believe we should also give a permanent tax cut to the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans.
AUDIENCE: Nooo!
THE PRESIDENT: With all the other budgetary pressures we have -– with all the Republicans’ talk about wanting to shrink the deficit — they would have us borrow $700 billion over the next 10 years to give a tax cut of about $100,000 each to folks who are already millionaires. And keep in mind wealthy Americans are just about the only folks who saw their incomes rise when Republicans were in charge. And these are the folks who are less likely to spend the money — which is why economists don’t think tax breaks for the wealthy would do much to boost the economy.
So let me be clear to Mr. Boehner and everybody else: We should not hold middle-class tax cuts hostage any longer. (Applause.) We are ready, this week, if they want, to give tax cuts to every American making $250,000 or less. (Applause.) That’s 98-97 percent of Americans. Now, for any income over this amount, the tax rates would just go back to what they were under President Clinton.
This isn’t to punish folks who are better off –- God bless them. It’s because we can’t afford the $700 billion price tag. (Applause.) And for those who claim that our approach would somehow be bad for growth and bad for small businesses, let me remind you that with those tax rates in place, under President Clinton, this country created 22 million jobs and raised incomes and had the largest surplus in our history. (Applause.)
In fact, if the Republican leadership in Congress really wants to help small businesses, they’ll stop using legislative maneuvers to block an up or down vote on a small business jobs bill that’s before the Senate right now. Right now. (Applause.) This is a bill that would do two things. It would cut taxes for small businesses and make loans more available for small businesses. (Applause.) It is fully paid for, won’t add to the deficit. And it was written by Democrats and Republicans. And yet, the other party continues to block this jobs bill -– a delay that small business owners have said is actually leading them to put off hiring.
Look, I recognize that most of the Republicans in Congress have said no to just about every policy I’ve proposed since taking office. I realize in some cases that there are genuine philosophical differences. But on issues like this one — a tax cut for small businesses supported by the Chamber of Commerce — the only reason they’re holding this up is politics, pure and simple. (Applause.) They’re making the same calculation they made just before my inauguration: If I fail, they win. Well, they might think that this will get them to where they want to go in November, but it won’t get our country going where it needs to go in the long run. (Applause.) It won’t get us there. (Applause.) It won’t get us there. (Applause.) It won’t get us there. (Applause.)
So that’s the choice, Ohio. Do we return to the same failed policies that ran our economy into a ditch, or do we keep moving forward with policies that are slowly pulling us out? (Applause.) Do we settle for a slow decline, or do we reach for an America with a growing economy and a thriving middle class? (Applause.) That’s the America that I see. We may not be there yet, but we know where this country needs to go.
We see a future where we invest in American innovation and American ingenuity; where we export more goods so we create more jobs here at home; where we make it easier to start a business or patent an invention; where we build a homegrown, clean energy industry — because I don’t want to see new solar panels or electric cars or advanced batteries manufactured in Europe or Asia. (Applause.) I want to see them made right here in the U.S. of A by American workers. (Applause.)
We see an America where every citizen has the skills and training to compete with any worker in the world. That’s why we’ve set a goal to once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020. (Applause.) That’s why we’re revitalizing community colleges like this one. (Applause.) That’s why we’re reforming our education system based on what works for our children, not what perpetuates the status quo. (Applause.)
We see an America where a growing middle class is the beating heart of a growing economy. That’s why I kept my campaign promise and gave a middle-class tax cut to 95 percent of working Americans. (Applause.) That’s why we passed health insurance reform that stops insurance companies from jacking up your premiums at will or denying coverage because you get sick. (Applause.) That’s why we passed financial reform that will end taxpayer-funded bailouts; reform that will stop credit card companies and mortgage lenders from taking advantage of taxpayers and consumers. (Applause.)
That’s why we’re trying to make it easier for workers to save for retirement and fighting the efforts of some in the other party to privatize Social Security — because as long as I’m President, no one is going to take the retirement savings of a generation of Americans and hand it over to Wall Street. Not on my watch. (Applause.)
