President Obama Calls on Congress to Fully Fund Embassy Security

President Obama Calls on Congress to Fully Fund Embassy Security | The White House Skip to main content | Skip to footer site map The White House. President Barack Obama Get Email UpdatesContact Us Go to homepage. The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts 2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Executive Orders Presidential Memoranda Proclamations Legislation Pending Legislation Signed Legislation Vetoed Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Visitor Access Records Financial Disclosures 2012 Annual Report to Congress 2011 Annual Report to Congress 2010 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff A Commitment to Transparency

Browse White House visitor logs

Issues Civil Rights It Gets Better Defense End of Iraq War Disabilities Economy Jobs Reform and Fiscal Responsibility Strengthening the Middle Class Support for Business Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Refinancing Rural Service Seniors & Social Security Snapshots Creating Jobs Health Care Small Business PreK-12 Education Taxes Tax Receipt The Buffett Rule Technology Urban Policy Veterans Joining Forces Violence Prevention Women Immigration Reform

Creating an Immigration System for the 21st Century

2012 Federal Taxpayer Receipt

Understand how and where your tax dollars are being spent

The Administration We the People

Create and Sign Petitions Now

President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden Being Biden Audio Series First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Chief of Staff Denis McDonough Deputy Chief of Staff Rob Nabors Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco Counselor to the President Peter Rouse Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House White House On the Go

Download our mobile apps

Take A Virtual Tour

View the Residence, East Wing and West Wing

Inside the White House Interactive Tour West Wing Tour Video Series Décor and Art Holidays Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows President’s Commission About the Fellowship Current Class Staff Bios News and Newsletters White House Internships About Program Presidential Department Descriptions Selection Process Internship Timeline & FAQs Tours & Events 2013 Easter Egg Roll Kitchen Garden Tours Take a Virtual Tour of the White House Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources /* Maximize height of menu features. */if(typeof(jQuery)!='undefined')jQuery.each($('#topnav'),function(i,v){var o=$(v),oh=o.height(),sh=o.siblings().height();if(oh Home • Briefing Room • Statements & Releases   The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release May 16, 2013 President Obama Calls on Congress to Fully Fund Embassy Security

Today, the President called on Congress to support and fully fund the Administration’s budget request to improve security of our embassies around the world.  In addition, the President called on Congress to support the full implementation of the recommendations of the Benghazi Accountability Review Board (ARB), including recommendations associated with additional support, authorities, and resources for the State Department.  Finally, the President called on Congress to support our efforts to enhance our Marine Security Guard detachments around the world as a part of our effort to better secure high-risk posts.

Every day, thousands of American men and women are serving our nation overseas – military service members, diplomats, development workers and others. They accept the risks that come with service because they understand that they are making vital contributions to our national interests and national security.  We owe it to all of them to do everything in our power to protect our personnel serving overseas.

In the wake of the attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities in September 2012, the Department of State reviewed its global security posture and took steps necessary to address security vulnerabilities, including submitting a request to reallocate $1.4 billion in FY 2013 resources to begin work this year that was approved by the Congress.

In addition to the $1.4 billion requested in FY 2013, the FY 2014 budget request provides over $4 billion for the Department of State’s embassy security programs, fully supporting this critical priority.  As part of this effort, the budget includes $2.2 billion to support increased embassy security construction recommend by the Benghazi Accountability Review Board (ARB).

The budget fully supports the resources necessary to address all recommendations made by the Benghazi ARB including increased embassy security construction, expanded Marine Security Guard detachments at US diplomatic facilities, increased security training, and support for a 5% increase in diplomatic security staff.

In addition to resources, the Department of State needs authority to address immediate security concerns.  The Department should have authority to transfer resources that are necessary to provide secure facilities for our personnel overseas.  For instance, in doing so, it should have the authority to draw from other State Department operating accounts.

The President will continue to do everything in his power to make sure a tragedy like this never happens again.  But as the President said, we can’t do this alone and the President will continue to urge members of Congress to work together on behalf of the American people.

(BA in Millions)

2012

Actual

2013

Enacted

2014

Request

Operations (WSP)                                                                        

$1,591  $2,250  $2,182Construction (WSU)                                                                            

$775 $1,897   $1,864Total State Security Programs1                                                    

$2,366   $4,147 $4,0461FY 13 Enacted include the Department of State’s $1.4 billion for embassy security in the wake of the September 11, 2012 Benghazi Attacks

 

Blog posts on this issue May 17, 2013 6:08 PM EDTWeekly Wrap Up: “What Our Families Deserve”

Here’s a quick glimpse at what happened this week on WhiteHouse.gov.

May 17, 2013 5:50 PM EDTA Stronger and Sustainable Military for the 21st Century

The President and the Department of Defense are taking unprecedented steps to protect our environment, achieve significant cost savings, and give our military better energy options.

May 17, 2013 5:28 PM EDTComing Together to Stop Slavery

Today at the White House, we convened the 10th annual meeting of the President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons.

view all related blog posts ul.related-content li.views-row img {float: left; padding: 5px 10px 0 0;}ul.related-content li.view-all {padding-bottom: 3em;} Stay ConnectedFacebookTwitterFlickrGoogle+YouTubeVimeoiTunesLinkedIn   Home The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Issues Civil Rights Defense Disabilities Economy Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Refinancing Rural Service Seniors & Social Security Snapshots Taxes Technology Urban Policy Veterans Violence Prevention Women The Administration President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House Inside the White House Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows White House Internships Tours & Events Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources En español Accessibility Copyright Information Privacy Policy Contact USA.gov Developers Apply for a Job

View the original article here

Congress must enact tax reform without territorial taxation

By Philip G. Cohen, professor, Pace University's Lubin School of Business, New York City - 04/18/13 04:20 PM ET

What does Loophole Expansion have to do with Tax Reform???Many companies are seeking to lower the federal tax rate that publicly-traded and other “C” corporations pay on taxable income. This is in line with a broad consensus that U.S. corporate (and perhaps individual) tax rates should be lowered, with the revenue lost from this effort made up for by limiting or eliminating certain exemptions and deductions, which is often referred to as broadening the base.??

Some of this effort has been characterized as loophole closing. While not a popular view among the U.S. corporate tax community, some have argued that loophole closing should also be used to raise additional revenue to pay-down deficits and stimulate job creation in the U.S. ??

Under the current U.S. tax structure, income not sourced or connected with the United States, and earned by foreign subsidiaries, will generally not be subject to U.S. taxation until if and when the earnings are distributed back to the United States. Many, if not most U.S. based multinationals, refrain from distributing overseas income to the United States unless most if not all the tax on the dividend is offset with foreign tax credits. Thus earnings from foreign subsidiaries operating in zero or low-taxed countries are generally kept offshore. This is referred to as the lockout effect and in some cases results in the income never being subject to U.S. or foreign tax.??

There is an exception to deferral for certain types of income and activities. When this exception applies, there is immediate U.S. taxation. The latter treatment is generally reserved for passive income, highly mobile activities, as well as investment of earnings in United States property, including most loans to related U.S. companies. If anything, over the last 10-15 years, Subpart F, the part of the Internal Revenue Code that provides for immediate U.S. taxation of certain offshore earnings, has been weakened with provisions enacted including “look-thru” and the “active financing” exception coupled with the wide utilization of foreign entities that are disregarded for U.S. tax purposes. Even aside from the foregoing, there are many other techniques available under current law, like short-term loans, to legally avoid Subpart F’s impact.??

