President Obama: Congress Needs to Keep Our Government Open

President Barack Obama delivers remarks on the budget negotiations, in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House

President Barack Obama delivers remarks on the budget negotiations, in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House, Sept. 30, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

If Congress does not fulfill its responsibility to pass a budget today, much of the United States government will be forced to shut down tomorrow. 

This afternoon, President Obama delivered remarks from the White House Press Briefing Room about what that shutdown would mean for the country.

While some services will continue -- social security checks, postal service, operations related to national security or public safety –- a number of changes would go into effect immediately. 

Office buildings would close. Paychecks would be delayed. Vital services that seniors and veterans, women and children, businesses and our economy depend on would be hamstrung. Business owners would see delays in raising capital, seeking infrastructure permits, or rebuilding after Hurricane Sandy. Veterans who’ve sacrificed for their country will find their support centers unstaffed.  Tourists will find every one of America’s national parks and monuments, from Yosemite to the Smithsonian to the Statue of Liberty, immediately closed.  And of course, the communities and small businesses that rely on these national treasures for their livelihoods will be out of customers and out of luck.

A shutdown would also disrupt the economy, President Obama said. “It would throw a wrench into the gears of our economy at a time when those gears have gained some traction.”

Related Topics: Economy

President Obama's Bilateral Meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu

September 30, 2013 | 14:54 | Public Domain

President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu speak to the press after a bilateral meeting in the Oval Office to discuss the progress on final status negotiations with the Palestinians, and developments in Iran, Syria, and elsewhere in the region.

Download mp4 (547MB) | mp3 (36MB)

Read the Transcript

Remarks by President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel After Bilateral Meeting

 

Oval Office
 
12:39 P.M. EDT
 
PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Well, it’s a pleasure to welcome Prime Minister Netanyahu back to the Oval Office.  I think I've had the pleasure of hosting him more often than just about any other world leader, and hopefully this will provide just some small measure of repayment for the wonderful visit that I had in Israel this spring.  And I want to thank him and his family and his entire team for the tremendous hospitality that we had when we were there.
 
The Prime Minister and I were just talking about the fact these are hectic times, and nowhere is that more true, obviously, than in the Middle East.  And so we had an opportunity for a wide-ranging discussion about a range of issues.  
 
I commended him for entering into good-faith negotiations with the Palestinian Authority in discussing how we can resolve what has been, obviously, one of the biggest challenges for a very long time in the region.  And both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas have assigned outstanding negotiators.  They have been engaging in serious conversations.  And our goal continues to be to help facilitate -- not dictate, but facilitate -- the kinds of genuine negotiations that will result in two states living side-by-side in peace and security.
 
And we have a limited amount of time to achieve that goal, and I appreciate the Prime Minister’s courage in being willing to step forward on behalf of that goal.
 
We had an opportunity to discuss the situation in Syria.  Obviously, we have a broad set of strategic concerns in Syria.  We are both pleased that there is the possibility of finally getting chemical weapons stockpiles out of Syria.  But I think we both share a deep concern that we have to be able to verify and enforce what has now been agreed to at the United Nations.  Chemical weapons inside of Syria obviously have threatened Syrian civilians, but over the long term also pose a threat to Israel.  And we want to make sure that we get those indiscriminate, horrible weapons out of there.  
 
And so we are consulting with the international community on these issues, and I shared with the Prime Minister our belief that we have to move with speed and dispatch in actually making sure that the agreement that was arrived at in the United Nations is followed through on.
 
In addition, we have the larger question of how to deal with the civil war that's taking place in Syria.  And given Israel’s significant interest in the spillover effects of activities there, we will be consulting very closely with them.
 
We had an opportunity to discuss Egypt, and I shared with him what I said at the United Nations just a week ago, which is that we continue to have concerns about what has happened in Egypt, but we also are committed to a constructive relationship with Egypt, in part because of the important role that the Camp David Accords and the Egypt-Israeli peace serve not only for the stability and security of both those countries, but also for security in the region and U.S. security.
 
So we will continue to work with the Egyptian government, although urging them and pushing them in a direction that is more inclusive and that meets the basic goals of those who originally sought for more freedom and more democracy in that country.
 
