Press Gaggle by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest Aboard Air Force One en route Boston, MA

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Aboard Air Force One
En Route Boston, Massachusetts

9:35 A.M. EDT

MR. EARNEST:  Good morning, everybody.  Welcome aboard Air Force One as we make our way to Boston.  I have a couple of updates that I'll walk through before we open it up to questions.

The first is you all have received an email overnight that the President signed a disaster declaration for the state of Massachusetts.  This will make additional federal resources available to state and local officials who are responsible for responding to the bombings in Boston.  So I wanted to flag that for you.

Second is prior to departure from the White House today, the President received a briefing on the latest -- on the investigation into the bombings in Boston from his Homeland Security Advisor, Lisa Monaco.  As you know, over the course of the last couple of days, the President has been routinely briefed on these latest details, and so he got his latest briefing this morning in person prior to leaving the White House.

The third thing is many of you have asked whether or not the President will have the opportunity while he’s in Boston to meet with the families of those who were injured or killed in the bombings.  He will have that opportunity while he’s in Boston.  He'll also have the opportunity to talk to some of the first responders, both professionals as well as the volunteers who were the first on the scene and were there to tend to those who were injured in the blasts.

I don't have any details for you at this point about where and when those meetings and those visits will occur, but over the course of the day we'll keep you updated on the President’s activities.

The last thing is I wanted to just give you a sense of who’s aboard Air Force one with us today.  Several members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation are onboard.  So both Massachusetts senators -- Senator Elizabeth Warren and Senator Mo Cowan are aboard Air Force One this morning.  Also aboard are Congressman Michael Capuano, Congressman Steven Lynch, Congressman Richard Neal, Congressman Bill Keating, and Congressman John Tierney.  And then also aboard the plane is Vickie Kennedy, the wife of the late Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy.

Those are all the updates I have at this point.  So we'll open it up for questions.

Q    Josh, do you guys have any update on the West, Texas situation?  Was the President briefed on it?  And at this point, are you guys looking at this as an accident, or any kind of possible suspicious activity there?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, let me start by saying that the thoughts and prayers of the President and First Lady go out to those who were affected by the blast that we saw in West, Texas last evening.  It is clear just from the reports that the devastation there is quite significant and the Federal Emergency Management Administration is in coordination with their -- with local authorities who are responsible for responding to that scene.  We have offered to make resources available and we are in close touch with the local authorities who are responsible for investigating and responding to that scene.

So at this point, I don't have an update for you on the investigation.  If you have questions about -- I'd urge you to check with the Texas Department of Public Safety and with local authorities for that.

Q    Has President Obama been briefed on it?  

MR. EARNEST:  The President was briefed -- I should have mentioned that -- the President was briefed on this very, very early this morning.

Q    What time?

MR. EARNEST:  I don't have the exact time for you, but very early.  Prior to the briefing that he got from Lisa Monaco before his departure from the White House today.

Q    Did they wake him up to give him a briefing, or was it --

MR. EARNEST:  I don't have those details.  I just know that he was informed of this very early this morning.

Q    Do you know who the point person doing those briefings is?  Lisa Monaco is briefing on also this --

MR. EARNEST:  I don't have granular detail in terms of who is receiving the updates on these things.  Lisa Monaco is the President’s Homeland Security Advisor and so she obviously is playing an important coordinating role with the President.  She’s got an extensive background in homeland security issues.  And so it is her office that's responsible for coordinating those functions inside the White House.

So, again, I don't know who briefed him first thing this morning, but I can tell you that he will be regularly briefed on this situation, as he has been the others that have been going on the last couple of days.

Q    Has he spoken with Governor Perry about this?

MR. EARNEST:  I don't have any calls to read out at this point, but if there are any additional calls I'm able to read out to you then I will.

Q    Josh, on guns, he mentioned yesterday that it’s not over.  He said he’s going to take up some things today.  What is he planning on doing for the future to get it back going?

MR. EARNEST:   Well, it was apparent for those of you who saw the President’s remarks in the Rose Garden that the President continues to feel very passionately about the Congress taking the necessary steps, common-sense steps that would make our community safer.  The President indicated in his remarks that this is merely round one and that he’s ready to keep up the fight for this effort.

Fortunately, the President is not alone.  I think you saw a rather emotional and persuasive op-ed from former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in The New York Times this morning.  I think that passion -- the passion of her feelings on this issue are evident.  And I think that reflects the passion that people all across the country feel about this issue, that there are too many families who’ve been altered forever by gun violence. 

And the President believes that, as you heard him say yesterday, that attempts to mislead the American public about the contents of the legislation are unconscionable and that the President will continue to work to mobilize support all across the country to get action through the United States Congress.  And the President has public opinion on his side, and the President will continue to mobilize that public opinion in support of these common-sense measures.

And, again, you can’t reiterate often enough -- we can take these common-sense steps without infringing in any way on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.  The President believes powerfully that the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans should be protected.  But he believes just as strongly in taking common-sense steps that would protect the lives of innocent men, women, and children who all too often are tragically gunned down on the streets of too many cities all across this country.

Q    Will he be calling senators and speaking out at public events again?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I don’t have any specific updates for you, but I don’t think the President has indicated that he’s going to be shy about making his feelings on this issue known.

Q    Josh, the President was really harsh on Republicans yesterday in the Rose Garden after the guns setback.  Does this mean that he’s given up trying to reach this consensus in the middle to achieve other parts of his agenda -- immigration, budget-related topics?

MR. EARNEST:  Not at all.  First of all, the common-sense compromise that the President was advocating for was actually formulated by a conservative Republican and a moderate Democrat. So we’ve seen bipartisanship at work on this issue.  And in terms of consensus, 90 percent of the American public agrees with the President’s point of view and agrees with the compromise that was put forward by Senators Toomey and Manchin. 

So I think we’re pretty close to a consensus on this just as about everywhere except in the United States Congress.  And as the President alluded to yesterday, I think that is an indication of the pernicious influence that some special interests have in the United States Congress.  And that is going to require a vocalization of public opinion to overcome it.

At the same time, it’s an indication I think that even on a hotly contested issue -- I mean, it shouldn’t be a hotly contested issue, but even in this case, what has been a hotly contested issue in terms of common-sense measures that would reduce gun violence -- even that highly contested issue is yielding some bipartisan agreement.

We did see, in addition to that compromise measure that was formulated, again, by a conservative Republican and a moderate to conservative Democrat, we saw that there were a number of Republicans who also have or would describe themselves as conservative who voted for that legislation.  We just need to get more of them. 

But my point is, is that we should be able to find similar common ground on some of the other issues that the President is hoping will move through the Congress.  I think there’s a pretty good indication that we’re going to find some common ground and make some bipartisan progress on things like comprehensive immigration reform.  We’re at the beginning of that process so we’ll see how that moves forward. 

But I don’t see any reason why anybody who’s taking a look at what’s happening in Congress right now should despair about the possibility for bipartisanship.  I think what the President is frustrated by, in reaction to the gun vote yesterday, was a willingness to willfully distort the facts that were included in that legislation, and as I mentioned, the outsized influence that’s being exercised by some special interests in Washington, D.C. and the unwillingness of some members of the United States Senate to stand up to them.

Q    Josh, I’m not going to ask you to preview the President’s comments, but can you give us any insight into how they took shape, how much of a hand he had in crafting them?

MR. EARNEST:  I know the President did spend some time working on his remarks.  You can expect that he will in his remarks offer his condolences on behalf of the First Lady and his family, but also on behalf of the American people to the people of Boston.

At the same time, he will reiterate his confidence in the resilience of the people of Boston, and remind the American people that the way that the people of Boston have responded to this terror attack represents who we are as a country, and it represents the values that we cherish as Americans.  And you’ll hear more from the President on that today.  He’ll say it more eloquently than I just did.

Q    Maybe an official on background or something could give us info on who took the lead in writing the speech -- something along those lines.

MR. EARNEST:  I’ll see if we can get you some more information on this, but I know this is something that the President has spent a lot of time personally working on.

Q    Josh, did the President monitor any of the news coverage yesterday about what was going on in Boston, with the reporting that wound up being retracted by a couple of news outlets about arrests that they said were taking place but it turns out it hadn’t?  Had he monitored any of that and did he have any concerns about that?

MR. EARNEST:  I don't know whether or not he watched any of that news coverage, and I haven’t had an opportunity to talk to him about some of the conflicting reports that we saw yesterday. I would just reiterate something that the FBI mentioned yesterday, is to urge caution as we’re reporting out some of these facts.  There are often unintended consequences of these erroneous reports, so I would just encourage caution as people are working this story.

Q    Can I just ask a question about North Korea?

MR. EARNEST:  Sure.

Q    North Korea has apparently made some of the first overtures in the most recent escalation of tensions for negotiations, to hold some kind of negotiations with all kinds of conditions and so on.  Has the President seen those?  And what is his reaction?  What does he make of it?

MR. EARNEST:  I haven’t had the chance to speak to the President about it, but I can give you a White House reaction.  I can tell you that our administration and the United States in general remains committed to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.  The United States has been and remains open to authentic and credible negotiations that would implement the September 2005 statement of the Six-Party talks. 

The North Koreans, in the context of those talks and on other occasions, have articulated their willingness or their actual commitment to renouncing nuclear weapons and discontinuing their nuclear program.  In order for those talks to make progress and to be fruitful, it’s going to require the North Koreans to demonstrate some seriousness about living up to their obligations and keeping those commitments. 