That’s why we’re fighting to extend the child tax credit and make permanent our new college tax credit, because if we do, it will mean $10,000 in tuition relief for each child going to four years of college. (Applause.) And I don’t want any parent not to be sending their kids, in good time or bad, to college because they can’t afford it.
And finally, we see an America where we refuse to pass on the debt we inherited to the next generation.
Now, let me spend just a minute on this issue, because we’ve heard a lot of moralizing on the other side about this — government spending and debt. Along with the tax cuts for the wealthy, the other party’s main economic proposal is that they’ll stop government spending.
Now, it’s right to be concerned about the long-term deficit. If we don’t get a handle on it soon, it can endanger our future. And at a time when folks are tightening their belts at home, I understand why a lot of Americans feel it’s time for government to show some discipline, too. But let’s look at the facts. When these same Republicans — including Mr. Boehner — were in charge, the number of earmarks and pet projects went up, not down.
These same Republicans turned a record surplus into a record deficit. When I walked in, wrapped in a nice bow was a $1.3 trillion deficit sitting right there on my doorstep. (Laughter.) A welcoming present.
Just this year, these same Republicans voted against a bipartisan fiscal commission that they themselves had proposed. Once I decided I was for it, they were against it. (Laughter.) And when you ask them what programs they’d actually cut they don’t have an answer.
That’s not fiscal responsibility. That’s not a serious plan to govern.
Now, I’ll be honest -– I refuse to cut back on those investments that will grow our economy in the future -– investments in areas like education and clean energy and technology. (Applause.) I don’t want to cut those things. And that’s because economic growth is the single best way to bring down the deficit –- and we need these investments to grow.
But I am absolutely committed to fiscal responsibility, which is why I’ve already proposed freezing all discretionary spending unrelated to national security for the next three years. (Applause.)
And once the bipartisan fiscal commission finishes its work, I’ll spend the next year making the tough choices necessary to further reduce our deficit and lower our debt — whether I get help from the other side or not. (Applause.)
Of course, reducing the deficit won’t be easy. Making up for the 8 million lost jobs caused by this recession won’t happen overnight. Not everything we’ve done over the last two years has worked as quickly as we had hoped, and I am keenly aware that not all of our policies have been popular.
So, no, our job is not easy. But you didn’t elect me to do what was easy. (Applause.) You didn’t elect me to just read the polls and figure how to keep myself in office. You didn’t elect me to avoid big problems. You elected me to do what was right. And as long as I’m President, that’s exactly what I intend to do. (Applause.)
This country is emerging from an incredibly difficult period in its history -– an era of irresponsibility that stretched from Wall Street to Washington, and had a devastating effect on a lot of people. We have started turning the corner on that era. But part of moving forward is returning to the time-honored values that built this country: hard work and self-reliance; responsibility for ourselves, but also responsibility for one another. It’s about moving from an attitude that said “What’s in it for me?” to one that asks, “What’s best for America? What’s best for all our workers? What’s best for all of our businesses? What’s best for all of our children?” (Applause.)
These values are not Democratic or Republican. They are not conservative or liberal values. They are American values. As Democrats, we take pride in what our party has accomplished over the last century: Social Security and the minimum wage; the GI Bill and Medicare; civil rights and worker’s rights and women’s rights. (Applause.) But we also recognize that throughout our history, there has been a noble Republican vision as well, of what this country can be. It was the vision of Abraham Lincoln, who set up the first land grant colleges and launched the transcontinental railroad; the vision of Teddy Roosevelt, who used the power of government to break up monopolies; the vision of Dwight Eisenhower, who helped build the Interstate Highway System. And, yes, the vision of Ronald Reagan, who despite his aversion to government, was willing to help save Social Security for future generations — working with Democrats. (Applause.)