And we had an opportunity, obviously, to discuss Iran.  Both the Prime Minister and I agree, since I came into office, that it is imperative that Iran not possess a nuclear weapon.  That is important for American security; it is important for Israeli security; it’s important for world security, because we do not want to trigger a nuclear arms race in the most volatile region in the world.  And given the statements and actions from the Iranian regime in the past -- the threats against Israel, the acts against Israel -- it is absolutely clear that words are not sufficient, that we have to have actions that give the international community confidence that, in fact, they are meeting their international obligations fully, and that they are not in a position to have a nuclear weapon.  
 
What I also shared with the Prime Minister is that, because of the extraordinary sanctions that we have been able to put in place over the last several years, the Iranians are now prepared, it appears, to negotiate.  We have to test diplomacy.  We have to see if, in fact, they are serious about their willingness to abide by international norms and international law and international requirements and resolutions.  And we in good faith will approach them, indicating that it is our preference to resolve these issues diplomatically. 
 
But we enter into these negotiations very clear-eyed.  They will not be easy.  And anything that we do will require the highest standards of verification in order for us to provide the sort of sanctions relief that I think they are looking for.
 
So we will be in close consultation with Israel and our other friends and allies in the region during this process, and our hope is that we can resolve this diplomatically.  But as President of the United States, I've said before and I will repeat that we take no options off the table, including military options, in terms of making sure that we do not have nuclear weapons in Iran that would destabilize the region and potentially threaten the United States of America.
 
In all of this, our unshakeable bond with the Israeli people is stronger than ever.  Our commitment to Israel's security is stronger than ever.  And we are very much looking forward to continuing to work with our friends in Israel to make sure that the U.S. security interests are met, Israel's security interests are met, but hopefully that we can also bring about greater peace and greater stability in a region that has been racked with violence and tensions for far too long.  
 
And I appreciate the Prime Minister's views.  He is always candid, and we’re always able to have not only a good working relationship at the prime ministerial level, but also because of the outstanding work that our staffs do.
 
So, Mr. Prime Minister, welcome.  
 
PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU:  Mr. President, thank you for welcoming me and my delegation on what I know is a very busy day for you in Washington today.  
 
There are many things on your plate, but I know that you know and the American people know that there is no better ally -- more reliable, more stable, more democratic -- other than Israel in a very raw, dangerous place.  So I welcome the opportunity that we're having to discuss how we work closely together to address the enormous challenges that face both of us.  And I think of those, the most important challenge is preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
 
I appreciate deeply the fact that you have made clear that you remain committed to this goal.  I also appreciate the statement you made that Iran's conciliatory words have to be matched by real actions -- transparent, verifiable, meaningful actions.  
 
Iran is committed to Israel's destruction.  So for Israel, the ultimate test of a future agreement with Iran is whether or not Iran dismantles its military nuclear program.  We have a saying in Hebrew, we call it mivchan hatotza’a -- you would say it in English, what's the bottom line?  And the bottom line, again, is that Iran fully dismantles its military nuclear program.  
 
In this regard, I want to express my appreciation to you for the enormous work that’s been done to have a sanctions regime in place to thwart Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons.  I believe that it's the combination of a credible military threat 
and the pressure of those sanctions that has brought Iran to the negotiating table.
 
I also believe that if diplomacy is to work, those pressures must be kept in place.  And I think that they should not be lessened until there is verifiable success.  And, in fact, it is Israel’s firm belief that if Iran continues to advance its nuclear program during negotiations, the sanctions should be strengthened.  It’s the combination, I believe, that has guided your policy and our policy so far, that is good credible military threat and strong sanctions I think is still the only formula that can get a peaceful resolution of this problem.
 
Mr. President, we discussed many of these, but I want to use this opportunity to thank you, Secretary of State Kerry and others in your administration for helping to advance peace between Israel and the Palestinians.  I remain committed to that peace.  And I hope that our efforts -- our common efforts -- would lead to a secure and lasting peace.  
 
We know that for peace to endure, it must be based on Israel’s capacity to defend itself, by itself.  And I hope that we can achieve an historic transformation that will give a better future for us and our Palestinian neighbors, and, who knows, one day with our other neighbors as well.
 
So I want to thank you again for your hospitality, for your efforts, and it’s very, very good to see you again.
 
Q    Mr. President, are you resigned to a government shutdown at this point?  And given how close we are to the midnight deadline, have you had any conversations with Speaker Boehner over the past few days?
 