So far we have not seen that.  I think that the belligerent actions and words that we’ve seen emanating from the North Korean regime actually indicate the opposite of that. 

So we’re open to credible, authentic negotiations, but it’s going to require clear signals from the North Korean regime, clear signals we haven’t seen so far, to live up to their international obligations and to keep their commitments to end their nuclear weapons program.

Q    So it sounds like you're saying that this latest offer from them you don't view as credible.

MR. EARNEST:  Well, we’re open to credible negotiations with the North Koreans, but we also need to see some clear evidence that the North Koreans themselves are willing to live up to their international obligations, are willing to demonstrate their commitment to ending the nuclear program, something they’ve promise in the past.  And we haven’t seen that thus far.

Q    Can I ask about Iran?  Diplomats this week are saying that Iran has tripled its production of high-tech machines that can be used -- use nuclear weapons, some 600 of them in the last three months.  Does that suggest that the U.S. approach to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is not working?

MR. EARNEST:  I don't have anything for you on those specific reports.  I think what you have seen from this administration is a coordinated effort to bring together the international community in opposition to the Iranian nuclear program.  I think just in the four or five years that the President has been in office, we have seen a pretty significant reversal of the dynamic that was in place in terms of dealing with the Iranians.  We saw an international community that was splintered and we saw an Iranian regime that was united, but in the four or five years that the President has been working on this issue, we’ve actually seen a dramatic reversal in that dynamic.  The international community is now united in our opposition, and we’ve worked with our international allies and partners to isolate the Iranian regime and put in place the toughest sanctions that have ever been put in place against them.

And there are indications that those sanctions are having an impact on the nation of Iran.  And what we’re seeking from the Iranians is a commitment to live up to their international obligations.  And the President has been pretty clear about his determination to ensure that they do that.

Q    Can I just clarify one thing?

MR. EARNEST:  Sure.

Q    Is he speaking today to families of the victims who were killed, or the wounded, or both?

MR. EARNEST:  We’ll have some more updates as the day goes on in terms of -- we will try to get you some details about who he’s talking to.

Q    Josh, can I just ask is there -- did the President give any indication this morning from his briefings about Boston that there’s been any advance in the case, any movement toward identifying a suspect or having someone in custody?

MR. EARNEST:  That's a good question.  It’s one that I’m unable to answer at this point.  I don't want to read out any of the details of the briefings that the President has received.  So updates on the progress of the investigation will be announced by the FBI and so I’m going to leave it to them to report out those details. 

Q    Thanks, Josh.

MR. EARNEST:  Thank you.

END
9:51 A.M. EDT

President Obama speaks at in interfaith service dedicated to those who were gravely wounded or killed at the Boston Marathon bombing.

President Obama will deliver remarks this morning at Healing Our City: An Interfaith Service which is dedicated to those who were gravely wounded or killed in Monday’s bombing near the finish line of the Boston Marathon.

The Kaiser Foundation hosts an event for the launch of EMPOWERED, Alicia Keys' new campaign to help end the HIV/AIDs epidemic.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney Aboard Air Force One en route Denver, Colorado, 4/3/2013

Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney Aboard Air Force One en route Denver, Colorado, 4/3/2013 | 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 Rural Taxes Tax Receipt The Buffett Rule Technology Urban Policy Veterans Joining Forces Violence Prevention Women Now Is The Time

To do something about gun violence

Immigration Reform

Creating an Immigration System for the 21st Century

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 • Press Briefings   The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release April 03, 2013 Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney Aboard Air Force One en route Denver, Colorado, 4/3/2013

 