These were serious leaders for serious times. They were great politicians, but they didn’t spend all their time playing games or scoring points. They didn’t always prey on people’s fears and anxieties. They made mistakes, but they did what they thought was in the best interests of their country and its people.
And that’s what the American people expect of us today -– Democrats, independents, and Republicans. (Applause.) That’s the debate they deserve. That’s the leadership we owe them.
I know that folks are worried about the future. I know there’s still a lot of hurt out here. And when times are tough, I know it can be tempting to give in to cynicism and fear and doubt and division -– and just settle our sights a little bit lower, settle for something a little bit less. But that’s not who we are, Ohio. Those are not the values that built this country.
We are here today because in the worst of times, the people who came before us brought out the best in America. Because our parents and our grandparents and our great-grandparents were willing to work and sacrifice for us. They were willing to take great risks, and face great hardship, and reach for a future that would give us the chance at a better life. They knew that this country is greater than the sum of its parts -– that America is not about the ambitions of any one individual, but the aspirations of an entire people, an entire nation. (Applause.)
That’s who we are. That is our legacy. And I’m convinced that if we’re willing to summon those values today, and if we’re willing to choose hope over fear, and choose the future over the past, and come together once more around the great project of national renewal, then we will restore our economy and rebuild our middle class and reclaim the American Dream for the next generation. (Applause.)
Thank you. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)
Remarks of President Barack Obama on the Economy
Remarks of President Barack Obama on the Economy – As Prepared for Delivery
Wednesday, September 8th, 2010
Cleveland, Ohio
As Prepared for Delivery—
Good afternoon, Ohio. It’s good to be back.
In the fall of 2008, one of the last rallies of my presidential campaign was here in the Cleveland area. It was a hopeful time, just two days before the election. We knew that if we pulled it off, we’d have the chance to tackle some big and difficult challenges that had been facing this country for a long time.
We also hoped for a chance to get beyond some of the old political divides – between Democrats and Republicans, Red states and Blue states – that had prevented us from making progress. Because although we are proud to be Democrats, we are prouder to be Americans – and we believed that no single party has a monopoly on wisdom.
That’s not to say that the election didn’t expose deep differences between the parties. I ran for President because for much of the last decade, a very specific governing philosophy had reigned about how America should work:
Cut taxes, especially for millionaires and billionaires. Cut regulations for special interests. Cut trade deals even if they didn’t benefit our workers. Cut back on investments in our people and our future – in education and clean energy; in research and technology. The idea was that if we had blind faith in the market; if we let corporations play by their own rules; if we left everyone else to fend for themselves, America would grow and prosper.
For a time, this idea gave us the illusion of prosperity. We saw financial firms and CEOs take in record profits and record bonuses. We saw a housing boom that led to new homeowners and new jobs in construction. Consumers bought more condos and bigger cars and better televisions.
But while all this was happening, the broader economy was becoming weaker. Job growth between 2000 and 2008 was slower than it had been in any economic expansion since World War II – even slower than it’s been over the past year. The wages and incomes of middle-class families kept falling while the cost of everything from tuition to health care kept rising. Folks were forced to put more debt on their credit cards and borrow against homes that many couldn’t afford in the first place. Meanwhile, a failure to pay for two wars and two tax cuts for the wealthy helped turn a record surplus into a record deficit.
I ran for President because I believed that this kind of economy was unsustainable – for the middle-class and for our nation’s future. I ran because I had a different idea about how America was built – an idea rooted in my own family’s story.
You see, Michelle and I are where we are today because even though our families didn’t have much, they worked tirelessly – without complaint – so that we might have a better life. My grandfather marched off to Europe in World War II and my grandmother worked in factories on the home front. I had a single mom who put herself through school, and would wake before dawn to make sure I got a decent education. Michelle can still remember her father heading out to his job as a city worker long after Multiple Sclerosis had made it impossible for him to walk without crutches.