PRESIDENT OBAMA:  I am not at all resigned.  And I’ll have a chance to obviously speak more to this.  I’m going to have a Cabinet meeting this afternoon and may have some further thoughts for the press as the day goes on.  But the bottom line is that the Senate has passed a bill that keeps the government open, does not have a lot of extraneous issues to it, that allows us then to negotiate a longer-term budget and address a range of other issues, but that ensures that we’re not shutting down the government and we’re not shutting down the economy at a time when a lot of families out there are just getting some traction and digging themselves out of the hole that we’ve had as a consequence of the financial crisis.
 
I’ve said before, Congress has two responsibilities:  Pass a budget, pay the bills.  And I am not only open to but eager to have negotiations around a long-term budget that makes sure that we’re investing in middle-class families, helping the economy grow, giving people who are working hard a leg up, and greater security and stability and deals with some of our long-term challenges in terms of debt and deficits.
 
But the only way to do that is for everybody to sit down in good faith without threatening to harm women and veterans and children with a government shutdown, and certainly we can't have any kind of meaningful negotiations under the cloud of potential default, the first in U.S. history.
 
There’s not a world leader, if you took a poll, who would say that it would be responsible or consistent with America’s leadership in the world for us not to pay our bills.  We are the foundation of the world economy and the world financial system.  And our currency is the reserve currency of the world.  We don't mess with that.  And we certainly don't allow domestic policy differences on issues that are unrelated to the budget to endanger not only our economy but the world economy.  So I suspect that I will speaking to the leaders today, tomorrow, and the next day.
 
But there’s a pretty straightforward solution to this.  If you set aside the short-term politics and you look at the long term here, what it simply requires is everybody to act responsibly and do what’s right for the American people.  
 
All right?  Thank you very much, everybody.  Thank you. 
 
 END
12:54 P.M. EDT

 

Close Transcript

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Presidential Nominations Sent to the Senate

NOMINATIONS SENT TO THE SENATE:

Lanhee J. Chen, of California, to be a Member of the Social Security Advisory Board for a term expiring September 30, 2018, vice Mark J. Warshawsky, term expired.

Alan L. Cohen, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Social Security Advisory Board for a term expiring September 30, 2016, vice Dana K. Bilyeu, term expired.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Daily Briefing by the Press Secretary, 9/30/13

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

1:31 P.M. EDT
 
MR. CARNEY:  Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.  Thank you for being here.  Thank you for your patience.  Of course, I wanted to make sure that you heard the President’s remarks at the end of his bilateral meeting with the Israeli Prime Minister, Prime Minister Netanyahu, at which, in addition to his comments about the meeting, about our relationship with Israel, our unshakeable support for Israel’s security, the discussion the two leaders had about Syria and Iran and the Middle East peace process, among other things, the President took a question and answered it about the fact that as of now, it is up to the House of Representatives to decide whether or not they want to shut down the government in order to make an ideological point, or whether they will follow the Senate’s lead and pass an extension of government funding at current levels for a number of weeks so that we can get about the business of discussing and negotiating a long-term budget agreement.
 
With that, I will take your questions. 
 
Q    Can you talk a little bit more about what the President just said about having conversations with leaders on the Hill?  Did that include Speaker Boehner?  And is he making any progress in these talks for averting a shutdown?
 
MR. CARNEY:  I think the President said what we've said, which is that you can expect that he will be having conversations with leaders on the Hill, as he has in the past.  And I assume that would include the Speaker of the House.  
 
The point I think, though, is that we are at a moment where the House of Representatives has to decide, and the Speaker of the House, as the leader of the House and the leader of House Republicans, must decide whether roughly 60 members of his caucus, the tea party faction, will dictate to the American people whether the government will shut down because they have not been able to achieve through normal means their ideological agenda, which is to repeal and do away with in some manner or other the Affordable Care Act -- the irony, of course, being that tomorrow enrollment begins in the Affordable Care Act, and millions of Americans for whom access to affordable insurance has been but a dream, there will be the opportunity to enroll in the Affordable Care Act through the exchanges and the marketplaces and receive, come January 1st, affordable health insurance for the first time.
 
And that's going to happen.  Nothing will alter that.  That will happen. 
 
Q    A couple follows to that.  Can you say whether he’s spoken yet to Speaker Boehner?
 