Aboard Air Force OneEn Route Denver, Colorado  2:14 P.M. EDT MR. CARNEY:  Thanks for joining us today on our flight to Denver, where, as you know, the President will be meeting with law enforcement officials and others at the Denver Police Academy where he will discuss the need for Congress to act on common-sense measures to reduce the scourge of gun violence in America.   I think you can expect that he will note that the legislation he supports that has been moving through Congress represents real, sensible, middle-of-the-road attempts to address this problem; that nothing he supports would in any way violate the Second Amendment rights of the American people, the Second Amendment rights that the President strongly supports. One provision that he supports -- the effort to close loopholes in our background check system -- is supported by over 90 percent of the American people, by vast majorities of Republicans and Democrats and independents, by a substantial majority of gun owners, and a substantial majority of members of the NRA.   He has made clear in his effort, his concerted effort, to move forward with these measures since the Newtown tragedy; that it is imperative the elected officials of the American people allow all of these measures to come to a vote -- and, in his view, to vote for them -- but at the very least, to allow them to come to a vote.  Because if you disagree with 90 percent of the American people on background checks, you ought to vote no, and not oppose -- not use parliamentary maneuvers to prevent a vote.  That’s the President’s view.   In any case, he looks forward to this event.  As you know, he will be going to Connecticut on Monday to continue this conversation.   Q    When the President insists on these votes, particularly on assault weapons and the high-capacity magazines, is it because he thinks that there is a price to pay for voting no?  And isn’t there just as well a price to pay by some members of Congress, some Democrats, for voting yes on those issues? MR. CARNEY:  Jim, there are definitely political issues involved in this.  This has always been the case.  But the President doesn’t look at this through a political lens.  He’s not asking for a vote for political reasons, he’s asking for a vote because the victims of Newtown and of Aurora and Virginia Tech, and the countless lesser-known victims of gun violence across America deserve at least a vote.  And the kids who were killed -- the 20 children who were killed in Newtown, they weren’t Republicans or Democrats; they didn’t care, and their parents don’t care about the political implications of voting yes or no on these bills.  They want things done that give other children more protection from this kind of violence, and that includes every measure that the President supports.  Q    Any reaction to reports that current and former cops think that today’s Denver venue is not the right place to have a speech? MR. CARNEY:  Well, look, obviously people have a variety of views on these issues across America.  I think it’s irrefutable that a majority of law enforcement professionals in America support common-sense measures that are at issue now and subject to votes in Congress.  I don't think anybody would argue with that. I think most law enforcement officials agree that closing loopholes in our background check system assists them in their job to protect the American people from gun violence.  If you're opposed to taking measures to prevent criminals from getting weapons, vote no and explain why.  Most police officers, law enforcement officers support the idea that we ought to take measures to ensure that the system that already exists is actually effective so that those who by law should not have weapons cannot obtain them.  It’s a pretty simple proposition. Q    How do you fight the perception, though, that these measures are losing steam in Congress?  MR. CARNEY:  I think perceptions are one thing, reality is another.  And the fact is we are moving forward with Congress and are in regular conversation with members and staff from both parties about how to move forward.  And the President is committed to pressing this agenda because it’s the right thing to do for our children and all the potential victims of gun violence in the country.  I think that as I said the other day and the President has made clear, he never believed and we never suggested that any of this would be easy.  There’s a reason why these kinds of actions have not succeeded for many years now.  There are a variety of reasons why.  But it is incumbent upon every elected official sent to Washington to address this challenge, this scourge, and to -- he believes -- do the common-sense things that can help save the lives of our children in the future. Q    But there’s a difference, isn’t there, between saying this isn’t going to be easy and counting votes.  And the votes for a lot of these things aren’t there. MR. CARNEY:  Well, again, the votes haven’t happened, first of all.  Secondly, if the votes were there, Jeff, they would have been voted and done and signed into law a long time ago.  That's why a process like this exists.  That’s why negotiations are ongoing on a variety of pieces of this proposal in an effort to try to find the votes necessary.  And, unfortunately, it is, as we've said many times, a feature of our system now that everything in the Senate is subject to a filibuster.  And what the President has said I think very clearly is that it would be shameful to not allow any one of these measures to come up to a vote.   Q    You talked about parliamentary procedures.  Would you consider a filibuster an illegitimate procedure?  I mean, it is part of the rules. MR. CARNEY:  I didn’t say it wasn't part of the rules.  I said that the victims of Newtown -- the 20 kids and the 6 educators who lost their lives -- deserve a vote.  And that if you want to vote no, vote no.  Don’t block a vote.  That’s not doing service to the memory of these kids.   Q    You said that -- you have emphasized that the President doesn’t mean to impinge on anyone's Second Amendment rights, but there are a lot of people out there who believe that he does.  And if I'm not mistaken, Saturday is the five-year anniversary of his speech in San Francisco where he talked about small-town Americans clinging to guns and religion.  What about the optics of going there right after this event in Denver to call attention to his views on guns? MR. CARNEY:  As you know, and as everyone who is an expert on this issue can attest, there is not a single thing that the President has proposed that would take a single firearm away from a single law-abiding citizen in America.  This President supports our Second Amendment rights.  The proposals he put forward -- like banning military-style assault weapons, like limiting high-capacity ammunition clips -- these are proposals that in no way infringe upon Second Amendment rights, and, again, would not take any firearm away from any law enforcement -- law-abiding citizen. When it comes to straw purchases -- I mean, again, this is about enforcing the law.  If you have individuals who are routinely buying weapons as straw purchasers on behalf of criminals who cannot buy weapons themselves because of their criminal record, that’s a violation of the law, and we ought to take action to ensure that the law is enforced.  That seems like a very common-sense, conservative principle to me, as does the idea that the background check system that already exists should be improved so that loopholes are closed that make sure that it does what it was intended to do, and that is ensure that those with criminal records and others who by law should not be allowed to, or are not allowed to purchase weapons cannot circumvent the law because of the loopholes in the system. Q    Does the President see Colorado as a model for other states after the legislation that they passed here? MR. CARNEY:  The President believes that actions in Colorado, the actions underway in Connecticut do represent important progress on these issues, and I think are useful models to look at as we undertake efforts in Washington. Q    Do you know which lawmakers are going to be at the event? MR. CARNEY:  I don’t.  I can try -- if I can find out, I’ll get that for you. Q    There’s a report that Senator Bennet would be there, but the other senator wouldn’t. MR. CARNEY:  Again, I don’t know.  I’ll have to find out, or we may find out when we get there. Q    On a different subject.  The President and Mrs. Obama are going to Dallas for the Bush Library opening.  Can you tell me how that decision came about, how excited he is about going to Dallas to do this?  What will be on his mind? MR. CARNEY:  He’s very pleased to be going, and looks forward to it.  The office of the President of the United States is a pretty rare position to hold, and only those who have held it can fully appreciate what it means to be President of the United States.  And he shares in common with President George W. Bush a love, a deep love for his country, and appreciates President Bush’s service, and looks forward to being there with him as well as President George H. W. Bush and Presidents Clinton and Carter. Q    Jay, on Keystone pipeline.  One of his hosts today at the fundraiser in San Francisco is an active opponent of the Keystone pipeline -- Tom Steyer.  There are also going to be protests planned outside the Getty mansion tonight.  I guess I’ll try a third time on the Arkansas spill:  Have you had a chance to talk to the President about that spill?  And how does it affect -- how does the Utah spill affect his thinking on the Keystone pipeline, and what would he tell his hosts today if that issue comes up? MR. CARNEY:  Well, I’m not going to preview hypothetical answers to hypothetical questions.  What I will say is that there are procedures in place -- Q    The answers wouldn’t be hypothetical, the questions would be.  The answers would be answers to the hypothetical. MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think the whole thing would be hypothetical, Hans, but thank you for your -- Q    I’m just clarifying. MR. CARNEY:  I think you’re muddying, actually, but thanks. Q    No, you hide behind this hypothetical thing all the time. MR. CARNEY:  He asked me, if he’s asked, what would he say? Q    Right, but what he’d say would be his answer.  The “if” is the hypothetical. MR. CARNEY:  Well, first of all, the question hasn’t been asked.  He’s not here to give the answer to the hypothetical. Q    -- to the question is the hypothetical. MR. CARNEY:  Thank you for your assistance in the briefing, Hans.  As you know, when an incident like what has happened in Arkansas occurs, there are procedures in place.  The EPA takes the lead; the responsible party is held responsible, as is the case in this situation.  When it comes to Keystone, that is a process, as we’ve discussed many times, that is evaluated at the State Department, as has been the case for many, many years under multiple presidencies, and as is appropriate given the fact that it is a pipeline that crosses international borders.  And that process is underway, as you know. Q    But do incidents such as Arkansas, such as the spill in Utah, inform the decision-making? MR. CARNEY:  Again, the evaluation of these proposals is made at the State Department.  You can certainly ask the State Department about whether any incidents, present or past, what those incidents have in terms of an impact on their evaluation process.  I think there are standards that are followed in this evaluation process that are being followed today at the State Department, but the State Department is the location where this process takes place. Q    Is the decision of the administration at all influenced by people like Mr. Steyer, who is hosting the President today?  Is it at all influenced by the protest and demonstrators that the President sees? MR. CARNEY:  Look, I think we’ve seen over time that there are strongly held views on this issue, on both sides.  And the President is following a process that has been in place for quite some time, through multiple administrations of both parties, and that is the way it should be.  As you know, the process was delayed because of a political action by Congress, but the -- nevertheless, the process is underway and being undertaken by the State Department. Q    Are there any updates, Jay, on North Korea and monitoring of the North Korea situation? MR. CARNEY:  Well, we continue to monitor the situation.  The provocative actions and bellicose rhetoric that we see from North Korea is obviously of concern, and we take -- are taking the necessary precautionary measures, many of which have been reported on.  It is also the case that the behavior of the regime in Pyongyang that we are seeing now has a -- represents a familiar pattern, and as I think we’ve seen over the past several administrations.   So we are taking the necessary precautionary measures, but it is important to view this within the context of the kind of behavior that we’ve seen out of North Korea in the past.  And it’s important to say that, in every instance, this refusal to abide by its international obligations and to engage in threats and provocative rhetoric and behavior only serves to isolate North Korea further, to make it more and more difficult for the North Korean economy to develop, and imposes more and more hardships on the North Korean people.   North Korea knows the path that's available to it -- the regime does -- and that is a path towards greater integration in the international community, stronger economic development, and better prospects for the North Korean people if they take substantive steps towards denuclearization and abide by the series of international obligations that they are currently flouting. Q    Jay, I don’t know if you were asked this in the past few days.  But on immigration, Senator Leahy is saying he is calling for, once a bill is introduced by the Gang of Eight, that he wants to accelerate the process, to mark it up, and then advance it to the Senate floor.  Marco Rubio is calling for regular order -- wants hearings, wants more hearings.  He says we need to make sure that we really understand this bill.  What is the administration's view?  Do you believe that, like Senator Leahy, you have to move as fast as possible on this thing, because otherwise it could just die in the Senate because of it just being drawn out, and that we shouldn't go through regular order just because we've already had enough hearings over the past several years? MR. CARNEY:  I think the characterization of regular order here has to be understood within the context of the fact that this legislation in essence has been on the table and subject to debate in the United States Congress for many years now.  The basic outlines of what has been under consideration and is being worked on by the Gang of Eight and has been proposed by the President reflects legislation that was considered in Congress, in 2006, 2007, I believe.   Senator Leahy, as I understand it -- and I would refer you to him and his statements -- has held multiple hearings on this issue.  And the Gang of Eight and all of its members are the ones writing the legislation, which the President obviously believes is a good thing.  And the progress that they have made thus far is also a good thing.   So I leave it to and we leave it to the Chairman and other leaders in the Senate to decide on the process they want to follow.  But the President has made clear that he believes there is no reason to delay this process.  There is no reason to postpone it.  And he has been encouraged by the progress thus far, and hopes and expects that that progress will continue, and that it will result in the production of a bill and the consideration of the bill and a vote on the bill. Q    Now Rubio and other Republicans are saying, wait a minute, why rush it -- if it's good legislation, doesn't it deserve the test of scrutiny, of talking -- it is a new Congress.  The country has changed in the past six years; don't we want to talk it over and look at it more, possibly offer other amendments, make it better.  Do you fear that it would just get killed if it's going to be dragged out?  Is that the problem?  Or is it that people are being deported and you need to get this on the books and end the deportations that the administration is carrying out? MR. CARNEY:  Again, as veterans of the Senate know, this issue has been under consideration at very serious levels periodically for a long time now.  There is a great need to act on comprehensive immigration reform and a great opportunity to do it now, as the President has made clear.  It has been in the past, and seems to be now, a bipartisan priority.  And that is as it should be, in the President's view.   And he has been encouraged by and welcomes the progress being made by the bipartisan Group of Eight.  He has contributed to this process through the blueprint that has been available publicly for a long time now that outlines his principles when it comes to comprehensive immigration reform, and again, looks forward to further progress by the Senate, and action -- and consideration of the bill and action on the bill. Q    Jay, on another -- one last thing.  There’s a new independent report today -- among its leaders are Senator Sam Nunn -- and it says that the U.S. and Russia need to gradually take their nuclear weapons off ready-to-launch status.  I was wondering if you were familiar with that, if the President is familiar with it.  Does he endorse that idea?   MR. CARNEY:  I am not familiar with it.  I am obviously familiar with the very important work that former Senator Nunn and former Senator Lugar have done on the issues of proliferation and reduction of nuclear arsenals, but I’m not familiar with this report.   END2:35 P.M. EDT

Blog posts on this issue April 06, 2013 5:30 AM EDTWeekly Address: The President’s Plan to Create Jobs and Cut the Deficit

President Obama tell the American people about the budget he is sending to Congress, which makes the tough choices required to grow our economy and shrink our deficits

April 05, 2013 4:42 PM EDTWeekly Wrap Up: “We Have Not Forgotten”

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

April 05, 2013 4:00 PM EDTPresident Obama Marks the End of Easter Season at Prayer Breakfast

President Obama marks the end of the Easter season with a prayer breakfast at the White House.

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 Rural 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

Press Gaggle by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest Aboard Air Force One en route Chicago, Illinois, 3/15/2013

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Aboard Air Force One
En Route Chicago, Illinois

11:26 A.M. EDT

MR. EARNEST:  Two announcements at the top.  The first is the Vice President will be leading a delegation to attend the inaugural Mass of Pope Francis.  Joining the Vice President as part of that delegation to Rome will be New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez; the Democratic Leader of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi; and the President of Georgetown University Jack DeGioia.

I also want to give a little heads up on what we’re talking about today in Argonne.  Welcome aboard Air Force One as we make our way to Argonne National Lab just outside Chicago, Illinois.  Those of you who dialed into yesterday’s conference call know that the President will be discussing one of the priorities he identified in his State of the Union address -- investing in American energy. 