Many U.S. based multinationals are concentrating their lobbying efforts to using tax reform to implement territorial taxation. Moving toward territorial taxation has a plethora of advocates. Even the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, the so-called Simpson-Bowles Commission, whose mission was deficit reduction supported territorial taxation and Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson continue to do so. Chairman Camp of the House Ways and Means Committee is also a proponent of territorial taxation albeit with some limits. One argument for territorial taxation is that companies based outside the U.S. generally do not face worldwide taxation on active income, putting companies incorporated in the U.S. at a competitive disadvantage with their foreign-based rivals. The second argument for territorial taxation is that it will eliminate the lockout effect of having hundreds of billions of dollars of earnings trapped offshore.??

What does loophole expansion have to do with either tax reform or deficit reduction? There is an existing loophole for offshore earnings. The Internal Revenue Code today taxes income earned by a foreign subsidiary differently than if earned in the U.S. because taxation of the former is generally deferred. Hundreds of billions of dollars of profits are being shifted from the United States tax base, to abroad, where it’s deferred until if and when repatriated. It is difficult for the IRS to police this area.??

A territorial tax system would serve to encourage the shifting of activities offshore, and, with it, taxable profits and jobs. Congress attempted to address the lockout effect in 2004, with the enactment of Internal Revenue Code section 965 which permitted for a limited time, U.S. based multinationals to repatriate billions of dollars kept in foreign subsidiaries at a tax rate of 5.25 percent compared to the general corporate tax rate of 35 percent. This provision, which was part of The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, was also heavily lobbied for by many of the same companies behind the push for territorial taxation. It didn’t create many U.S. jobs if you don’t include K Street lobbyists.

??Charlie Wilson, who headed General Motors, and became secretary of Defense under President Eisenhower has been misquoted as testifying that “what’s good for General Motors is good for the country.” There is no doubt that expanding the deferral loophole to full-blown adoption of territorial taxation would benefit many U.S. based multinationals. There are well-funded efforts to influence lawmakers of both parties in this effort.??

Congress and the administration however have a fiduciary obligation to look beyond whether such tax reform would benefit these companies and inquire how such a migration would impact jobs in the United States and the U.S. tax base. Is widening the barnyard door even further good for America? I submit that under such criteria the case for expanding the deferral loophole is dubious.??

Philip G. Cohen is a tax professor at Pace University Lubin School of Business and a retired Vice President-Tax & General Tax Counsel for Unilever United States, Inc. The opinion expressed here is his personal views.

View Comments

View the original article here

White House blames Congress for Gitmo prison staying open

The White House on Monday blamed Congress for preventing the closing of the Guantánamo Bay detention prison amid a hunger strike and riots at the camp.

President Obama “remains committed” to closing Guantánamo Bay, something he said he would do in his first week in office in 2009, White House press secretary Jay Carney insisted.

“It is the president’s view that facility ought to be closed,” Carney said. “We have taken steps processing detainees, transferring them to third countries, but the obstacles to closing Guantánamo Bay have been raised by Congress.”

Violent riots broke out at one of the prison's camps this weekend after military authorities decided to end communal housing, instead moving prisoners to individual cells.

The Pentagon said the decision was made after detainees covered windows and surveillance cameras, a move that coincided with a hunger strike being staged by dozens of prisoners. At least one prisoner was injured by a rubber bullet in the clash with guards on Saturday.

The dispute reportedly began when inmates were angered by guards searching copies of the Quran issued by the military. The Pentagon said at least 11 inmates protesting their treatment were being force-fed.

Carney confirmed that the White House had been made aware of the planned move.

“We were informed by the Department of Defense by the steps it was going to take to move detainees from Camp Six communal situation to single cell living in order to ensure their health and security,” he said.

Saturday's violence has refocused attention on the administration’s failed attempt to close the entire detention facility in Cuba.

Congress has repeatedly attached provisions in military spending bills barring the White House from financing trials of Guantánamo captives on U.S. soil or opening a military prison on U.S. soil. Congress has also mandated military detention for most future al Qaeda cases, increasing the difficulty of closing the prison.

On Monday, Carney said Obama was trying to move forward with the prison’s closure.

“Congress has, as you know, raised obstacles to this legislatively,” he said. “And that has made it, obviously, more difficult to pursue this, but that does not change the fact that it is the president's objective, and we are, you know, constantly looking for ways to move forward on that objective.”

The Pentagon hasn’t allowed an extended visit to Guantánamo by defense attorneys for any of the prisoners.

In January, defense attorneys for the accused 9/11 hijackers requested a 48-hour visit to Camp Seven to examine the living conditions at the camp amid accusations of mistreatment by military officials.

Members of the International Red Cross were given special access to the Camp Seven compound in 2009, but their report was classified by the U.S. government and has yet to be released.

Officials at Guantánamo also came under criticism for revelations of covert surveillance of confidential attorney-client meetings between terror detainees and their defense teams at Guantánamo.

—This story was updated at 4:09 p.m.

View Comments

View the original article here

Obama calls on Congress to approve $21B infrastructure bill

President Obama on Friday called for Congress to approve a $21 billion package aimed at building public-private partnerships to improve the nation's crumbling infrastructure.

“Let's get this done. Let's rebuild this country we love. Let's make sure we're staying on the cutting edge,” Obama told a boisterous crowd on a platform overlooking the Port of Miami.

The platform provided a view of a $2 billion tunnel project intended to improve congestion and allow for quicker trade. Obama said the project, funded by both public and private dollars, was a template for the rest of the nation.

“We can do this not just here in Miami Dade, but we can do this all across the country,” Obama said, calling for a “partnership to rebuild America.”

Obama suggested creating an infrastructure bank that could help seed major projects, and White House officials say they want Congress to allocate $10 billion for the program.

The president also unveiled a $4 billion investment program in support of the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA). The program, expanded in last year’s transportation bill, is intended to leverage private and nonfederal funding for projects of regional or national significance through loans, loan guarantees and lines of credit.

“Instead of picking projects based on pork barrel politics, we'll pick them based on how good they are for the economy,” Obama said.

Obama additionally called for a set of $7 billion in tax incentives meant to support state and municipal bonds for projects. Among them is a measure that would do away with penalties, sometimes totaling up to 35 percent, on foreign investment in U.S. real estate and infrastructure projects.

The president suggested there was a bipartisan consensus for his proposals, noting the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the nation's largest labor organization both back infrastructure spending.

“If you've got the Chamber and the unions agreeing, then the politicians should be able to agree, too,” Obama said.

Still, the plan, which will be included in the president's budget when it is released April 10, is likely to face opposition from Republicans in Congress. On Friday, Obama suggested some hypocrisy from members who railed against government spending but then showed up to ribbon-cutting ceremonies in their districts.

“If you think it's good for your district, then it's probably good for other districts too,” Obama said. “We can't allow Washington politics to get in the way of progress.”

Obama also warned that the United States risked losing jobs and commerce to nations with superior infrastructure if Congress failed to act.

“What are we waiting for? There's work to be done, there's workers that are ready to do it,” Obama said. “Let's prove to the world that there's no better place to be than the United States of America.”

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in January that he favored infrastructural improvements but questioned how they would be funded.

“It's easy to go out there and be Santa Claus and talk about all the things you want to give away, but at some point somebody has to pay the bill,” Boehner said.

View Comments

View the original article here

Congress Is Strong-Arming The Postal Service Into Bankruptcy Even Faster

On Thursday, Congress voted against allowing the U.S. Postal Service to cut its delivery down to five days a week, forcing the organization to keep delivering mail on Saturdays. This will drive the USPS into looming bankruptcy — already foisted upon the USPS by Congress itself — even faster.

In 2006, Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, mandating that the USPS front the money for 75 years of employee pensions — a requirement no other public or private institution faces.

In trying to scrape up money for the pensions of kids who haven’t even graduated high school yet, the USPS has spiraled into near-bankruptcy. Without the pension requirement, a July 2012 analysis showed, the USPS would have a $1.5 billion surplus. Instead, it’s billions of dollars in the red.