MR. CARNEY:  I don't have any other conversations or new conversations to read out.  I think what the President indicated is that he expects that he will, of course, speak with leaders in the coming days. 
 
Again, there’s nothing here to debate.  The President has made clear all year long that he is willing and eager to negotiate over our budget priorities and to reach a common-sense solution to funding our government.  That's what his budget was about, which many of you wrote about and correctly assessed to represent a compromise.  And we have encouraged Republicans to show the same willingness to compromise all year long, and the President has met with many members of Congress of the Republican Party over the course of the year to have those discussions. 
 
What he will not do is go along with the idea that the government should be shut down over this desire to unwind history and achieve through threat and extortion what Republicans couldn’t do through the legislative process or through the election process.  It's just not fair to the American people, and it's not fair to the millions of Americans who will have access to affordable health insurance for the first time.
 
Q    Would the President veto a continued resolution that only included a provision killing the medical device tax?
 
MR. CARNEY:  We have said that’s -- none of this is acceptable.  This is just a blatant extortion.  And the irony about it is -- the Republicans will tell you -- the Republicans who support this extortion game or extortion racket will tell you that, oh, well, that’s compromise; we just want you to do this on the Affordable Care Act, and chip away at it here or delay there. And yet, they'll all also tell you quite clearly that the goal -- the ultimate goal and purpose of this is to do away with the Affordable Care Act, so take away all those benefits for millions of Americans, and increase the deficit dramatically while doing it -- something they never mention.
 
But in the end, they want to do that for a continuing resolution that will fund the government for 45 days?  60 days?  What comes next?  What will they demand next?  I mean, part of it was they want everybody's boss to be able to tell them -- to tell every woman in America whether or not they can get contraceptive coverage.  They want to attach that to this debate. 
 
This is not, as others have said, this is not the way Congress ought to operate, and it's irresponsible and reckless to hold the functioning of the government hostage to these ideological imperatives.
 
Q    Given that there's no sign of any movement, Jay, isn't a shutdown inevitable this evening?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, the President said just now, and I certainly agree with him, that, no, that he is not resigned to a shutdown, because there's an avenue open to the House, after the Senate does what we expect, which is send back to the House a clean CR that just continues funding the government at current levels.  It contains no concessions to the democratic agenda or the President's agenda.  It just continues funding the government at current levels for a number of weeks in order to allow for the negotiations the President is eager to engage in.  That’s the responsible thing to do.
 
The irresponsible thing to do is to attach a bunch of political ideological demands to this simple proposition of funding the government and not shutting it down, and say you'll shut it down if you don’t get what you want.
 
Q    But you're not detecting any signs of any movement?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, I used to walk the halls of Congress as a reporter and, back then, knew a lot more about the minute-by-minute developments.  In fact, I did that during the last government shutdown here in '95 and up there in '96.  But I leave it to your colleagues to tell me more precisely what the thinking of the House Republican leadership is.
 
Q    How will a shutdown affect White House staffing?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, the White House, like other agencies within government, is affected.  There will be reductions in staff.  We’ll have a skeletal staff.  There’s obviously essential staff that's exempted -- or excepted, which I think is the proper term.  And that's true in other areas.  But it will be an extremely lean operation if this comes to pass.
 
Q    And lastly, will he go on this trip to Asia this weekend?
 
MR. CARNEY:  We don't have any changes to announce.  We plan to make this trip.  The President, as President, looks forward to and believes it is important to travel to Asia in order to promote our economic interests in Asia and our strategic interests in Asia.  There are American jobs that can be created through our engagement with Asia, the fastest-growing region of the world and an enormously important region when it comes to our trading relationships and partnerships. 
 
So we have this trip scheduled and we intend to take it.  We’ll see, obviously, what happens as the week unfolds.
 
Let me move around a little bit if I may.  April.
 
Q    I want to follow up on what Steve said.  You said there will be a skeletal staff and a lean operation indeed if the shutdown happened.  Could you get into the breakdown?  Could you give us numbers?
 
MR. CARNEY:  I would refer you to the Office of Management and Budget, which handles all of these specifics and can give you more information about how it breaks down.  But those of you who know if you're as old as I am and remember what it was like in the mid ‘90s, and remember also what you reported just when there was at least the potential of a shutdown, there are significant reductions in staff and furloughs that take place here, as elsewhere, if a shutdown occurs.
 