The Energy Security Trust that he’s highlighting today is a common-sense proposal to use some of the revenue that we obtain in the form of royalties from offshore oil and gas production and invest it in research dedicated to alternative forms of energy.  This research furthers the goal identified by the President to make our country and our economy less dependent on foreign oil. 

We’ve already made progress on this front with the so-called car rule that has increased fuel efficiency.  According to a new EPA study, fuel economy has increased 16 percent over the last several years.  And this isn’t just good for the environment, it also reduces the number of times -- the number of trips to the gas station for American families and for businesses.  It also makes our economy a little less dependent on the fluctuation in the global price of oil, and it makes our country more secure and less dependent on energy from some volatile regions in the world.

But there is more that we can do in the form of advanced batteries, electric cars, and a few vehicles that are powered by biofuels or natural gas.  That’s some of the research that’s being done at Argonne National Lab, and it’s research that we should invest in. 

This idea was devised by some retired military leaders because of the good it would do for our national security, and by some prominent business leaders, including some Republicans, because it would benefit our economy and create jobs.  So with all the talk about bipartisan compromise in Washington, D.C. the last couple of weeks, there’s no reason that Republicans in Congress can’t work with the President to get this done. 

So you’ll hear a lot more from the President about that this afternoon.

And with that, I’ll take your questions.

Q    I’d like to ask you about -- to respond to a couple of things going on at the CPAC conference.  One is that gun control is becoming a major topic there, and they’re building some opposition to the President’s proposals on the Hill.  Wayne LaPierre is going to be speaking there today.  How is the White House planning to counter that opposition?  Do you have some plans to get your supporters fired up in the way that they are getting today?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I think what we’re focused on right now is doing some of the things that the President talked about in the speech that he gave on this topic a couple of months ago.  The first is we’re moving forward with the implementation of a range of executive actions that the President has committed his administration to take.  He announced 23 of them back in January that would help us reduce gun violence in communities all across the country.

But we’re also engaged in a process with Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill to move forward some legislative remedies to this problem.  A number of these proposals have strong bipartisan support in the Congress.  They have that bipartisan support for good reason -- because there’s actually strong support across party lines out of the country for many of these proposals.  Just to take one example, there’s plenty of polling data to indicate that closing loopholes in background checks actually has the support of about 90 percent of the American public. 

So there’s no reason we shouldn’t be able to act in bipartisan fashion on some common-sense measures that would reduce violence, gun violence in our communities.  That said, the President has said repeatedly that he believes in the Second Amendment, that he believes the Second Amendment guarantees the right of law-abiding Americans to have firearms.  And there is nothing in what the President has proposed either in the form of executive actions or in this legislative proposals that would take a firearm away from a law-abiding citizen.

So there’s plenty of common ground for us to seize, to move forward, that would reduce gun violence in our communities.  And as the President said, this is a complex issue, but we shouldn’t let the complex, complicated nature of some of these remedies prevent us from taking action. 

Q    We haven’t heard very much from the President since the State of the Union on guns.  Are we going to be seeing some more public engagement on this?  Or are there things that he’s doing behind the scenes that maybe we don’t know about?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I think it was -- actually, the last time that I was on Air Force One, the week of the State of the Union, where the President gave some pretty powerful remarks in his hometown of Chicago -- the last time that we were here.  He went back to the neighborhood where he and his family live on the South Side of Chicago to talk about how gun violence has affected so many of the families there, and so many of the ways that we can address the ongoing problem of gun violence in those communities.

So the President has been engaged on these issues.  I know that there have been -- in some of the conversations that the President has had over the last couple of weeks with rank-and-file members of the House and Senate, he’s talked about some of the legislative priorities that would reduce gun violence being a priority of his. 

So this is something that the President is actively engaged on.  Obviously, the Vice President has played a very prominent role in advancing this effort.  And I think the fact that the President and the Vice President are both dedicated to this issue and are dedicating significant time to this issue is indication of just how important it is to this administration.

Q    One other thing in CPAC is that Senator McConnell had some pretty pointed remarks in his prepared remarks today about the OFA fundraising, and said it’s not really the Republican Party that’s the party of millionaires and billionaires when President Obama is charging half a million dollars for donors to get into the White House.  Can you respond to that?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I mean, in terms of OFA’s practices and I'd refer you to my colleagues over there at Organizing for Action.  But the donors conference that they had in Washington this week did not take place at the White House.  It was at the St. Regis Hotel, I believe, and some other places in Washington.

I guess what I would say in response is I’d urge you and, frankly, Americans all across the country to examine the policy priorities of congressional Republicans and the policy priorities of this administration and decide for yourself.  You have congressional Republicans who have, time and time again, stood up to protect tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, wealthy Americans and well-connected corporations, in the face of a -- they prioritize those tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires over a balanced solution to our deficit challenges.

We can reduce our deficit if we're willing to ask millionaires and billionaires to pay a little bit more.  The Republicans feel so strongly about protecting the tax benefits of millionaires and billionaires that they won't make progress on balanced deficit reduction.

There are a -- the President, on the other hand, has said if we're going to ask seniors, if we're going to ask veterans, if we're going to ask students, if we're going to ask middle-class families to make sacrifices to deal with our deficit challenges, then we also need to ask the same thing of millionaires and billionaires.

So I would encourage people to just take a look at the policy proposals that are being advanced by both sides and decide for themselves.

Q    On the Keystone issue, he’s speaking about energy today, and when the President was visiting with Senate Republicans yesterday he had mentioned that he was going to be making a decision on Keystone within a matter of months, and then he said, within the year.  Can you clarify the timing first on that? 

And then also he had said at one point that he had acknowledged that environmentalists had exaggerated some of the environmental concerns -- and he said that to the senators and they told us afterwards -- as well as -- then he, on the other flip side, he said, well, there’s also some of the proponents of this and the corporations and proponents of this have exaggerated the number of jobs that it could produce.  So can you tell us -- I'm interested in what kind of claims that he thinks environmentalists exaggerated, and the timing, too.

MR. EARNEST:   This is a process that's still being run by the State Department, as it traditionally has been.  It’s my understanding that there are several weeks remaining in the comment period that currently is underway as they evaluate the decision on this.  So I think that is, in large part, driving a lot of the timing here.  So I'd refer you to the State Department for more details about what their timeframe actually looks like.

In terms of -- won't read out the President’s comments in a private meeting with members of Congress.  But as a general matter, as you’ve heard us say, there have been thousands of miles of pipelines that have been built while President Obama has been in office, and I think the point is, is that it hasn’t necessarily had a significant impact one way or the other on addressing climate change.

The truth is what we need to do is we need to take an all-of-the-above approach to our energy challenges.  And so this means continued production of oil and natural gas.  And production of oil is at a 20-year high, I believe. Natural gas production is at an all-time high.  And our consumption is actually at recent lows.  So we've made some progress in all of these issues.

But it’s going to require some significant investments like the investments that we're talking about today for us to make progress on this.  And that's something the President remains committed to. 

Our sense is that when there’s a decision that's ready to be announced by the State Department, they’ll go ahead and make that announcement and we'll go forward from there.

Q    Are you saying, though, that whether or not Keystone gets built is less important for global warming than issues like making more investments in green energy right now?

MR. EARNEST:   There’s no question about that.

Q    What did you say?

MR. EARNEST:   I said there’s no question about that.  That if we're actually going to address the causes of climate change, we need to put in place things like the car rule that has had a significant impact on increasing fuel efficiency.  As I mentioned at the top, there’s a new EPA report that indicates that the car rule and other measures have actually increased fuel efficiency by about 16 percent in this country.  That has a -- the impact of that is to remove a significant amount of carbon emissions from the atmosphere.

There are other steps that we can take in terms of investments in renewable energy, in terms of investments in solar and wind energy that will greatly mitigate the causes of climate change.

Q    Does the President think that environmentalists are exaggerating the climate change impacts of developing the oil sands in Canada -- is that sort of where you're going here?

MR. EARNEST:  I think my point is, is that there have been pipelines that have been all across -- thousands of miles of pipelines have been built since President Obama took office inside the United States of America and it hasn’t had a measurable impact on climate change.  But what has had an impact, measurable impact on climate change has been, for example, the car rule that the President has put in place that has greatly increased fuel efficiency and reduce carbon emissions -- that those are the kinds of things that we can do to address the challenge of climate change.

The President talked about this pretty eloquently in his inaugural address.  It’s something that he restated in his State of the Union address as being a priority for his second term.  And so I would encourage you to tune in and watch the President as he continues to put forward some policies that will do something serious to address the problem of climate change.

Q    That's kind of the point that the environmental groups are making, is that this is different because it’s a watershed project that will really push forward development of a dirtier type of oil, and have a major impact on climate change.  Is that overstated, as far as --

MR. EARNEST:  I'm not intimately familiar with the arguments that they're making, so I don’t want to respond to those.

Q    About the car rule, you didn’t need Congress to approve that, right?

MR. EARNEST:  That’s correct.

Q    Now, this proposal today, you would need Congress to.

MR. EARNEST:  That’s right.  That’s right.

Q    How does the White House plan to build that consensus when Republicans are already saying we want to see more drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf to get more revenues to be able to fund something like this?