Dropping Saturday delivery was supposed to be its way of trying to fight these congressionally-imposed deficits. But yesterday, Congress rejected the five-day proposal, roundly agreeing that the USPS must keep its service at six days a week, even though it can hardly afford to do so.

Now, the USPS is looking for a workaround to see if it can cut back on first-class mail, magazine, and direct mail delivery while still meeting Congress’s six-day mandate.

Though the Postal Service is an independent agency, a legal opinion by the Government Accountability Office found that it needs Congressional approval to change its budget or delivery schedule.

Congress has apparently not considered that postal access matters, particularly to rural Americans. Members of Congress seem content to let the USPS flounder, despite the fact that it would take just one simple step to fix the USPS’s budget problems: repealing the pension requirement. It doesn’t look like Congress will let that happen any time soon.

View the original article here

Guestworkers Who Suffered Horrific Conditions At McDonald’s Bring Grievances To Congress

The group's lodging consisted of cots on the floor of a boiler room

When a group of young Latin American students arrived in the United States to work as guestworkers at a Pennsylvania McDonald’s, they thought they were in for an amazing experience — a chance to see the US up close, and to experience the culture that defines the country. But that’s not what they got at all.

Instead, Jorge Rios of Argentina, Fernando Accosta from Paraguay, Luis Fernando Suarez Mendosa of Peru, and Rodrigo Yanez of Chile say they saw the worst of American culture: The exploitation of low-wage workers with no voice.

At the McDonald’s where they were sent to work, they report that they were shoved into a basement room with six cots, and forced to pay for the inadequate lodging out of their meager wages — made all the more meager by the fact that their boss wouldn’t give them the 40 hours a week promised.

They also say they had to walk a dangerous highway to get to work:

Adding insult to injury, each student had paid $3,000 just to get into the guestworker program.

But now, in coordination with the broader National Guestworkers Alliance, those students and others have filed complaints with the State Department and Department of Labor. McDonald’s says it is investigating the complaints, which are against a single franchise owner and not the company as a whole.

The students also brought their grievances to the apex of the immigration debate, Capitol Hill, on Wednesday. They told their personal testimonies to legislators, trying to convince them that any immigration overhaul must include the language in the guestworker protections.

“When we asked for solutions, the sponsor didn’t solve our problems. When we asked for help, the Department of State didn’t assist us. I feared losing everything I had spent to come here,” said Jorge Rios, who originally contacted the Guestworker Alliance to report the abuses he experienced, “I feared being devoid of the opportunity to travel around the country. I feared suffering the humiliation of being sent back home. I feared being blacklisted and losing the chance to re-enter the US in the future. I was paralyzed by fear.”

Republicans have insisted that if they are going to consider any immigration reform legislation, a guest worker program must be a part of the package. Such programs generally bring in low-wage workers to do jobs Americans won’t, and those workers remain in the country on a J1 visa for some number of months before returning to their country of origin.

But story after story reveals that such programs have become exploitative, and the Southern Poverty Law Center has refered to the work as “close to slavery.” If an expanded guestworker program does become part of the larger immigration reform package, questions about the guestworker program and its treatment of young students are bound to come up.

View the original article here

Students play waiting game while Congress catches up on student loan debacle

This summer, millions of students might see the interest rate double on their student loans unless Congress takes action. Doubling of the interest rate will cost the average college student about $1,000 more per year of school.
Think you’re having déjà vu? Last summer, Congress narrowly stopped interest rates from doubling. One year later, here we are facing the same crisis. This time around, students and taxpayers need a strong long-term solution that makes the student loan system more effective and affordable for students and families.

Wednesday morning, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce held a hearing on the federal student loan program. The consensus among the witnesses who testified at the hearing was that systemic changes are needed. Notably, neither students nor student representatives were among the witnesses called, so here’s our synopsis and response:
•    Student loan interest rates

One major question discussed today was not just what the interest rate on federal student loans should be, but how Congress should set that rate. Currently, federal student loans have a fixed interest rate set by Congress. This rate does not change when the cost of borrowing changes in the market. Several witnesses proposed having a market-based fixed rate. Under this proposal, the interest rate available for federal loans would vary from year to year based on market conditions, but would be fixed for borrowers throughout repayment. There was disagreement as to whether such a rate should have a cap. 

Our take: If we change the rate to a market-based fixed rate, we need protections like a cap to ensure affordability over the long-run. Moreover, some bills we’ve seen change interest rates by shifting debt from the government to students, taking billions out of student aid to reduce the deficit – a move that is bad for students and bad for our country’s future.

•    Income-based repayment

Witnesses also supported increasing participation in income-based repayment as a way of promoting college affordability and decreasing default rates. Under income-based repayment, a borrower’s monthly loan payment is a set percentage of her income. One witness suggested improving financial aid counseling so students know about the repayment options available to them before they find themselves struggling to pay back their loans. Another popular suggestion: automatically enroll all students in a single, income-based repayment program.

Our take: Income-based repayment should be a priority, and we need more students taking advantage of the benefits it offers.  Defaulting students into IBR would ensure that would happen. Federal counseling also needs to be improved, and today, Senators Harkin and Mikulski introduced the Smarter Borrowing Act that aims to do just that.

•    Increase college access and completion

Some participants discussed how a college education is a worthwhile investment. College graduates have lower unemployment rates and can expect to earn more over their lifetimes than those who do not complete college. Having an educated workforce improves the overall economy and benefits society as a whole.

Our take: We know that, they know that, so let’s get to work on making college more accessible and affordable. For example, we need to support investments like Pell grants.

With the looming July deadline, the coming months are likely to invite more congressional noise on the topic. We plan to make sure that students and borrowers are a part of that process. 
Postolowski is a legal fellow at Young Invincibles - a non-profit, non-partisan youth advocacy organization dedicated to amplifying the voices of young Americans and expanding economic opportunity for our generation.

View Comments

View the original article here

Weekly Address: Congress Must Compromise to Stop the Impact of the Sequester

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Hi, everybody. On Friday, I met with leaders of both parties in Congress to try and find a way forward in light of the severe budget cuts – known in Washington as “the sequester” – that have already started to inflict pain on communities across the country.

These cuts are not smart. They will hurt our economy and cost us jobs. And Congress can turn them off at any time – as soon as both sides are willing to compromise.

As a nation, we’ve already fought back from the worst economic crisis of our lifetimes, and we’ll get through this, too. But at a time when our businesses are finally gaining some traction, hiring new workers, bringing jobs back to America – the last thing Washington should do is to get in their way. That’s what these cuts to education, research, and defense will do. It’s unnecessary. And at a time when too many of our friends and neighbors are still looking for work, it’s inexcusable.

Now, it’s important to understand that, while not everyone will feel the pain of these cuts right away, the pain will be real. Many middle-class families will have their lives disrupted in a significant way.

Beginning this week, businesses that work with the military will have to lay folks off. Communities near military bases will take a serious blow. Hundreds of thousands of Americans who serve their country – Border Patrol agents, FBI agents, civilians who work for the Defense Department – will see their wages cut and their hours reduced.

This will cause a ripple effect across the economy. Businesses will suffer because customers will have less money to spend. The longer these cuts remain in place, the greater the damage. Economists estimate they could eventually cost us more than 750,000 jobs and slow our economy by over one-half of one percent.

Here’s the thing: none of this is necessary. It’s happening because Republicans in Congress chose this outcome over closing a single wasteful tax loophole that helps reduce the deficit. Just this week, they decided that protecting special interest tax breaks for the well-off and well-connected is more important than protecting our military and middle-class families from these cuts.