Yes, our families believed in the American values of self-reliance and individual responsibility, and they instilled those values in their children. But they also believed in a country that rewards responsibility. A country that rewards hard work. A country built upon the promise of opportunity and upward mobility.
They believed in an America that gave my grandfather the chance to go to college because of the GI Bill. An America that gave my grandparents the chance to buy a home because of the Federal Housing Authority. An America that gave their children and grandchildren the chance to fulfill our dreams thanks to college loans and college scholarships.
It was an America where you didn’t buy things you couldn’t afford; where we didn’t just think about today – we thought about tomorrow. An America that took pride in the goods it made, not just in the things it consumed. An America where a rising tide really did lift all boats, from the company CEO to the guy on the assembly line.
That’s the America I believe in. That’s what led me to work in the shadow of a shuttered steel plant on the South Side of Chicago when I was a community organizer. It’s what led me to fight for factory workers at manufacturing plants that were closing across Illinois when I was a Senator. It’s what led me to run for President – because I don’t believe we can have a strong and growing economy without a strong and growing middle-class.
Now, much has happened since that election. The flawed policies and economic weaknesses of the previous decade culminated in the worst recession of our lifetimes. My hope was that the crisis would cause everyone, Democrats and Republicans, to pull together and tackle our problems in a practical way. But as we all know, things didn’t work out that way.
Some Republican leaders figured it was smart politics to sit on the sidelines and let Democrats solve the mess. Others believed on principle that government shouldn’t meddle in the markets, even when the markets were broken. But with the nation losing nearly 800,000 jobs the month I was sworn in, my most urgent task was to stop a financial meltdown and prevent this recession from becoming a second depression.
We’ve done that. The economy is growing again. The financial markets have stabilized. The private sector has created jobs for the last eight months in a row. And there are roughly three million Americans who are working today because of the economic plan we put in place.
But the truth is, progress has been painfully slow. Millions of jobs were lost before our policies even had a chance to take effect – a hole so deep that even though we’ve added jobs again, millions of Americans remain unemployed. Hundreds of thousands of families have lost their homes; millions more can barely pay the bills or make the mortgage. The middle-class is still treading water, while those aspiring to reach the middle class are doing everything they can to keep from drowning.
Meanwhile, some of the very steps that were necessary to save the economy – like temporarily supporting the banks and the auto industry – fed the perception that Washington is still ignoring the middle class in favor of special interests.
And so people are frustrated and angry and anxious about the future. I understand that. I also understand that in a political campaign, the easiest thing for the other side to do is ride this fear and anger all the way to Election Day.
That’s what’s happening right now. A few weeks ago, the Republican leader of the House came here to Cleveland and offered his party’s answer to our economic challenges. Now, it would be one thing if he admitted his party’s mistakes during the eight years they were in power, and was offering a credible new approach to solving our country’s problems.
But that’s not what happened. There were no new policies from Mr. Boehner. There were no new ideas. There was just the same philosophy we already tried for the last decade – the same philosophy that led to this mess in the first place: cut more taxes for millionaires and cut more rules for corporations. Instead of coming together like past generations did to build a better country for our children and grandchildren, their argument is that we should let insurance companies go back to denying care to folks who are sick, and let credit card companies go back to raising rates without any reason. Instead of setting our sights higher, they’re asking us to settle for a status quo of stagnant growth, eroding competitiveness, and a shrinking middle class.
Cleveland – that is not the America I know. That is not the America we believe in. A lot has changed since I came here in those final days of the last election, but what hasn’t is the choice facing this country. It’s still fear versus hope; the past versus the future. It’s still a choice between sliding backward and moving forward. That’s what this election is about. That’s the choice you’ll face in November.
I have a different vision for the future. I’ve never believed that government has all the answers to our problems. I’ve never believed that government’s role is to create jobs or prosperity. I believe it’s the drive and ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, the skill and dedication of our workers, that has made us the wealthiest nation on Earth. I believe it’s the private sector that must be the main engine of our recovery.
I believe government should be lean, it should be efficient, and it should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices don’t hurt others.