Q    And that staff that will be not coming in or furloughed will not be paid, correct?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, that's my understanding.  But I hesitate to answer these kind of technical questions because there are far better sources for that specific information.
 
Q    And understanding that today that even the White House is trying to still parse through all the technicalities of the effects on the White House from a shutdown -- is that the case?  If so, could you talk to us about some of the things that you’re dealing with it?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Look, here’s the thing.  There are effects here and there are effects throughout the government.  But those pale in comparison to the effects and impacts that a shutdown would have on women and children and seniors.
 
Shortly after a shutdown, if it were to occur, federal funding for the Women, Infants and Children program may not be sufficient to cover benefits, and agencies may have to cut off services to mothers and young children.
 
Senior nutrition grants, which help approximately 2.5 million seniors annually -- help them remain healthy and independent by providing meals and related services -- would not be funded. 
 
Programs that our nation's veterans depend on would be affected.  For example, veterans’ call centers and regional offices would be closed immediately, effective immediately.  So those services that help veterans understand their benefits, including call centers, hotlines and regional offices, would be closed.  Vocational rehabilitation and education counseling for veterans would be limited.  Veterans’ business support centers would be immediately closed.  And should a lapse extend through late October, compensation, pension, education and other veterans' benefits would be cut off.
 
Important research and consumer safety programs would be halted in the event of a shutdown, including research into life-threatening diseases.  Work to protect consumers, ranging from child product safety to financial security, to the safety of hazardous waste facilities would cease. 
 
The Sandy recovery efforts, the West, Texas investigation and other fire and emergency response grants would be halted.  And on that, I just want to point out that when it comes to disaster -- emergency disaster relief, there is the fund that is operational.  So should there be a disaster, there would be funding available for initial and immediate emergency relief.  But what would be affected by a shutdown are the ongoing Sandy recovery efforts and the investigation into the explosion in West, Texas, and the like.
 
So those are the impacts and effects that matter.  We, like every other agency, would be affected, but it's folks out in the country who will be affected that concerns us most.
 
Q    Jay, thank you for that information.  But, again, how will the President plan to go to Asia if there's a schedule -- skeleton crew and a lean operation here?  And then, also, how is ASEAN affected --
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, the President said today, not long ago, that he is not resigned to the idea that the government will shut down.  He remains hopeful that the House will come to the reasonable decision that it is appropriate to simply extend funding of the government further for several weeks in order to allow for the kind of negotiations that they claim they want about our budget priorities.  So he remains hopeful, at least not resigned, to the fact of a shutdown. 
 
And when it comes to the mechanics of the trip and the people and equipment that gets positioned abroad for a trip like this, I just would have to refer you to OMB or to the agencies involved -- Department of Defense, Secret Service.
 
Q    Jay, one of the other proposals floating around up on Capitol Hill would be a really, really short-term CR, something along the lines of a week, to keep the government running.  You, from this podium in the past, have described that as sort of "tollbooth government," or even these continuing resolutions as "tollbooth government."  Wouldn’t a one-week CR be sort of the ultimate tollbooth government?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, I’m not going to respond to ideas floating around the Hill.  There are tons of them, and we could respond all day to them.  Right now, the option available, as I understand it, to the House, to the Speaker, will be the opportunity to follow the Senate's lead in funding the government for a number of weeks in a clean continuing resolution.  And we would support that.
 
This process, again, has been one where a small faction, a very extreme faction of Republicans in the House has essentially forced its leadership to go along with a proposition that it is better to shut down the government, with all of the negative effects that we've talked about, and better perhaps to default on our obligations for the first time in history than to allow a law that was passed and signed and upheld by the Supreme Court to be implemented -- a law that would provide millions of Americans who do not have insurance access to affordable insurance. 
 
And one might surmise that the extreme agita that you see among Republicans right now over the Affordable Care Act and Obamacare is a direct result of the fact that, beginning tomorrow, there is a concrete development that means that millions of Americans will, for the first time, be able to sign up for that health insurance.  And as I think I've seen Republicans say, it will be a lot harder to get rid of Obamacare once these individuals who have had a hard time getting affordable health care are able to see the benefits of the Affordable Care Act provides to them.
 