I still believe we can and must replace these cuts with a balanced approach – one that combines smart spending cuts with entitlement reform and changes to our tax code that make it more fair for families and businesses without raising anyone’s tax rates. That’s how we can reduce our deficit without laying off workers, or forcing parents and students to pay the price. I don’t think that’s too much to ask. It’s the kind of approach I’ve proposed for two years now. A majority of the American people agree with me on this approach – including a majority of Republicans. We just need Republicans in Congress to catch up with their own party and the rest of the country.

Now, I know there are Republicans in Congress who would actually rather see tax loopholes closed than let these cuts go through. And I know there are Democrats who’d rather do smart entitlement reform than let these cuts go through. There’s a caucus of common sense. And I’m going to keep reaching out to them to fix this for good.

Because the American people are weary of perpetual partisanship and brinksmanship. This is America, and in America, we don’t careen from one manufactured crisis to another. We make smart choices. We plan. We prioritize. So I’m going to push through this paralysis and keep fighting for the real challenges facing middle-class families. I’m going to keep pushing for high-quality preschool for every family that wants it, and make sure the minimum wage becomes a wage you can live on. I’m going to keep pushing to fix our immigration system, repair our transportation system, and keep our children safe from gun violence.

That’s the work you elected me to do. That’s what I’m focused on every single day. Thanks.

 ###

Mrs. Obama joins a virtual conversation about Let’s Move!, her initiative to ensure our nation’s kids grow up healthy and reach their full potential.

The Open Government Partnership publishes the text of the President's directive extending whistleblower protections to the intelligence and national security communities, as requested by the community.

The Department of Labor celebrates its centennial anniversary and looks forward to continuing its important work on behalf on America's workers.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

WEEKLY ADDRESS: Congress Must Act Now to Stop the Sequester

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

WASHINGTON, DC—President Obama used this week’s address to urge Congress to stop the harmful automatic cuts that threaten thousands of jobs and affect our national security—called the sequester—from taking effect on March 1st.  The President and Congressional Democrats have already put forward solutions to avoid these cuts and reduce the deficit in a balanced way, and now it’s time for Congressional Republicans to compromise by closing some loopholes that protect the wealthiest Americans so that we can reduce the deficit in a balanced way and create jobs for the middle class. 

The audio of the address and video of the address will be available online at www.whitehouse.gov at 6:00 a.m. ET, Saturday, February 23, 2013.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
As Prepared for Delivery
The White House
February 23, 2013

Hi, everybody.  Our top priority as a country right now should be doing everything we can to grow our economy and create good, middle class jobs. 

And yet, less than one week from now, Congress is poised to allow a series of arbitrary, automatic budget cuts that will do the exact opposite.  They will slow our economy.  They will eliminate good jobs.  They will leave many families who are already stretched to the limit scrambling to figure out what to do. 

But here’s the thing: these cuts don’t have to happen.  Congress can turn them off anytime with just a little compromise.  They can pass a balanced plan for deficit reduction.  They can cut spending in a smart way, and close wasteful tax loopholes for the well-off and well-connected. 

Unfortunately, it appears that Republicans in Congress have decided that instead of compromising – instead of asking anything of the wealthiest Americans – they would rather let these cuts fall squarely on the middle class.

Here’s what that choice means.  Once these cuts take effect, thousands of teachers and educators will be laid off, and tens of thousands of parents will have to scramble to find child care for their kids.  Air traffic controllers and airport security will see cutbacks, causing delays across the country.  Even President Bush’s director of the National Institutes of Health says these cuts will set back medical science for a generation.

Already, the threat of these cuts has forced the Navy to delay the deployment of an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf – affecting our ability to respond to threats in an unstable part of the world.  And just this week, the Pentagon announced that if these cuts go through, almost 800,000 defense employees – the equivalent of every person in Miami and Cleveland combined – will be forced to take unpaid leave. 

That’s what this choice means.  Are Republicans in Congress really willing to let these cuts fall on our kids’ schools and mental health care just to protect tax loopholes for corporate jet owners?  Are they really willing to slash military health care and the border patrol just because they refuse to eliminate tax breaks for big oil companies?  Are they seriously prepared to inflict more pain on the middle class because they refuse to ask anything more of those at the very top? 

These are the questions Republicans in Congress need to ask themselves.  And I’m hopeful they’ll change their minds.  Because the American people have worked too hard for too long to see everything they’ve built undone by partisan recklessness in Washington. 

I believe we should work together to build on the more than $2.5 trillion in deficit reduction we’ve already achieved.  But I believe we should do it in a balanced way – with smart spending cuts, entitlement reform, and tax reform. That’s my plan.  It's got tough cuts, tough reforms, and asks more of the wealthiest Americans. It's on the White House website for everyone to see.  And it requires Democrats and Republicans to meet half way to resolve the problem.  That’s what the American people expect. And that’s what you deserve.

We just need Republicans in Washington to come around.  Because we need their help to finish the job of reducing our deficit in a smart way that doesn’t hurt our economy or our people.  After all, as we learned in the 1990s, nothing shrinks the deficit faster than a growing economy that creates good, middle-class jobs.  That has to be our driving focus.  That has to be our North Star.  Making America a magnet for good jobs.  Equipping our people with the skills required to fill those jobs.  Making sure your hard work leads to a decent living.  That’s what this city should be focused on like a laser.  And I’m going to keep pushing folks here to remember that. 

Thanks.

President Obama urges Congress to stop the sequester -- the harmful automatic cuts that threaten thousands of jobs and affect our national security from taking effect on March 1.

Have questions about what the sequester is, and why American famillies and our national economy face the threat of harmful budget cuts? Check out this explainer for some background.

In an effort to encourage transparency and participation in government, we invite you to take part in developing our Open Government self-assessment report.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

’2016: Obama’s America’ Mailed To Every Member Of Congress

Disgraced former college president and conservative pseudointellectual Dinesh D’Souza would very much like to be relevant again:

While President Barack Obama was finishing up the State of the Union address during a nationally televised speech Tuesday night, hundreds of copies of a DVD featuring an interview with his impoverished half-brother were being mailed to senators, congressmen, the governors of all 50 states and the nine Supreme Court justices.

One copy of the movie, 2016: Obama’s America, also was mailed to the president at his White House address and another went to Vice President Joe Biden. The film tries to make the point that Obama’s agenda is bad for America and that the rationale for his policies stems from a hard-left ideology that was instilled in him by the example set by his absentee father.

2016: Obama’s America is the second best-performing political documentary of all time. But just because it drew a paranoid sector of the electorate to the box office doesn’t mean it’s an effective political advocacy tool. Congress already has a terrifying number of members who believe that President Obama is a socialist whose birthplace remains in question, and who probably aren’t going to make time to watch a movie that reaffirms their convictions. And I doubt that Nancy Pelosi is going to settle in for movie night with some popcorn and end the evening shaken, dash her oversized pearl necklaces to the floor, and hustle off to brunch with Michele Bachmann to discuss how they can work together. In both cases, no matter what members of Congress (and Joe Biden) think of the president and his ideological motivations, the fact remains that Barack Obama was reelected. That he is president and has the power to push for legislation and make executive orders and decisions is a fact, and not something that you can wish away.

Besides, if you’re going to entertain Congress with insane conspiracy theories about President Obama, the actual documentary to watch is Dreams From My Real Father. A truly uproarious piece of cinema, the movie uses old pin-up photos to argue that Obama’s actual father is the left labor activist, publisher, and deeply pretentious poet Frank Marshall Davis, and suggests that Obama had a nose job so he’d look less like his real father. The movie never explains why it would have been better for Stanley Ann Dunham to have become pregnant by a Kenyan PhD candidate than a semi-wacky American. But its self-seriousness is at least really, really funny. And it’s a truly delightful illustration of how deranged Obama’s made people. This movement isn’t just about deligitimizing his claim to the presidency. It’s about running permanently down rabbit holes.