MR. EARNEST:  What I would say is that the proposal that the President is talking about today was actually an idea, a policy that was devised by retired military leaders who say that putting in place a policy like this would increase our national security.  This is an idea that was also written by prominent business leaders, including some Republican business leaders, who say that this is an idea that would strengthen our economy and create jobs.

So in terms of Republicans who are wondering whether or not this is something that they should support, I would encourage them to go talk to these retired military leaders, to go talk to their fellow Republicans in the business community, that they think this would be a good thing for our economy.  And I think that would form the basis of a reasonable cooperative approach to putting in place a policy like this that will strengthen our economy, that will create jobs, that will improve our national security, and reduced to some degree the impact of climate change.

Q    So Lisa Murkowski, for instance, is one Senate Republican who likes this idea; she had a version of it in her plan.  But she is saying that it's contingent on seeing more drilling, more access to areas.  Is that something that the administration is open to?  Or is that off the table totally?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, the plan that we have put forward is one that’s based on the five-year plan that we currently have available in terms of those areas that have been made available under the five-year plan for drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf.  But this is something that we'll have to talk about with Congress, and if there is different ideas that people want to offer up, we'll certainly have a conversation with them about that.  But the plan that we have put forward is based on the five-year plan that currently is in place.

Q    Can I ask you about -- the U.N. has a report out about drones in Pakistan, saying both that we are -- the U.S. is violating the sovereignty of the Pakistani government, and that the civilian casualty rate is far too high.  Do you have a reaction to that?

MR. EARNEST:  I can tell you that our administration is aware of Mr. Emmerson's report.  But at this point, I don’t have a specific comment on either intelligence operations or any military operations. 

As you know, this administration is in regular and close contact with Pakistan.  We have a solid working relationship with them on a range of issues, including a close cooperative security relationship.  And we're in touch with them on a regular basis on those issues, particularly the ones that relate to security. 

At this point, we're going to withhold judgment on the actual report.  But we're in touch with Mr. Emmerson, and if there are requests for information that are made of the administration, then we’ll carefully consider those requests.

Q    But it's the U.S. position that we are not violating the sovereignty of Pakistan, is that right?

MR. EARNEST:  Again, I want to withhold judgment on the actual report in terms of the claims that they're making.  I just want to leave it -- reiterating for you that we do have an open, ongoing dialogue with Pakistan on a whole range of issues, and including a close, cooperative security relationship. 

Q    On Afghanistan, there is this dispute between Karzai and the U.S. over detainees, and recently -- you have the front page of the Washington Post today saying that Karzai is going to take over Bagram prison and take the detainees himself.  How do you resolve this?  What is the best way forward on this?  And is this going to prevent the U.S. from remaining there with a presence -- any type of presence in the years ahead?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, as you know, Susan, from following this, this is something that we've been working through with Mr. Karzai for several months now; that our military leadership on the ground at ISAF is working closely with the Karzai government to effect the transfer of these detention facilities, including the one that you're talking about.

But in terms of where we stand in that process, I don’t have anything new to offer from here other than to say that, as we have for several months now, that this is something that we're working closely with President Karzai to complete, which is the transfer of this detention facility.

Q    It just seems like Karzai was very -- when he was here a few weeks ago, he was --

MR. EARNEST:  He was.

Q    -- it seemed like it was an okay experience.  There was none of this talking about us colluding with the Taliban.  Now he's making these wild accusations.  Is there any truth to the accusations he's making?  And can you say anything about whether he is just off the reservation; he's not working with us?  Where do things stand right now?

MR. EARNEST:  I think Secretary Hagel discussed this a little bit when he was in Afghanistan over the weekend.  I don’t have anything additional to say beyond what Secretary Hagel has said.  But in terms of the detention facilities, we certainly are working closely with President Karzai to complete the transfer of those detention facilities.  But beyond that, I don’t have anything on his comments.

Q    Do you know if the President is aware of the coverage of Senator Portman's change of heart today on gay marriage?  And does the White House have a response to that?

MR. EARNEST:  I have not -- I haven't discussed it with the President, but I saw those reports this morning.  I think what is clear is that we are witnessing a pretty significant sociological shift in this country that’s happening at a pretty rapid pace, and it's happening right before our eyes in a way that says a lot about our country -- that we have a country where we prioritize equality and fairness.  And I think that is reflected in the comments of Senator Portman today.  I think it's reflected in the filing before the Supreme Court that was signed by a large number of Republicans a couple of weeks ago.

And the President certainly -- well, I haven't -- pardon me -- while I haven't spoken to the President about this, he certainly welcomes anyone who is willing to step forward and say that they share the President's commitment to fairness and equality in this country.

Q    Can we follow up from the briefing yesterday?  Is there any response from the President on the TSA allowing knives on planes?

MR. EARNEST:  There is no comment on this from the President.  The TSA and Administrator Pistole are responsible for safeguarding the security of our transportation system, and they're putting in place the policies that they think are most effective in doing that.  But in terms of any White House comment, I don't have any.

Q    Josh, the new Israeli coalition government is being formed that puts the far-right group in sort of a strong position with regard to settlements.  Is the President concerned that that represents a shift that Netanyahu is digging in further on not giving anything up on the settlement issue?

MR. EARNEST:  I don't want to comment on the formation of the Israeli government because I think that's still an ongoing process.  I know that they’ve made some progress even just this morning that's been announced.  But it’s my understanding that that process hasn’t been completed, so I wouldn’t want to comment on it from here before it’s completed.

But in terms of the issue of settlements, the President and other senior members of this administration have been pretty clear about the fact that unilateral actions like settlement building are not constructive to the peace process.  That’s also true of the unilateral actions that are taken by the Palestinians, including the action that we saw from them last fall at the United Nations.  So these kinds of unilateral actions aren’t helpful.

And I do anticipate that the President, in the conversations that he’ll have with both the leaders of the Israeli government and the leaders of the Palestinian Authority, will be having conversations with them about what kind of serious commitments they're willing to make to advance the peace process.  And certainly, face-to-face conversations between the Israelis and the Palestinians is the only way we’re going to resolve that process.

The United States is certainly willing to continue to play a facilitating role, but it’s going to be hard to get to those face-to-face negotiations where it can make progress on peace if unilateral actions like that continue.

Q    Will the President and Vice President both be out of the country on Tuesday or at any other point between these two trips?

MR. EARNEST:  There certainly is a chance that that could happen.  I think some of the schedule details are still being nailed down.  But obviously, the President and Secretary Kerry are traveling to the Middle East.  It’s the President’s first trip to the Middle East [Israel] as President. So this is, obviously, an important priority of the President’s.  We’ve got important interests that need to be represented in the region.  The President looks forward to the high-level discussions that will be underway there, and he’s pleased that Secretary Kerry will be participating in them as well.

Vice President Biden, as I mentioned at the beginning, is traveling to Rome for the inaugural Mass of Pope Francis. 

But the fact remains that President Obama is President of the United States everywhere he goes.  Vice President Biden is Vice President of the United States everywhere that he goes.  Secretary Kerry, in fact, is Secretary of State of the United States everywhere that he goes.  So I think what this weekend’s -- or next week’s schedule indicates is that this administration is deeply engaged all around the globe to make sure that the interests of the United States are well represented.

Q    So there’s no problem if they both happen to be outside of the country at the same time?

MR. EARNEST:  There’s no reason that that should in any way impact the day-to-day running of the country.

Q    Do you know if there’s any precedent for that?

MR. EARNEST:  I don't believe that it has occurred since President Obama and Vice President Biden have been in office, but I don't know about previous Presidents.

Q    I have some nerdy questions about leasing reforms that were sort of discussed yesterday.  I don't know if my colleagues want to bear with me.  But do you have any more details on how those reforms would create more revenues that could be then diverted into this fund?

MR. EARNEST:  My layman understanding of this is that what we anticipate is that we do anticipate that some of the reforms to the process that will cut red tape will expedite the permitting process in a way that will lead to greater production and therefore greater royalties.

And we currently collect about $5 to $6 billion dollars a year in royalties.  And what we’re talking about in the context of the Energy Security Trust is about $200 million a year over the next 10 years.  So we’re just talking about a portion of these royalties that would be dedicated to the Energy Security Trust, but that would guarantee a stream of revenue that could be very critical to research planning and the kinds of innovations and breakthroughs that could be critical to the development of alternative forms of energy.

Q    $5 to $6 million overall royalties or just in the OCS?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, that’s a good question.  I don’t know the answer to that.

Q    And would there -- I mean, is the administration going to propose some kind of “use it or lose it” measures for leases?

MR. EARNEST:  I know that’s something that we’ve talked about quite a bit in the past -- that there are large portions of areas that have been approved for exploration and drilling that are currently not being explored and drilled right now.  So “use it or lose it” is a provision that the President supported previously.  I don’t have any update for you in terms of new policy proposals on that.

Q    And would you need congressional approval for these leasing proposals, for these leasing reports?  Or is that something that you can do administratively?

MR. EARNEST:  That is a good question.  I’d check with the Department of Energy.  My guess is, is that these are administrative changes that we’re talking about here to try to cut red tape and accelerate the permitting process in a way that wouldn’t at all affect environmental impact studies.

My guess is that’s something you could largely administratively, but I’d confirm that with the Department of Energy.

Q    Thanks.

MR. EARNEST:  Anybody else?