Q    The White House might be open to a one-week CR --
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, I'm not going to negotiate ideas that are floated to me from any row of this briefing room, except to say that we don’t think extraneous political agenda items ought to be -- well, maybe from the front -- (laughter) -- I think I'll just make it a blanket opposition to that. 
 
But let me just say that Congress ought to do its job.  It only has a few absolute functions, and one of them is to ensure that the government and its essential operations are funded.  Another is to ensure that the United States pays its bills, as it has throughout the entire history of the nation.
 
Q    And, Jay, let me just follow up real quick.  In the last couple of weeks, Democrats, including the President, have
-- and he has not used all of these words, but I'll throw out some of them that have been used -- have referred to Republicans as "arsonists," "anarchists," "extortionists, "blackmailers" -- 
 
MR. CARNEY:  I think I just said extortion and -- yes.
 
Q -- "hostage-takers."  Dan Pfeiffer talked about bombs being strapped to chests.  (Laughter.)  It almost sounds as if this White House is trying to taunt Republicans into shutting the government down.
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, that’s certainly not the case.  I mean, as I think I just saw my colleague, Dan Pfeiffer, on CNN's air not long ago say that I think it was Mitch McConnell who, in the iteration of these negotiations -- similar ones two years ago -- who referred to the economy being a hostage that they could take in negotiations with the President.  So I don’t think this is language that either side has exclusive rights to or has only used in the past. 
 
But here are the facts.  When it comes to funding the government or when it comes to paying our debts, the Democrats and the President, on one hand, are asking for nothing -- no concessions, no ideological riders, no special pet projects, no political gotcha items -- in exchange for the simple extension of government funding, in exchange for Congress ensuring that we do not default.
 
Republicans, on the other hand, are attaching -- in the concrete bills that they've passed and in their imaginations anyway when they talk about what they'd like to attach -- all sort of political agenda items, some of them wildly inconsistent with where the American people want the country to move.  And that includes issues that are wholly unrelated to the budget and wholly unrelated to the debt and the deficits that we must manage, and the responsibility of Congress to ensure that we don't default.
 
Q    Two questions, Jay, one following on Jim.  This is no longer such a hypothetical -- Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has hot-lined a one-week CR in the Senate within the last few minutes, maybe hour.  So it looks like there’s some movement on that on Capitol Hill.  And you said that Congress has the responsibility to keep the government funded.  I wonder, would the President sign a one-week CR?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, you just mentioned this happened in the last couple minutes, so I'm not going to give you a statement of administration policy except to say that it has long been our position that Congress ought to make sure that the government doesn’t shut down, and they ought not to attach to their responsibility to ensure that the government doesn’t shut down any ideological poison pills or any agenda items that they can't achieve through the normal process.
 
But we'll have to see what Congress does.  There’s a lot of movement in Congress that doesn’t result in actual action.
 
Q    And on the Affordable Care Act, will the President be doing anything tomorrow to promote the rollout, and can you talk a little bit about what the White House is going to be doing, broadly?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, I don't have any information at this time for you on the President’s schedule tomorrow.  It is certainly the case -- and I appreciate you bringing it up -- that the Department of Health and Human Services and others are engaged in preparing for tomorrow’s opening day of enrollment and there’s a lot of activity around that.  And it will be the first day of the six-month open enrollment period for individuals to basically shop for health insurance in a way that they’ve never been able to before, and for so many of them to have options available to them at affordable prices that they’ve never had before.
 
And we expect that when those marketplaces open and the exchanges open and you can, as a consumer, review your options either online or through the telephone call centers, there will be a lot of window-shopping, a lot of people will assess what’s available to them, and then, as time passes and we move closer to January 4th, more and more of the millions of Americans who have this option available to them will take advantage of it.  And that will be a very good thing, indeed.
 
Jon Karl.
 
Q    Jay, are these briefings essential?  Will you continue to brief in the middle of a shutdown?
 
MR. CARNEY:  We obviously believe it’s important that the American people be apprised of what’s happening here at the White House, and we will endeavor to provide that information as best we can with a skeletal staff.
 
Q    Are you confident that this will be a political disaster for Republicans if there’s a shutdown?
 
MR. CARNEY:  I wouldn't make any kind of predictions.  And that suggests that we're looking for an outcome -- I'm not.  I don't know, and honestly, I think it’s important to know that we don't care about the politics of this.  The President cares about making sure that the American people aren't hurt by it. 
 