View the original article here

Federal Reserve Vice Chair Excoriates Congress For Failing To Boost The Economy

Federal Reserve Vice Chair Janet Yellen

After passage of the 2009 economic stimulus package, which helped save or create millions of jobs, Congress all but gave up providing support to the labor market. Instead, in the last two years, the nation’s deficits have been reduced by $2.5 trillion, with the overwhelming majority coming from spending cuts.

In a speech today, Federal Reserve Vice Chair Janet Yellen took policymakers to task for failing to provide support for the economy, noting that spending cuts have been a “headwind for the recovery“:

Discretionary fiscal policy hasn’t been much of a tailwind during this recovery. In the year following the end of the recession, discretionary fiscal policy at the federal, state, and local levels boosted growth at roughly the same pace as in past recoveries, as exhibit 3 indicates. But instead of contributing to growth thereafter, discretionary fiscal policy this time has actually acted to restrain the recovery.

State and local governments were cutting spending and, in some cases, raising taxes for much of this period to deal with revenue shortfalls. At the federal level, policymakers have reduced purchases of goods and services, allowed stimulus-related spending to decline, and have put in place further policy actions to reduce deficits…While a long-term plan is needed to reduce deficits and slow the growth of federal debt, the tax increases and spending cuts that would have occurred last month, absent action by the Congress and the President, likely would have been a headwind strong enough to blow the United States back into recession. Negotiations continue over the extent of spending cuts now due to take effect beginning in March, and I expect that discretionary fiscal policy will continue to be a headwind for the recovery for some time, instead of the tailwind it has been in the past.

Former President Bill Clinton said much the same thing last week, noting that “everybody that’s tried austerity in a time of no growth has wound up cutting revenues even more than they cut spending because you just get into the downward spiral and drag the country back into recession.” The experience of Europe should be showing U.S. policymakers that cutting spending in a weak economy backfires, squashing economic growth, which causes debt to expand. But it doesn’t seem like that lesson is taking hold.

View the original article here

The One Question Congress Must Ask Before Confirming Obama’s CIA Director

The Senate Intelligence Committee will hold a hearing tomorrow on the confirmation of President Obama’s nominee for Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, John Brennan. There are a number of questions Brennan should and needs to answer but the hearing presents the perfect opportunity to get the current top Obama administration counterterrorism official perhaps most closely involved in the targeted killing program against al Qaeda to answer the fundamental question about it: when does it end?

Since his first bid to direct the Agency fizzled in 2008 after questions were raised about his role in the CIA torture program during the Bush years, Brennan has filled an at times more vital role in the Obama administration. Acting as the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, serving under the National Security Adviser, Brennan has advised the President on counterterrorism for the past four years. As such, his access to the President to weigh in on security matters domestic and international has been almost unparalleled. In the aftermath of the failed Christmas Day bombing in 2009, Brennan authored a scathing review of what was then U.S. counterterrorism policy. While the Newtown tragedy was still ongoing last December, it was Brennan who first briefed Obama about the school shooting.

Brennan’s most controversial role has been his front-and-center position in the Administration’s military campaign against al-Qaeda and its affiliates. The use of targeted killings — most famously executed with drones — against individuals and groups suspect of connection to terrorist groups off the battlefield is by far the most visible outcome of those discussions. In a profile written in the Washington Post, Brennan is identified as the primary supporter of codifying the rules regarding when and where armed drone strikes could be carried out into what’s now called “the playbook” and the benign-sounding disposition matrix that identifies targets for strikes.

So Brennan, then, is ideally positioned to answer the fundamental question that needs to be answered to get a hold on America’s targeted killing program:

What role do targeted killings play in the broader U.S. counter-terrorism strategy and under what circumstances might we cease to employ them?

The question goes beyond the tactic of drone strikes to the conditions that cause them to be used in the first place. As a tactic, drone strikes have garnered significant opposition due to the potential for blowback among the populations where they are utilized, as well as the secrecy that surrounds the CIA’s classified program in Pakistan and moral questions about the serious harm cost in civilian lives the program carries with it. However, whether the program is achieving the ends that the Obama administration seeks, or even an explanation of what those ends are, is often left out of the debate and questioning of government officials.

Getting Brennan to explain what the Administration’s end game is is the most important step towards getting a handle on the program. Were the program to continue indefinitely, without any clear guidelines as to what sufficient success to cease killings might look like, all of the associated problems — blowback, civilian casualties, and undermining international law — would likely be exacerbated, as even a tightly regulated program would invariably carry the risks of unintended consequences. Moreover, a failure to give a clear account of the reasons why the Administration believes targeted killings are effectively degrading al-Qaeda and integrating that strategy into a legal understanding of when that degradation is enough to justify ending the program risks allowing targeted killings to continue well after they’ve become counterproductive. There’s also something intrinsically dangerous about a war without a clearly defined endpoint.

Defining what strategic victory looks like would also help get a handle on the thorny legal problems surrounding killing suspected American al-Qaeda members. According to the Department of Justice white paper released Monday night, much of the Administration’s justification for the killing of American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki stemmed from the Authorization of the Use of Military Force (AUMF) against al-Qaeda after 9/11. An account of when the AUMF might no longer permit targeted killings would also provide a basic benchmark for judging when the Administration’s claimed power to kill Americans would expire on its own terms.

The Administration has clearly thought about these matters. Former Pentagon General Counsel Jeh Johnson hinted that there was “a tipping point at which so many of the leaders and operatives of al-Qaeda and its affiliates have been killed or captured…that al-Qaeda as we know it, the organization that our Congress authorized the military to pursue in 2001, has been effectively destroyed.” Retiring Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta similarly said that targeted killings are “not something that we’re going to have to continue to use forever.” Getting Brennan to clarify Johnson and Panetta’s remarks would go a long way towards providing some needed oversight for the targeted killing program.

View the original article here

House Republicans Start New Congress By Telling The Same Old Lies About Wall Street Reform

The new chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), this week released a statement announcing that “the work of our committee and subcommittees has perhaps never been more important to hard-working taxpayers.” However, Hensarling made it clear that he doesn’t have much interest in abandoning the playbook of former Chairman Spencer Bachus (R-AL), as the statement went on to say “during the past few years, we’ve seen a mind-numbing, innovation-choking, job-killing flood of federal red tape…And we’ve observed how Congress enshrined a ‘too big to fail’ bailout scheme into law.”

But there is no “too big to fail bailout scheme” in the Dodd-Frank financial reform law, which was signed by President Obama in 2010. The law lays out a clear process, called resolution authority, for unwinding a troubled financial firm without resorting to the sort of bailouts used in 2008. The law, in fact, explicitly bars the use of the process to bail out a firm. Former Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) — whose name graces the Wall Street reform law — called the process “death panels” for banks.

But House Republicans love to perpetuate the myth that Dodd-Frank enshrines bailouts. In fact, recent House Republican budgets have called for the repeal of resolution authority, even though that would set the country back right where it was in 2008: with little choice but to bail out failing firms or risk a financial calamity. As economist Mark Thoma explained:

The resolution authority in Dodd-Frank is intended to fix this problem [of bailouts] by putting into place a procedure that is similar to what is done with ordinary banks. Resolution authority allows government regulators to take control of the banks, fix the problems, and then return them to the private sector. But, and this is important to recognize, Dodd-Frank also prevents the type of bank bailout that was done during the financial crisis.

Thus, the authority for the type of bailout that we saw during the crisis no longer exists. If if we now remove resolution authority there will be just one choice if a too big to fail firm gets in trouble — let it fail. That, and the cascading shadow bank failures that would follow, would be a disaster.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, responded to Hensarling’s statement by saying, “our colleagues in the majority made a claim which misrepresents the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act…Dodd-Frank specifically ends too-big-to-fail by prohibiting the bailout of a failing financial institution. In fact, it mandates the orderly liquidation of such an institution, in which its executives are dismissed and its shareholders are wiped out.”