Q    There was a report that Republicans are talking about reducing the number of visas for family members of immigrants who have green cards or are citizens.  Is the President okay with the direction of the talks and possibly reducing the number of family visas in the future as part of a comprehensive immigration bill?

MR. EARNEST:  I don’t want to get ahead of discussions that they’re having on Capitol Hill about this, so I don’t want to comment specifically on the proposal that they may or may be considering.

What I can tell you is I know that there’s a lot of support in the private sector for measures like this, that a lot of large businesses who are trying to recruit talent from overseas view this as an important recruitment tool; that being able to talk to a prospective employee and say, come work for my country -- come work for my company in the United States, help me grow my business -- that that sales pitch is more persuasive, the recruiting pitch is more persuasive if you can also tell that person you can bring your family with you as well.

So I know that this is something that has strong support in the business community, and whatever proposal is put forward by this bipartisan immigration reform group is something that we’ll carefully consider.

Q    Thanks, Josh.

MR. EARNEST:  All right, guys, thank you.

END 
11:52 A.M. EDT

President Obama discusses the need to harness American energy in order to reduce our dependence on oil and make the United States a magnet for new jobs. He highlights his all-of-the-above approach to American energy -- including a proposal to establish an Energy Security Trust, which invests in research that will help shift our cars and trucks off of oil.

In the first foreign trip of his second term in office, President Obama will meet with the new Israeli government and speak to the Israeli people, as well as meet with the Palestinian leadership and the King of Jordan.

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

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney aboard Air Force One en route Newport News, VA, 2/26/2013

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Aboard Air Force One
En Route Newport News, Virginia

11:39 A.M. EST

MR. CARNEY:  Hello.  Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.  Thank you for being aboard Air Force One with us today as we make our way to Newport News, Virginia.  As you know, the President will be visiting Newport News Shipbuilding, a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries, where he will discuss the impacts on the defense industry and the Virginia economy if congressional Republicans fail to compromise to avert the sequester.

As I think you know, in the information that we provided you it makes clear that HII, in this case, the company that runs  Newport News Shipbuilding, engages with suppliers, small businesses across the country that would be adversely affected by sequester.  The President feels very strongly that for the sake of the people of Virginia and people who would be affected across the country, Republicans in Congress need to do what the American public overwhelmingly wants them to do, which is agree to a balanced approach to further reducing deficit.  And you’ll hear about that subject from the President in his remarks today.

Questions.

Q    Military officials in Afghanistan are correcting an incorrect report that the Taliban attacks dropped last year.  Does that undercut the President’s message that there are improvements happening in Afghanistan?

MR. CARNEY:  The President has made clear repeatedly that as we draw down our forces and train up Afghan forces, we will turn over security lead to the Afghans progressively as we move towards the transition points that he has discussed and that NATO has committed to. 

It has always been the case, and will remain the case, that this is hard work and it is not work that comes without occasional setbacks.  I haven’t seen the report that you’ve mentioned, but ultimately, thanks to the sacrifice of American men and women in uniform, as well as our diplomats, Afghanistan is increasingly capable of taking care of its own security and ultimately will be responsible for its own security.  The President is committed to winding down that war and will keep to the timetable that he’s announced with his NATO allies.

Q    Jay, is the President resigned to the sequestration cuts going into effect on Friday?

MR. CARNEY:  I think you heard him say the other day that he remains hopeful, even though he understands that the clock is ticking and thus far, Republican leaders have refused to budge on the basic principle that we need to address this, our deficit challenges, in a balanced way.
We have on board, as you know, Congressman Rigell, who has said that he would like to see the sequester averted and that closing loopholes is a fair way to, in part, go about doing that. I think you saw Senator Lindsey Graham yesterday, late yesterday, on CNN talk about how he believes the damage of the sequester would be severe, especially to our defense interests, and that he would be open to a package of balanced deficit reduction that would include up to $600 billion in revenue from tax reform. 

What's notable about that figure is that it’s roughly what the President has put forward in his offer to Speaker Boehner and it's actually considerably less, $200 billion less, than the Speaker himself, as late as December of last year, just two months ago, said was his plan for contributing revenue to deficit reduction.

Q    Do those two folks that you mentioned give you folks hope that that’s an actual breakthrough, or is that just -- are those just outliers in an otherwise intractable situation?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, we'll have to see what the Republican leadership does.  Unfortunately, on the other side of the ledger, we've seen comments, as we did from Congressman Pompeo, a Republican Congressman, that suggests a different course of action.  He said it would be a home run politically for Republicans to see sequester implemented.  I wonder if he would say that to the 90,000 Defense Department workers in Virginia who would see their pay cut because of furloughs, or the thousands of Virginians who would lose their jobs because of sequester if it were allowed to be implemented.  We certainly don't think that's a home run for ordinary Americans, even if that Congressman thinks it would be for him politically.

Q    Jay, Senators Graham and McCain, our understanding is, are invited to the White House later today.  Is that about immigration?  Or is that about sequestration and defense?

MR. CARNEY:  The meeting arose out of the President's telephone calls with Senator McCain -- I believe the telephone call with Senator McCain when he was calling members of the so-called Gang of Eight on immigration.  Senator Graham also is a member of that.  And I'm sure immigration will be a topic of conversation today.  But I also expect, given the leading role that those Senators play in their party in the Senate that other topics will be addressed, including sequester.  I think Senator Graham said yesterday in public in an interview that he hopes that sequester will be on the table as a topic of discussion.  And I know that the President will want to discuss that as well.

Q    Why not Flake and Rubio, too?

MR. CARNEY:  My understanding is this arose from a conversation with Senator McCain -- the meeting did.  The President spoke with Senator Rubio, he spoke with other members of the Gang of Eight, including Democratic members, and looks forward to working with them on immigration reform.  As I think Margaret points out, I think we expect more than one topic of conversation in this meeting.

Q    Are you hoping that there can be some real advancement or breakthrough on the sequestration front, given those two and the roles they play?  And also, does the President plan on calling Boehner and McConnell back to the White House either before March 1st or at least by week’s end?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I don't want to set any expectations with regards to a sequester.  On this particular meeting I'm sure it will be a subject.  Senator Graham has said he would like it to be.  I know the President is interested in that subject.    Immigration and other issues will be on the table, I’m sure.

The President has been engaged and will continue to be engaged with congressional leaders of both parties on the issue of the sequester.  I don't have any meetings or phone calls to preview for you, but you can expect that he will continue to engage with them. 

He will also, as he is today, go out and speak to the American people about these important issues.  It's rather stunning to me that Republicans criticize the President for talking to the American people about the consequences of sequester, because the American people are the ones who will feel those consequences.  Perhaps --

Q    They called it a roadshow. 

MR. CARNEY:  Well, they did, and I guess that maybe they are opposed to the President talking to the American people about sequester because the American people overwhelmingly support the President's position on how to reduce our deficit, and reject overwhelmingly the Republican position, which is placing the entire burden on senior citizens and middle-class families and the like. 

The numbers could not be more stark, and setting aside public opinion, the policies could not be more different when it comes to balance and fairness.

Q    When you talked about Senator Graham speaking about being open to tax revenues yesterday, he also said, where's the President when it comes to overhaul of entitlement.  And would that be a topic?  Would there be a give-and-take?  Do you think there would be an opening to negotiation on that today?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, first of all, I'm not going to preview a meeting that hasn't taken place.  And I'm simply reflecting what Senator Graham said he would like to be one of the topics of conversation, and representing for the President that he, of course, would be interested in talking about that.  It's not a negotiation over sequester.

But when it comes to entitlement reform, I would remind you, as we made clear again last week and have repeatedly since December, the President's offer to the Speaker of the House remains on the table.  That includes roughly $580 billion in revenue through tax reform -- again, short of what John Boehner said was possible, significantly short of what John Boehner said he supported back just a few short months ago.  And it includes savings from entitlement reforms -- tough choices by Democrats as part of a broad, comprehensive deficit reduction package that would include tax reform that generated revenue. 

The President has shown his commitment to entitlement reform, including the so-called superlative CPI change, as well as means-testing of Medicare benefits.  These are -- these represent choices that are reflective of his willingness to compromise and Democrats’ willingness and interest in compromise. What we haven't seen, unfortunately, from Republican leaders is anything like that commensurate level of -- anything commensurate with that level of compromise.  We have not seen proposals from  -- at least comprehensive proposals from Republicans that include revenue in the way that the President's proposals include savings from both discretionary spending and entitlements. 

Back in December, the Speaker talked about that he could create -- he could produce $800 billion in revenue over 10 years from tax reform -- $800 billion from, to quote him, “the rich."  He never put that on paper, but he said it again and again publicly.  He said it was the right policy.  And what we don’t understand is why it was the right policy two months ago and now it's unacceptable policy for Speaker Boehner today.

Q    Jay, on that point, the White House keeps on saying that Boehner proposed this set of policies, but that would -- he was talking before the fiscal cliff deal, which already raised taxes.  Wasn’t he talking about -- you're talking about increasing the net tax burden -- he didn’t want to do that, though.  He wanted to reduce rates to get the $800 billion.

MR. CARNEY:  No, no, no.  He talked about a tax reform package that would contribute revenue to deficit reduction.  I understand that they want to now do tax reform that is revenue-neutral.  That is quite different from what we were talking about late last year. 