But in the words of the first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, I also believe that government should do for the people what they cannot do better for themselves.
That means making long-term investments in this country’s future that individuals and corporations cannot make on their own: investments in education and clean energy; in basic research, technology, and infrastructure
That means making sure corporations live up to their responsibilities to treat consumers fairly and play by the same rules as everyone else; to look out for their workers and create jobs here at home.
And that means providing a hand up for middle-class families – so that if they work hard and meet their responsibilities, they can afford to raise their children, send them to college, see a doctor when they get sick, and retire with dignity and respect.
That’s what we Democrats believe in – a vibrant free market, but one that works for everybody. That’s our vision for a stronger economy and a growing middle-class. And that’s the difference between what we and the Republicans in Congress are offering the American people right now.
Let me give you a few specific examples of our different approaches. This week, I proposed some additional steps to grow the economy and help businesses spur hiring. One of the keys to job creation is to encourage companies to invest more in the United States. But for years, our tax code has actually given billions of dollars in tax breaks that encourage companies to create jobs and profits in other countries.
I want to change that. Instead of tax loopholes that incentivize investment in overseas jobs, I’m proposing a more generous, permanent extension of the tax credit that goes to companies for all the research and innovation they do right here in America. And I’m proposing that all American businesses should be allowed to write off all the investment they do in 2011. This will help small businesses upgrade their plants and equipment, and will encourage large corporations to get off the sidelines and start putting their profits to work in places like Cleveland and Toledo and Dayton.
To most of you, this is just common sense. But not to Mr. Boehner and his allies. For years, Republicans have fought to keep these corporate loopholes open. In fact, when Mr. Boehner was here in Cleveland he attacked us for closing a few of these loopholes – and using the money to help states like Ohio keep hundreds of thousands of teachers and cops and firefighters on the job. He dismissed these jobs – teaching our kids, patrolling our streets, rushing into burning buildings – as quote “government jobs” – jobs that I guess he thought just weren’t worth saving.
I couldn’t disagree more. I think teachers and police officers and firefighters are part of what keep America strong. And I think if we’re going to give tax breaks to companies, they should go to companies that create jobs in America – not those that create jobs overseas. That’s one difference between the Republican vision and the Democratic vision. And that’s what this election is all about.
Let me give you another example. We want to put more Americans back to work rebuilding America – our roads, railways, and runways. When the housing sector collapsed and the recession hit, one in every four jobs lost were in the construction industry. That’s partly why our economic plan has invested in badly needed infrastructure projects over the last nineteen months – not just roads and bridges, but high-speed railroads and expanded broadband access. Altogether, these are projects that have led to thousands of good, private sector jobs, especially for those in the trades.
Mr. Boehner and the Republicans in Congress said no to these projects. Fought them tooth and nail. Though I should say that didn’t stop a lot of them from showing up at the ribbon-cutting ceremonies and trying to take credit. That’s always a sight to see.
Now, there are still thousands of miles of roads, railways, and runways left to repair and improve. And engineers, economists, governors and mayors of every political stripe believe that if we want to compete, we need to rebuild this vital infrastructure. There’s no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains or the most modern airports – we want to put people to work building them right here in America. So this week, I’ve proposed a six year infrastructure plan that would start putting Americans to work right away. But despite the fact that this has traditionally been an issue with bipartisan support, Mr. Boehner has so far said no to infrastructure. That’s bad for America – and that too is what this election is about.
I’ll give you one final example of the differences between us and the Republicans, and that’s on the issue of tax cuts. Under the tax plan passed by the last administration, taxes are scheduled to go up substantially next year. Now, I believe we ought to make the tax cuts for the middle class permanent. These families are the ones who saw their wages and incomes flatline over the last decade – and they deserve a break. And because they are more likely to spend on basic necessities, this will strengthen the economy as a whole.