Outgoing Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said in an interview that he believes “efforts to water down the Dodd-Frank financial reform law have largely fallen by the wayside.” But that hasn’t stopped House Republicans from employing the same rhetorical pot shots that they were using even before the law passed.

View the original article here

Democratic freshman lawmaker: Congress not working enough

Rep. Rick Nolan (D-Minn.) said Friday that Congress is not working enough.

Speaking on MSNBC’s “The Ed Show,” Nolan, who served before in the House for three terms starting in the 1970s, told host Ed Schultz that lawmakers are working less now than they did the last time he was in Washington.

“Back when I served before, we worked 48 out of 52 weeks. This Congress is going to work, you know, 31, 32 weeks out of 52 weeks,” Nolan said. “We used to work four and five days a week. And we would be in committee in the morning. We would be in session during the afternoon and into the evening. And we got things done.”

Nolan said that time spent together would lead to lawmakers getting to know each other and learning how to better collaborate on legislation. The lawmaker, who beat Republican Chip Cravaack last election to return to Congress, has blamed fundraising in the past for the low legislative workload.

“Money has really corrupted the entire political process. The sad story, Ed, here is that the one with the most money generally gets the most votes,” Nolan said on Friday. “So people have come to the conclusion — and, quite frankly, understandably so, that there`s no sense running unless you're going to have at least enough money, and hopefully more than the other person that you're running against.”

Nolan also said Congress is not governing.

“Congress isn`t governing, in your opinion?” asked Schultz.

“No. You can`t run a business that way. You can’t run a country that way,” Nolan said.

View Comments

View the original article here

As Congress responds to meningitis outbreak: First, do no harm

By B. Douglas Hoey, CEO, National Community Pharmacists Association - 01/11/13 01:45 PM ET

When there is a national crisis, there’s often a notion to pass legislation to try to prevent a recurrence from ever happening again. Now, in the wake of the tragic meningitis outbreak allegedly caused by tainted medications from a rogue drug manufacturer, some in Congress are looking to take action.

While there may be room for a carefully crafted legislative solution, the situation calls to mind the time-tested, medical-school adage: First, do no harm.

In the event of the meningitis outbreak allegedly caused by the New England Compounding Center (NECC), it is important that Congress take targeted action to address the root cause of the problem. Overly broad legislation could have unanticipated consequences for patients and small business community pharmacies. For starters, everyone should recognize that NECC appears to have acted as a small-scale manufacturer of prescription drugs, churning out many thousands of doses and without first obtaining the necessary prescriptions. That’s a far cry from traditional pharmacy compounding.

In comments submitted to both the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee and the House Energy and Commerce Committee in conjunction with their recent hearings, the National Community Pharmacists Association (NCPA) drew clear contrasts between the activities reportedly performed by NECC and the individualized compounding performed by independent community pharmacies.

Independent community pharmacists compound special needs medications for individual patients where a commercial product is not available and in response to a physician’s prescription request. This may include making a liquid form of a medication for patients who have trouble swallowing pills or flavoring a medication for pediatric patients. Compounding also helps alleviate drug shortages on a regular basis. Perhaps most notably, just a few years ago during the nationwide H1N1 flu outbreak, traditional compounding helped alleviate a drug shortage for the liquid form of Tamiflu for children.

As previously evidenced, traditional compounding plays an integral role in the healthcare system. According to a survey of NCPA members, 85% of independent pharmacies perform compounding on behalf of patients and 62% say compounding makes up no more than 5% of their business. While compounding is a small, niche service for most community pharmacies, it is vital to meet specific needs of patients.

Given traditional compounding’s important role in the healthcare system, Congress should carefully consider any legislative changes. Such due diligence should start with an analysis of existing statutes and regulations.

Were existing state and federal laws and regulations properly enforced in the NECC case? Evidence suggests not, judging by congressional hearings and media reports. Had existing authorities been exercised and requirements been enforced, the NECC tragedy could have been greatly mitigated or possibly prevented altogether. In fact, current law allows the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to identify and stop rogue drug manufacturers as NECC appears to have been.

As Congress moves forward, NCPA stands ready to work with policymakers to ensure that any new legislation or regulations address the critical issue of proper oversight of the manufacturing of prescription drugs and shutting down any outliers like NECC. This balanced approach will ensure that patients maintain access to individualized medications when needed and that independent community pharmacies remain part of the solution to lowering health care costs and alleviating drug shortages when applicable.

Let’s be certain not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Hoey is CEO of the National Community Pharmacists Association.

View Comments

View the original article here

Americans Prefer Cockroaches, Traffic Jams and Nickelback To Congress

As the nation braces itself to hit the debt limit as early as February 15, Congress is as gridlocked as ever. Republican lawmakers are now suggesting they will resist raising the debt ceiling, risking a government shutdown and a default on U.S. credit. The last fight over the debt ceiling in August 2011 led to an unprecedented downgrade of U.S. credit and billions of wasted taxpayer dollars.

Americans were paying attention during 2011's fight, and their approval rating of Congress plunged to an all-time low soon after the credit downgrade. A record 82 percent of respondents said at the time they disapproved of the job Congress was doing. Now, on the verge of another debt ceiling crisis, that number has risen to 85 percent.

Public Policy Polling decided to figure out just how much Americans hate Congress by asking respondents to compare their feelings about their lawmakers to a list of other unpopular things. The results were not pretty:

Congress did beat out North Korea, Lindsay Lohan, the Ebola virus, gonorrhea and the Kardashians.

View the original article here

Congress less popular than colonoscopies, root canals, poll finds

A new poll released Tuesday finds the national favorability of Congress has again slipped into single digits, with American's elected officials now polling lower than painful medical procedures and a certain Canadian rock band.

The survey, from Democratic firm Public Policy Polling, showed Congress with a mere 9 percent favorability rating. By contrast, 85 percent of voters see legislators in a negative way.

Congress didn't fare much better when compared against a wide swath of generally disliked staples of modern life. Asked for their preference between Congress and lice, the microscopic insects prevail 67-19 percent. Ditto colonoscopies (58-31 percent), root canals (65-32 percent), and being stuck in traffic (56-34 percent).

Other widely disliked professions also rank well above being a member of Congress. Used car salesmen are favored 57-32 percent over members, while NFL replacement referees earn a 56-29 percent favorability and carnival workers win 39-31 percent. Canadian rock band Nickleback — the punchline of many a joke — also beat out Congress, earning a 39-32 percent advantage. In fact, the list of subjects polling better than Congress was nearly inexhaustible: Genghis Khan (41-37 percent), Donald Trump (44-42 percent) and cockroaches (45-43 percent) all beat out the House and Senate.

There were a rare few items that Congress managed to exceed in the poll, however. Tabloid stars like Lindsay Lohan (41-45 percent) and the Kardashians (36-49 percent) were both seen less favorably than Congress. K Street also got no love in the survey: 48 percent said they preferred Congress to the people that worked to influence them, while just three in 10 preferred lobbyists.

Former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, himself once a member of the Senate, fared worse than his colleagues (29-45 percent), as did former Cuban leader Fidel Castro (32-54 percent) and North Korea (26-61 percent). Congress was also favored over more than half of respondents over diseases like gonorrhea and ebola, and eked out polling wins over playground bullies, telemarketers and meth labs.

PPP surveyed 830 voters from Jan. 3 to Jan. 6 via automated telephone interviews. The margin of error was 3.4 percentage points.