And the fact of the matter is that including the fiscal cliff deal -- which included raising rates to Clinton-era levels for the wealthiest Americans -- income tax rates -- we have still seen deficit reduction that is made up of more than $2 in spending cuts for every dollar in revenues.  That reflects balance.  It reflects balance in favor of spending cuts signed into law by this President.  What it doesn’t reflect is the absolutist approach that Republicans have taken when we talk about the sequester or the need for further deficit reduction.

Q    One more question on the sequester.  If it goes into effect and the Republicans don't compromise with you, that will mean the ratio of spending cuts to taxes will be three and a half or four to one in the end.  Isn't that a defeat for the President if sequester stays?

MR. CARNEY:  Sequester, if it’s imposed, will be imposed because of a choice by the Republican leadership to reject balance in our deficit reduction efforts, to reject the overwhelming sentiment of the American people in favor of balance, and the consequences of sequester will be the result of that Republican choice. 

There’s no question that the President believes, as the Republicans once did, that the sequester is bad policy that should never be law, should never be implemented.  That was the whole point of the sequester.  And I can point you to numerous statements by Republican leaders about how sequester should be avoided at all costs. 

Now we have a Republican congressmen saying sequester will be a home run for them politically -- although the political universe that he inhabits seems different from the general American public, the general American universe.  And we see the Speaker of the House himself saying just a few weeks ago to the Wall Street Journal that he has sequester in his back pocket, and the Speaker in that interview also bragged about the fact that he had convinced fellow House Republicans to support implementation of the sequester.

Again, that kind of attitude ignores the impact that imposition of the sequester would have on the lives of average Americans here in Virginia and across the country.

I think we should all thank the pilot for that impressive landing.  (Laughter.) 

Q    Jay, is this Favreau and Tommy’s last flight?

MR. CARNEY:  It is.  It’s a sad day.

Q    Are they here because they --

MR. CARNEY:  They are.  There are and will be tears and gnashing of teeth. 

END
11:52 A.M. EST

President Obama is on hand for the unveiling of the new Rosa Parks statue in the U.S. Capitol

February 27, 2013 12:00 PM EST

To mark African American History Month, as well as the 150th anniversary of the year the Emancipation Proclamation, we talked with White House Curator Bill Allman about a painting called Watch Meeting--Dec. 31st 1862--Waiting for the Hour that hangs near the Oval Office in the West Wing.

President Obama strongly believes we need to replace the arbitrary cuts known as the sequester with balanced deficit reduction, and today he was at a shipyard in Newport News, VA to talk about what failing to do so will mean for middle class families.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

Press Gaggle by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest aboard Air Force One en route Chicago, Illinois, 2/15/2013

Press Gaggle by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest aboard Air Force One en route Chicago, Illinois, 2/15/2013 | 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 Immigration Reform 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 Violence Prevention Now Is The Time

To do something about gun violence

Immigration Reform

Creating an Immigration System for the 21st Century

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 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