But the Republican leader of the House doesn’t want to stop there. Make no mistake: he and his party believe we should also give a permanent tax cut to the wealthiest two percent of Americans. With all the other budgetary pressures we have – with all the Republicans’ talk about wanting to shrink the deficit – they would have us borrow $700 billion over the next ten years to give a tax cut of about $100,000 to folks who are already millionaires. These are among the only folks who saw their incomes rise when Republicans were in charge. And these are folks who are less likely to spend the money, which is why economists don’t think tax breaks for the wealthy would do much to boost the economy.
So let me be clear to Mr. Boehner and everyone else: we should not hold middle class tax cuts hostage any longer. We are ready, this week, to give tax cuts to every American making $250,000 or less. For any income over this amount, the tax rates would go back to what they were under President Clinton. This isn’t to punish folks who are better off – it’s because we can’t afford the $700 billion price tag. And for those who claim that this is bad for growth and bad for small businesses, let me remind you that with those tax rates in place, this country created 22 million jobs, raised incomes, and had the largest surplus in history.
In fact, if the Republican leadership in Congress really wants to help small businesses, they’ll stop using legislative maneuvers to block an up-or-down vote on a small business jobs bill that’s before the Senate right now. This is a bill that would do two things: cut taxes for small businesses and make loans more available for small businesses. It is fully paid for, and it was written by Democrats and Republicans. And yet, the other party continues to block this jobs bill – a delay that small business owners have said is actually leading them to put off hiring.
Look, I recognize that most of the Republicans in Congress have said no to just about every policy I’ve proposed since taking office. And on some issues, I realize it’s because there are genuine philosophical differences. But on issues like this one, the only reason they’re holding this up is politics, pure and simple. They’re making the same calculation they made just before the inauguration: if I fail, they win. Well, they might think this will get them where they need to go in November, but it won’t get our country where it needs to go in the long run.
So that’s the choice, Ohio. Do we return to the same failed policies that ran our economy into a ditch, or do we keep moving forward with policies that are slowly pulling us out? Do we settle for a slow decline, or do we reach for an America with a growing economy and a thriving middle-class?
That’s the America we see. We may not be there yet, but we know where this country needs to go.
We see a future where we invest in American innovation and American ingenuity; where we export more goods so we create more jobs here at home; where we make it easier to start a business or patent an invention; where we build a homegrown, clean energy industry – because I don’t want to see new solar panels or electric cars or advanced batteries manufactured in Europe or Asia. I want to see them made right here in America, by American workers.
We see an America where every citizen has the skills and training to compete with any worker in the world. That’s why we’ve set a goal to once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world by 2020. That’s why we’re revitalizing our community colleges, and reforming our education system based on what works for our children – not what perpetuates the status quo.
We see an America where a growing middle-class is the beating heart of a growing economy. That’s why I kept my campaign promise and gave a middle-class tax cut to 95% of working Americans. That’s why we passed health insurance reform that stops insurance companies from jacking up your premiums at will or denying you coverage just because you get sick. That’s why we passed financial reform that will end taxpayer-funded bailouts; reform that will stop credit card companies and mortgage lenders and Wall Street banks from taking advantage of taxpayers and consumers.
That’s why we’re trying to make it easier for workers to save for retirement, and fighting the efforts of some in the other party to privatize Social Security – because as long as I’m President, no one is going to take the retirement savings of a generation of Americans and hand it over to Wall Street.
That’s why we’re fighting to extend the child tax credit, and make permanent our new college tax credit. Because if we do, it will mean $10,000 in tuition relief for each child going to four years of college.
And finally, we see an America where we refuse to pass on the debt we inherited to the next generation.
Now, let me spend a minute on this issue, because we’ve heard a lot of moralizing on the other side about it. Along with tax cuts for the wealthy, the other party’s main economic proposal is that they’ll stop government spending.
Of course, they are right to be concerned about the long-term deficit – if we don’t get a handle on it soon, it can endanger our future. And at a time when folks are tightening their belts at home, I understand why a lot of Americans feel it’s time for government to show some discipline too.