View Comments

View the original article here

Statement by the President on the Status of the Administration’s Supplemental Request to Congress for Response, Recovery and Mitigation Related to Hurricane Sandy

Statement by the President on the Status of the Administration’s Supplemental Request to Congress for Response, Recovery and Mitigation Related to Hurricane Sandy | The White House Skip to main content | Skip to footer site map The White House. President Barack Obama Get Email UpdatesContact Us Go to homepage. The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts 2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Executive Orders Presidential Memoranda Proclamations Legislation Pending Legislation Signed Legislation Vetoed Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Visitor Access Records Financial Disclosures 2012 Annual Report to Congress 2011 Annual Report to Congress 2010 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff A Commitment to Transparency

Browse White House visitor logs

Issues Civil Rights It Gets Better Defense End of Iraq War Disabilities Economy Jobs Reform and Fiscal Responsibility Strengthening the Middle Class A Plan for Refinancing Support for Business Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Taxes Tax Receipt The Buffett Rule Rural Urban Policy Veterans Joining Forces Technology Seniors & Social Security Service Snapshots Creating Jobs Health Care Small Business PreK-12 Education Women Americans Sharing Their Story

On what $2K means to them

President Obama's Tax Plan

Extend tax cuts for families making under $250,000 a year

The Administration We the People

Create and Sign Petitions Now

President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet 2010 Video Reports White House Staff Chief of Staff Jack Lew Deputy Chief of Staff Nancy-Ann DeParle Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco Counselor to the President Peter Rouse Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House White House On the Go

Download our mobile apps

2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources /* Maximize height of menu features. */if(typeof(jQuery)!='undefined')jQuery.each($('#topnav'),function(i,v){var o=$(v),oh=o.height(),sh=o.siblings().height();if(oh Home • Briefing Room • Statements & Releases   The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release January 02, 2013 Statement by the President on the Status of the Administration’s Supplemental Request to Congress for Response, Recovery and Mitigation Related to Hurricane Sandy

It has only been two months since Hurricane Sandy devastated communities across New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut as well as other eastern states. Our citizens are still trying to put their lives back together. Our states are still trying to rebuild vital infrastructure. And so, last month, working closely with the Governors of the affected states, I sent Congress an urgent request to support their efforts to rebuild and recover. The Senate passed this request with bipartisan support. But the House of Representatives has refused to act, even as there are families and communities who still need our help to rebuild in the months and years ahead, and who also still need immediate support with the bulk of winter still in front of us.

When tragedy strikes, Americans come together to support those in need. I urge Republicans in the House of Representatives to do the same, bring this important request to a vote today, and pass it without delay for our fellow Americans.

Blog posts on this issue January 04, 2013 6:12 PM ESTJoin President Obama in a National Day of Service

The Presidential Inaugural Committee announces a National Day of Service on January 19, 2013

January 04, 2013 6:05 PM ESTJoin President Obama in a National Day of Service

The Presidential Inaugural Committee announces a National Day of Service on January 19, 2013

January 04, 2013 2:55 PM EST2012: A Year in Photos

Each January, Pete Souza, Chief Official White House Photographer and Director of the White House Photography Office selects his favorite images from the past twelve months, and now, we're sharing them with you.

view all related blog posts ul.related-content li.views-row img {float: left; padding: 5px 10px 0 0;}ul.related-content li.view-all {padding-bottom: 3em;} Stay ConnectedFacebookTwitterFlickrGoogle+YouTubeVimeoiTunesLinkedIn   Home The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Issues Civil Rights Defense Disabilities Economy Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Taxes Rural Urban Policy Veterans Technology Seniors & Social Security Service Snapshots Women The Administration President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House Inside the White House Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows White House Internships Tours & Events Mobile Apps Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources En español Accessibility Copyright Information Privacy Policy Contact USA.gov Developers Apply for a Job

View the original article here

Eight Smart Gun Bills Introduced On Day One Of The New Congress — And Two Stupid Ones

The 113th Congress is officially in session, and legislators kicked off the new year, and new term, yesterday with several pieces of gun-related legislation, their response to December’s tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary.

In total — between the Democrats’ proposed gun safety laws and the Republicans’ plans for expanded gun access — ten bills are being introduced today. Here they are:

1. Banning high-capacity ammunition. HR 138. This bill from Reps. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) and Diana DeGette (D-CO) would ban anyone in the US from owning, buying, or trading high-capacity ammunition clips, like the kinds that are often used in mass shootings. Such clips allow a gunman to fire off as many as 100 rounds without stopping to reload. McCarthy’s connection to gun safety laws is personal: Her husband was killed and son critically injured during a mass shooting.

2. Closing the ‘gun show loophole.’ HR 141. Another measure from McCarthy requires that all gun purchasers undergo a full background check. As-is, the private sales of firearms, and the sale of guns at gun shows, are exempt from the background check requirements that are mandatory for other gun sales. That loophole is currently an easy way for criminals or the mentally ill to access a gun undetected.

3. Making the database of who cannot buy guns effective. HR 137. Currently, states do a terrible job of entering names — of felons or the mentally ill — into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). This measure also from McCarthy is called the Fix Gun Checks Act, and has been introduced in previous legislative sessions. It would create incentives and penalties to encourage the efficient entry of names into NICS. It would also close the gun show loophole.

4. Regulating where and how ammunition is purchased. HR 142. McCarthy’s fourth and final bill would make it mandatory for all ammunition dealers to have a license to sell. It would also require anyone purchasing ammunition to do so in person, face-to-face with a seller. All bulk purchases of ammunition would need to be reported under McCarthy’s law. This bill responds to the criticisms that the internet is an open market for the unlimited sale of ammunition.

5. Requiring handguns to be registered. HR 117. Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) crafted this national law based on his state’s requirements for handgun purchasing. It would require every single handgun sold in the United States to be licensed and registered, without any exceptions or loopholes, and for that registry to be easily accessible.

6. Regulating how gun licenses are issued. HR 34. Like Holt, Rep. Bobby Rush’s (D-IL) bill aims to create a unified system of gun licensing procedures — for both handguns and semi-automatic weapons. Rush’s legislation, a reintroduction of “Blair’s Bill,” named after a murdered Chicago teen, would also require gun safety training for firearm owners.

7. Raising the age of legal handgun ownership to 21. HR 65. In a move that seems pointed toward combating youth street violence, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) proposed this bill that would make it illegal to own a handgun before the age of 21. Some states have such laws in place, but Jackson Lee’s measure would make the law national.

8. Requiring the reporting of stolen guns. HR 21. This bill, which Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA) has introduced to Congress previously and is reintroducing to the new Congress, would also close the ‘gun show loophole’ by requiring all gun-owners to undergo background checks. Additionally, it would make sure that gun owners are required to report stolen guns — a measure that could help law enforcement track illegal guns.

9. & 10. Eliminating ‘gun free zones’ in schools. HR 35 and HR 133. Following the lead of the National Rifle Association, Reps. Steve Stockman (R-TX) and Thomas Massie (R-KY) are both proposing more guns in schools. They want to eliminate “gun free school zones.” In a press statement, Stockman used this highly flawed logic as the reasoning for his bill: “In the 22 years before enactment of ‘gun free school zones’ there were two mass school shootings. In the 22 years since enactment of ‘gun free schools’ there have been 10 mass school shootings.”

View the original article here

Congress In Contempt, Part 1: The Fiscal Cliff Is Only One Example Of Congressional Failure

by Bill Becker

There was a moment when the Founding Fathers considered putting a provision in the Constitution that would allow citizens to recall members of Congress. The proposal failed.  As a result, only members of Congress can remove other members of Congress from office.

It’s a pity.  As the 112th Congress passes into an ignominious history and a not-much-different 113th Congress takes over, one wishes the citizenry had the right to kick members out of office not just during an election year, but any time they don’t do their jobs.  Clearly, members of Congress are not doing their jobs today. By one measure, 95% of Americans think lawmakers are doing a lousy job.  One suspects the other 5% are the members of Congress themselves, along with their staffs and families.