2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

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 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 • Press Briefings   The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release February 15, 2013 Press Gaggle by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest aboard Air Force One en route Chicago, Illinois, 2/15/2013 Aboard Air Force OneEn Route Chicago, Illinois  1:25 P.M. EST MR. EARNEST:  Welcome aboard Air Force One for our trip to Chicago.  We will only be there a few hours, and then we'll go somewhere much warmer, to Florida for the evening.  I'll make some opening remarks and describe to you a little bit more about the President's event in Chicago today, and then we'll open it up to questions.   Today, the President will visit Hyde Park Academy in the Woodlawn neighborhood in Chicago where he will deliver remarks to Hyde Park Academy students, faculty, and community leaders on the economic proposals from his State of the Union address designed to strengthen the middle class and those striving to get there. Woodlawn is a community where there is a locally organized, all-hands-on-deck approach to provide educational support for students, improve housing, expand economic opportunity, and attract jobs.  That effort makes Woodlawn an appropriate backdrop for the President's focus today on the importance of building ladders of opportunity into the middle class.  That includes policies that ensure that every child gets a great education starting from their earliest years; that our young people grow up in strong communities; that there are clearer opportunities for good jobs for all Americans; and that we support financial security for working families. These policies would benefit middle-class families in every single congressional district in the country.  So every member of Congress who agrees with the President that our nation is strong only when we have a thriving middle class should be strongly supportive of this effort. Now, prior to his remarks, the President will participate in a private roundtable discussion with 16 students who are enrolled in a youth anti-violence program.  This program is a school-based counseling, mentoring, violence prevention and educational enrichment program that promotes social, emotional and behavioral growth for at-risk young men.  The group is a mix of students who have voluntarily joined the program and those who have been urged by their principal to join. As the President has often said in the past, there are important steps we can take as a country to keep guns out of the wrong hands and get weapons of war off the street.  And he will talk about that again today, as well.  But we must also recognize that it's not enough to debate the role of government in reducing violence.  It’s up to parents, teachers, principals, neighbors and communities as a whole to make a difference in the lives of our young people and steer them away from a life of gang violence and toward the classroom.   So with that, we'll take some questions. Q    Will there be any sort of spray of that meeting?  Will we go in at all?  Or just --  MR. EARNEST:  There won't be.   Q    Josh, he’s got a lot built in -- extra time in his schedule before and after.  Is there any chance that he's going to meet with victims' families of the shooting? MR. EARNEST:  I don’t at this point have any additional meetings to read out to you.  The roundtable discussion that the President will participate in with the young men that I just mentioned will take up some time, and that is what a bulk of that time is devoted to. Q    A couple of questions on Hagel.  Has the White House ever said why it thinks Senate Republicans are linking Hagel's confirmation to the events in Benghazi?  I mean, why are they so insistent on linking the two? MR. EARNEST:  Well, that’s a good question.  In some ways, that may be a question that’s better posed to the members of the Senate Armed Services Committee.  I mean, the thing I can do is I can certainly restate to you the efforts -- the lengths, frankly, that we've gone to, to try to accommodate the requests for information that have been posed by some Republican senators.  Again, we’ve hosted 20 member and staff briefings on this topic; 10 different congressional hearings; six different witness interviews.  We’ve responded to 40 different inquiries, totaling up to 10,000 pages of documents.   But one thing I would add is Senator McCain gave an interview on Fox News yesterday explaining why he was delaying  -- why he supported the delay in this confirmation vote.  And I just want to read the exact quote from what he said, because I think it's pretty enlightening.  He begins saying, "To be honest with you, Neil" -- I didn’t go to journalism school, but I think if I were a journalism professor I would encourage journalists' ears to perk up when an interview -- when a person answering a question says, "to be honest with you."    So in this case Senator McCain says, "To be honest with you, Neil, it goes back to -- there's a lot of ill will towards Senator Hagel, because when he was a Republican, he attacked President Bush."  Senator McCain goes on to say later in the interview that Senator Hagel was "very anti his own party and people.  People don’t forget that," Senator McCain said.  He finished saying, "You can disagree, but if you're disagreeable, then people don’t forget that."   I think this is ironic -- well, I think this is clarifying.  Because this is one of the things -- one of the concerns that we expressed at the very beginning of this nomination process, was that we articulated our view that Republicans should not oppose Senator Hagel merely because he was critical of the war in Iraq.  Ironically, the President -- one of the reasons that the President chose Senator Hagel is because -- is that he demonstrated the courage of his convictions in standing up to intense political opposition to articulate his concerns about the war in Iraq.   This demonstrates somebody who is of strong character, but also somebody who has a lot of good insight into the proper use of our military might.   Q    Now that the nomination has been delayed -- I mean, that’s going to give opponents -- Hagel’s opponents some more time to oppose him and beat the drum against him.  Is the White House -- is there any sort of effort to counter that in these next 10 days or so until his nomination comes to the Senate again? MR. EARNEST:  Well, you have asked me a question about whether or not the Republicans in the Senate are going to try to politically capitalize on this delay.  I would actually make the case to you that this delay is a political tactic.  I wouldn’t be surprised if there are additional politics that are injected into this circumstance.  It is extremely unfortunate.  I referred to the President choosing Senator Hagel because of the courage of his convictions -- of Senator Hagel -- because of Senator Hagel demonstrating the courage of his convictions and the insight that he has demonstrated into foreign policy.  That’s exactly the kind of insight and exactly the kind of courage that our men and women -- 66,000 of whom are serving in Afghanistan right now -- need in their Secretary of Defense. Next weekend, there will be a meeting of our NATO allies in Brussels where defense ministers from those allies will be participating in discussions about our drawdown in Iraq -- I mean, in Afghanistan -- will be participating in discussions about our drawdown in Afghanistan.  Our new Secretary of Defense, who will be responsible for coordinating those efforts, won’t be there. So it’s unfortunate there are Republicans in this case who are choosing to play politics as opposed to doing the right thing. Q    But I think the question, though, was, is the White House prepared with some sort of ready response team to counter the attacks that are sure to surface on former Senator Hagel during this 10-day period.  And do you guys have your fax machine warmed up, ready to --  MR. EARNEST:  Our fax machine, huh?  (Laughter.)  That was funny. Q    The opponents have just bought themselves 10 days to muddy the waters.  Are you guys ready to -- MR. EARNEST:  Again, I think it’s unfortunate that people are choosing to play politics with such an important issue at such a critically important time. I should say we’re confident that Senator Hagel is going to be confirmed.  We are challenging Republicans to drop their opposition -- or at least drop their delay.  I mean, this is the other -- I guess this is the other point that I should make.  This is unprecedented.  Senator McCain, ironically enough, in a previous interview with Fox News, actually pointed out and acknowledged the unprecedented nature of filibustering the President’s nominee to be Secretary of Defense.  At that point, you’d think that might be ancient history.  That was five days ago that Senator McCain said that he didn’t support doing that. Q    Has the President spoken yet to Senator McCain or to Senator Graham? MR. EARNEST:  I don’t have any calls to read out to you at this point. Q    Can I ask -- I’d like to ask you about --  Q    One more thing about Hagel.  Are you going to provide any more information to them to try to satisfy their concerns? MR. EARNEST:  You mean in addition to the 20 member and staff briefings, the 10 congressional hearings, the 6 witness interviews, the 40 inquiries we’ve responded to totaling 10,000 pages of documents, and the letter that was sent to Senate Republicans yesterday by the White House Counsel?  I don’t have anything else to telegraph to you that we might send to them via fax machine or any other modality. Q    Has the President spoken to Senator Hagel in the last couple of days? MR. EARNEST:  I don’t have any conversations to read out to you at this point. Q    Now, after the President leaves Chicago, we know he’s going to Florida for what’s been described as a guy’s weekend.  We’ve read some reports in other publications about some of the details but haven’t gotten the full low-down from the White House.  So let’s just do it for the record if we can.  Can you describe -- is he playing golf?  Is it at the Floridian?  Is he getting a lesson from Tiger Woods’s former coach, Butch Harmon?  I’ve got a couple more, but --  MR. EARNEST:  I don’t have all those details handy, so why don’t we talk on the way to Florida and I can get you some more details on this.  But as I mentioned yesterday, the President is looking forward to spending President’s Day weekend with some friends in Florida, and I’m sure they’ll take advantage of the opportunity to play some golf. Q    Can you tell us what access the press will have to the President during this weekend? MR. EARNEST:  I don’t know what all the logistics are for this weekend.  The truth is I’m trying to get through our event in Chicago, but that’s certainly something we can talk about before we arrive in Florida. Q    And will you release the list of the friends that he’s playing with and staying with this weekend?  MR. EARNEST:  I’ll work on getting that done.  Again, I really just haven’t had a chance to look at it yet, but I’ll be there, too, and I’ll be working to try to do my best to get you the information that you need to do your job while you’re there. Q    And is Ben Rhodes -- I’m curious to know why he’s on the trip.  Is there -- I mean, is this also a working weekend for him?  Is there something that can be read into this, or is he an avid golfer?  (Laughter.) MR. EARNEST:  I have not been on the golf course with Ben before.  Typically, when the President travels overnight, away from the White House, he’ll often bring a member of his national security team just to be there to brief him and keep him updated as necessary on world events.  That’s the reason that Ben is coming.  I’m not sure that Ben brought his golf clubs. Q    I’ve got a question on Benghazi.  So Senator Graham was on Fox News recently and he said that DNI Clapper made the President aware of the two IED attacks on the consulate in April and June.  Now, did the President take any action then? MR. EARNEST:  I have to refer you to my -- for that kind of a detailed, tick-tock question, I’d refer you to my colleagues at the National Security Staff, who can get you -- who can try to get you some more details on this.  I don’t have that information in front of me.   Q    North Korea is telling China that they may set off two more nuclear tests this year.  Is there anything you can do to stop them?  Or what’s your reaction? MR. EARNEST:  Well, I’ve seen the reports that apparently originated with some Chinese sources, I believe, about those conversations.  I’m not aware of the content of those conversations.  Suffice it to say, we have warned North Korea about the damaging consequences, or at least the -- I should say, the further isolation that’s caused by their failure to live up to their international obligations.  Each time we see one of these nuclear tests, it further isolates the country of North Korea, which has a terrible impact on the people of North Korea.  It doesn’t serve their interests. So we encourage the North Koreans to live up to their international obligations, abandon their nuclear program, and work with the rest of the international community to become a responsible member of the international community. Q    There was a report, shortly before we took off, that various world powers are signaling to Iran that they may ease gold sanctions in exchange for shutting down the Fordow plant.  Can you talk about -- what can you confirm about that and what the U.S.’s role in this is? MR. EARNEST:  I don’t have anything on those reports.  I do know that the United States and other members of the P5-plus-1 are looking forward to the talks that will take place in a couple of weeks in Kazakhstan.  But in terms of those -- what kinds of things might be litigated at that meeting, or what kinds of negotiations may be underway in advance of that meeting, I don’t have anything on that for you. Q    Since Rhodes is on the plane, is that something that maybe you can get back to us on? MR. EARNEST:  I’ll look into it.  If we have something on it, I can get it to you. Q    There’s also a report that Mrs. Obama and her daughters are -- have a separate vacation plan for this weekend.  Can you just confirm that? MR. EARNEST:  Those of you who have been covering the White House know that the First Lady and her two daughters, on a pretty annual basis around this time, will go on a ski trip out west with some family friends, and they’re doing that again this year. Q    The President doesn’t like skiing?  (Laughter.) MR. EARNEST:  The President is looking forward to -- Q    Colorado is a swing state.  (Laughter.) MR. EARNEST:  The President is looking forward to a couple rounds of golf this weekend. Q    Has General John Allen told the President he does not want to be nominated as NATO Supreme Commander? MR. EARNEST:  I’m glad you asked that question.  I know that Secretary Panetta talked about this just a little bit yesterday.  The President has appreciated the service of General Allen in Afghanistan.  He’s coming off a 19-month tenure of service there, in a really pressure-packed situation.  This was not -- a stressful role that he played.  The President has relied on him quite a bit over the last 19 months as we’ve navigated some very complicated issues, and again, initiated this drawdown of our men and women out of Afghanistan.   General Allen has said that, as he considers his next assignment, that he wanted to spend some time talking to his family about what he’d like to do next.  And that’s certainly something that is understandable given what he’s been up to the last 19 months.  And so we’re happy to give him the opportunity to consider what he would like to do next. But suffice it to say, the President has a ton of confidence in General Allen, not just because of the great work that he did over the last 19 months in Afghanistan, but because of the wisdom and advice that he shared with the President on a range of issues before that.  So certainly, we'd like to look for an opportunity for General Allen to continue his service to his country. Q    Will the President meet with General Allen to talk about his future? MR. EARNEST:  There's no meeting that I'm aware of right now that's on the schedule.   Q    So it's unclear whether he's going to take this NATO job or something else? MR. EARNEST:  Well, it's something that he said that he would like the opportunity to discuss with his family.  And we're certainly comfortable with his -- Q    So it’s on pause -- it’s on hold until we hear more? MR. EARNEST:  Yes.  Q    What is your sense of how much of the President's remarks today will be devoted to guns and gun violence and homicide in Chicago, et cetera? MR. EARNEST:  Well, as I mentioned, the focus of the President's remarks today will be on the priority of building ladders of opportunity for those Americans who are scratching and clawing, trying to get into the middle class.  So he'll talk about some of the initiatives that he discussed in the State of the Union and even some of the initiatives that he's talked about over the last couple of days.   He'll talk about the difference that it would make to raise the minimum wage up to $9 an hour.  This would literally mean the difference between a family of four whose head of household has a full-time, minimum wage job.  Currently, the head of a household of four who has a full-time, minimum wage job is actually raising his family below the poverty line -- his or her family below the poverty line.  So giving a raise to $9 an hour would have a real impact on the standard of living for families like that.   This is why the President believes it’s important to invest in high-quality early childhood education programs.  We've seen that investments like this for every dollar that we invest in these kinds of programs, we can save seven taxpayer dollars because of the impact it has on educational achievement down the road, because of the impact it has on things like teen pregnancy rates and even on violent crime rates.  So the President will talk primarily about some of these issues.  But the other thing that's true -- and Secretary Duncan speaks about this very eloquently -- that our kids are not going to be successful in the classroom if they're scared of violence in their school.  So the President is going to talk about -- in addition to these other policies that are critical to expanding economic opportunity, he's also going to talk about making our community safer.  And one of the things that he'll also talk about are “promise zones.”  Promise zones are an idea where we can coordinate and integrate federal assistance to communities that are struggling both economically and otherwise.  So what we can do is we can devote resources from the Department of Justice to fund law enforcement programs.  We can dedicate funding from HUD to expand housing options in these communities.  We can dedicate money from the Department of Education to improve schools and to expand educational programs.  Integrating all these programs is critical to offering a ladder of opportunity to the families that live there.  So the President really will be making an effort to focus on the economy, but trying to separate that completely from gun violence is impractical.   Anybody else?  Thanks, everybody.   END1:44 P.M. EST

Blog posts on this issue February 15, 2013 6:41 PM ESTPresident Obama Welcomes Italian President Napolitano

The two leaders discussed the world economy and President Obama's plan to pursue a U.S.-European Union free trade agreement, which was mentioned in his State of the Union address earlier this week.

February 15, 2013 6:32 PM ESTWeekly Wrap Up: “We Don’t Give Up”

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

February 15, 2013 4:45 PM ESTOpen For Questions: The State of the Union and Immigration Reform

Cecilia Muñoz, Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, answers questions from the public about immigration reform and President Obama's State of the Union Address in an “Open for Questions” session moderated by Elianne Ramos from LATISM.

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 Violence Prevention 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