But let’s look at the facts. When these same Republicans – including Mr. Boehner – were in charge, the number of earmarks and pet projects went up, not down. These same Republicans turned a record surplus that Bill Clinton left into a record deficit. Just this year, these same Republicans voted against a bipartisan fiscal commission that they themselves proposed. And when you ask them what programs they’d actually cut, they usually don’t have an answer.
That’s not fiscal responsibility. That’s not a serious plan to govern.
I’ll be honest – I refuse to cut back on those investments that will grow our economy in the future – investments in areas like education and clean energy and technology. That’s because economic growth is the single best way to bring down the deficit – and we need these investments to grow. But I am absolutely committed to fiscal responsibility, which is why I’ve already proposed freezing all discretionary spending unrelated to national security for the next three years. And once the bipartisan fiscal commission finishes its work, I will spend the next year making the tough choices necessary to further reduce our deficit and lower our debt.
Of course, reducing the deficit won’t be easy. Making up for the 8 million lost jobs caused by this recession won’t happen overnight. Not everything we’ve done over the last two years has worked as quickly as we had hoped, and I am keenly aware that not all our policies have been popular.
So no, our job is not easy. But you didn’t elect me to do what’s easy. You didn’t elect me to just read the polls and figure out how to keep myself in office. You didn’t elect me to avoid big problems. You elected me to do what’s right. And as long as I’m President, that’s exactly what I’ll do.
This country is emerging from an incredibly difficult period in its history – an era of irresponsibility that stretched from Wall Street to Washington and had a devastating effect on a lot of people. We have started turning the corner on that era, but part of moving forward is returning to the time-honored values that built this country: hard work and self-reliance; responsibility for ourselves, but also responsibility for one another. It’s about moving from an attitude that said “What’s in it for me” to one that asks, “What’s best for America? What’s best for all our workers? What’s best for all our businesses? What’s best for our children?”
These values aren’t Democratic or Republican. They aren’t conservative or liberal values. They’re American values. As Democrats, we take pride in what our party has accomplished over the last century: Social Security and the minimum wage; the GI Bill and Medicare; Civil Rights and worker’s rights and women’s rights. But we also recognize that throughout history, there has been a noble Republican vision as well, of what this country can be. It was the vision of Abraham Lincoln, who set up the first land grant colleges and launched the transcontinental railroad; the vision of Teddy Roosevelt, who used the power of government to break up monopolies; the vision of Dwight Eisenhower, who helped build the Interstate Highway System. And yes, the vision of Ronald Reagan, who despite his aversion to government, was willing to help save Social Security for future generations.
These were serious leaders for serious times. They were great politicians, but they didn’t spend all their time playing games or scoring points. They didn’t always prey on people’s fears and anxieties. They made mistakes, but they did what they thought was in the best interest of their country and its people.
That’s what the American people expect of us today – Democrats, Independents, and Republicans. That’s the debate they deserve. That’s the leadership we owe them.
I know that folks are worried about the future. I know there’s still a lot of hurt out here. And when times are tough, I know it can be tempting to give in to cynicism and fear; to doubt and division – to set our sights lower and settle for something less.
But that is not who we are, Ohio. Those are not the values that built this country. We are here today because in the worst of times, the people who came before us brought out the best in America. Because our parents and grandparents and great-grandparents were willing to work and sacrifice for us. They were willing to take great risks, and face great hardship, and reach for a future that would give us the chance at a better life. They knew that this country is greater than the sum of its parts – that America is not about the ambitions of any one individual, but the aspirations of an entire people and an entire nation.
That’s who we are. That is our legacy. And I’m convinced that if we’re willing to summon those values today; if we’re willing again to choose hope over fear; to choose the future over the past; to come together once more around the great project of national renewal, then we will restore our economy; rebuild our middle-class; and reclaim the American Dream for the next generation.
Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America.
Recent Comments