The fiscal cliff debacle is merely the latest case in which our derelict and dysfunctional Congress has put the nation’s families, businesses and the overall economy at risk.  Even though Congress reached a last-minute agreement on the fiscal cliff last night,  significant damage already has been done by the politics of brinkmanship. From failing to fund Superstorm Sandy relief to outright denial of climate change, Congress has proved itself particularly inept.

Consider: While Congress went home for Christmas without reaching an agreement on taxes and spending, some 12 million Americans spent the holiday jobless. Two million of them lost their unemployment compensation when the crystal ball in Times Square hit bottom at the cusp of the New Year.

The health of America’s small businesses was a significant campaign issue in 2012, but it doesn’t seem to be a concern on Capitol Hill now that the election is over. The prospect of higher taxes and deep cuts in government programs caused consumer confidence to plummet six points in December, the most important time of year for business earnings, even more important this year as the economy continues climbing out of the pit created by the recession.

Think back over the last two years.  The genesis of the fiscal cliff was Congress’s standoff on raising the national debt ceiling in 2011. Legislation finally was approved only hours before the federal government defaulted on its debts.  Citing this “political brinksmanship” as a sign that Congress is “less able, less effective and less predictable” in managing the nation’s fiscal affairs, Standard & Poor’s took the unprecedented step of lowering America’s credit rating.

After last November’s election, in which voters seemed to signal they wanted an end to block-headed partisanship, congressional leaders expressed optimism they’d reach a deal  on taxes and spending before the end of the year. The fiscal cliff debacle indicates, however, that Congress didn’t get the message from voters or from Standard & Poor’s.  And another big cliff is just ahead: The need to raise the debt ceiling again in the next few weeks. The possible consequences of another standoff have been described by Jonathan Masters of the Council on Foreign Relations:

Many analysts say congressional gridlock over the debt limit will likely sow significant uncertainty in the bond markets and place upward pressure on interest rates. Rate increases would not only hike future borrowing costs of the federal government, but would also raise capital costs for struggling U.S. businesses and cash-strapped homebuyers. In addition, rising rates could divert future taxpayer money away from much-needed federal investments in such areas as infrastructure, education, and health care…Speaking to the Economic Club of New York in November 2012, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke warned that congressional inaction with regard to the fiscal cliff, the raising of the debt ceiling, and the longer-term budget situation was creating uncertainty that “appears already to be affecting private spending and investment decisions and may be contributing to an increased sense of caution in financial markets, with adverse effects on the economy.”

Masters points out that for all the rhetoric about economic stability and fiscal discipline, the debt ceiling standoff in 2011 actually added to government waste and the economy’s jitters:

A 2012 study by the non-partisan Government Accountability Office estimated that delays in raising the debt ceiling in 2011 cost taxpayers approximately $1.3 billion for FY 2011. BPC (the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington D.C.) estimated the ten-year costs of the prolonged fight at roughly $19 billion.

The stock market also was thrown into frenzy in the lead-up to and aftermath of the 2011 debt limit debate, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average plunging roughly 2,000 points from the final days of July through the first days of August. Indeed, the Dow recorded one of its worst single-day drops in history on August 8, the day after the S&P downgrade, tumbling 635 points.

Lawmakers in the modern era have been inept at timely decisions on spending in general.  American families found something new in their stockings this Christmas: The threat that milk prices would double after Jan. 1 because Congress failed to reauthorize the nation’s farm program when it expired earlier in the year.  Worse, farm experts warned the nation’s agricultural sector would be thrown into turmoil. As the year ended, lawmakers extended the program temporarily for one year, pushing the milk can down the road.

Last June, Congress finally approved a national transportation bill three years after the old bill expired, but only after 130 mayors from 36 states petitioned congressional leaders to finally get the job done.

Congressional cowardice is on full display when it’s time to approve the federal government’s annual budgets. Members avoided making tough budget decisions just before the November election by failing to approve a new budget when old one expired on Oct. 1. Congress finally approved a temporary budget bill just a week before the federal government would have been forced to shut down.  The temporary budget – still in effect today — essentially puts federal agencies on hold until at least next March, after the 113th Congress has been seated and when the next election is still 20 months away.

Stop-gap budgets have become a tradition in Congress.  As Brendan Greeley reports on Bloomberg Businessweek:

Since 1952, according to the Congressional Research Service, Congress has completed its spending bills by its own deadlines only four times—in 1977, 1989, 1995, and 1997. Year after year, lawmakers enact continuing resolutions to tide agencies over until appropriations bills pass. Fiscal year 2011—all 365 days of it—was paid for this way. Though a hyperpartisan year on Capitol Hill, it was by no means exceptional.  According to the CRS, 178 days every year, on average, have been funded through continuing resolutions since 1977. Basically, half the time there is no budget.

What are the consequences? More wasted money and government inefficiency. Greeley continues:

The uncertainty creates all kinds of inefficiencies,..(F)ederal contractors build a risk premium into their fees, charging back to taxpayers the extra uncertainty of potential funding disruptions. Agency leaders also have trouble staffing for new projects when there’s no budget. They have to resort to signing contracts on a monthly rather than an annual basis. Because every contract costs money to close, more contracts mean greater administrative and legal costs…

And the inefficiencies don’t end when the appropriations finally come through. Contractors or hires with critical skills may already have found other work. Agencies have trouble spending what they then receive before the end of the fiscal year.

Congress doesn’t tell us how much its tardy budgeting costs taxpayers, but it sometimes can’t hide the costs of partisan grandstanding.  For example, with important legislative work languishing, House Republicans held 33 votes to repeal Obamacare by July of last year, even though it was clear the Senate would never agree.  As Huffington Post reported:

While Republicans lambast the cost of implementing health care reform, a new report shows that their efforts to repeal the law have come at a major cost to taxpayers — to the tune of nearly $50 million…Republicans’ many fruitless attempts at repealing the Affordable Care Act have taken up at least 80 hours of time on the House floor since 2010, amounting to two full work weeks. As the House, according to the Congressional Research Service, costs taxpayers $24 million a week to operate, those two weeks amounted to a total cost of approximately $48 million.

In large part because of delays in the Senate’s confirmation of President Obama’s appointments, Chief Justice John Roberts reported on Dec. 31 that “judicial emergencies” have developed in 27 jurisdictions where judicial vacancies have not been filled.   “The pattern throughout (President Obama’s) tenure has been uncontroversial judicial nominees…going nowhere on the Senate floor,” according to Jennifer Bendery’s analysis of last year’s Senate confirmation process on Huffington Post.

While extreme weather caused unprecedented levels of damage to communities across the United States in 2012, the 112th Congress avoided discussing, let alone acting on, global climate change. It failed to pass the Violence Against Women Act. Red and blue states have lost thousands of jobs in the emerging wind energy industry because Congress stalled on passing the Production Tax Credit for utility-scale wind development by year’s end.  And while bargaining to cut spending on programs such as Medicare and Social Security, lawmakers refused to touch sacred cows like the billions of dollars of unnecessary taxpayer subsidies Congress gives the oil industry.

Last November’s election was an opportunity for voters to discipline Congress for all of this. But even with public approval of Congress at one of the lowest levels ever,  91% of the members up for reelection in November were returned to office.

We appear to be a masochistic electorate and Congress appears to count on it and to holds us in contempt.  That’s not likely to change until we impose the discipline on it that it’s unwilling to impose upon itself.  How? I’ll offer some suggestions in Part 2.

Bill Becker is the Executive Director of the Presidential Climate Action Project. For more specific information about the Soldiers Grove experience and its lessons for other disaster-affected communities, see Becker’s report,  “Rebuilding for the Future”.

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery('#comment_submit').click(function(){if(jQuery('#comment_check:checked').length

View the original article here