Because we talked about this with regards to the comprehensive immigration reform legislation that passed with a strong bipartisan majority in the Senate, and there were some question about whether secretly we didn’t hope that the Republicans in the House would block it because it would be bad
-- continued bad news for the Republicans when it came to their ever-worsening relations with Hispanic Americans across the country.  And the answer is, no.  We would love them to take advantage of the political opportunities available to them by passing comprehensive immigration reform and maybe improving their standing among Hispanic Americans by doing it.
 
And we would love for Republicans to do the right thing and maybe improve their standing among the American people, and Congress’s standing among the American people, by simply not shutting down the government and not defaulting on our obligations.
 
Q    So just to go through very quickly some of what the Republicans are demanding and what’s negotiable and what’s not.  The debt ceiling -- nothing there negotiable, right?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Correct.
 
Q    The idea of repealing the health care law -- obviously not negotiable.  Delaying the health care law for a year?
 
MR. CARNEY:  No.
 
Q    Not negotiable?
 
MR. CARNEY:  First of all, the answer is, no.  And nothing is negotiable when it comes to the debt ceiling.
 
And as the President said recently when it comes to extending the government, he’s willing to talk about ways to improve the health care law if Republicans are interested in that.  After all, a lot of the Affordable Care Act is designed -- its essential elements were designed by Republicans.  And I believe that there are Republicans out there who probably earnestly have some good ideas, although they're most likely afraid to talk about them in party circles. 
 
But the President is eager to do that.  What he is not willing to do is have those negotiations under the threat of shutting down the government, and certainly not under the threat of defaulting on our obligations.
 
Q    Is the idea of delaying this tax or of cutting this tax on medical devices also non-negotiable?
 
MR. CARNEY:  No, I answered that with Nedra that that's not -- look, Congress has throughout its time in session the opportunity to consider and pass legislation, to try to get majorities big enough in both houses to achieve a compromise between the House and the Senate and send it to the President.  That's the way it is supposed to work.
 
And as you know, the House Republicans in particular have done little else over the past couple of years than attempt to legislate ways that either defund or repeal or in other ways negatively effect the Affordable Care Act.  So they can certainly endeavor to keep doing that.  But to have that attached to the simple responsibility to fund the government, it’s just not acceptable.
 
Q    So is the reason why we’ve seen really no negotiations going on because basically everything the Republicans have put out there is non-negotiable?  Right?
 
MR. CARNEY:  That’s not a -- here’s it is.  It is not a concession to keep the government open.  It is not a concession to pay America’s bills.  That is a responsibility.  And as I emailed with a reporter out here, it is enshrined in the Constitution that Congress has the power to pay debts; Congress has the power to authorize funding.  If it were otherwise, the President would go about it and there would be no drama and no delay.

Q    So, last question.  What is the President doing over these next several hours to try to keep the government running?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, it is not, unfortunately, within the President’s power to pass legislation on the Hill.  The President said --
 
Q    But what is he doing?  Is he using the bully -- what’s he doing over the next several hours?
 
MR. CARNEY:  The President said just moments ago that he will certainly be, he expects, having conversations with leaders in Congress.  But it is pretty elemental here.  There’s an option to keep the government open, and there’s an option to shut it down for ideological reasons.  And he would not presume to have the power of persuasion within the House Republican caucus that perhaps John Boehner does, or perhaps other leaders in the conference, rather, might have.
 
Let me move around.  Chuck.
 
Q    The President said he was open to negotiating on the budget overall.  So --
 
MR. CARNEY:  Yes.  He’s said it all year long.
 
Q    Okay.  And I assume that if there were a one-year proposition of funding the government, not through a two or three month-- is that what he’s saying?  Is he saying that -- is that what he’s saying, though, is that it’s about funding the government for 2014?  And if he’s open to --
 
MR. CARNEY:  And beyond that, as is reflected in his budget.
 
Q    Well, under those circumstances, under that umbrella then, are parts of the law, of the health care law part of those negotiations?
 
MR. CARNEY:  The President said the other day that he is open to discussions with Republicans who are sincere about it -- ways to improve the Affordable Care Act.
 
Q    So he might be open to some of these changes under that set of negotiations, but just not over CRs or debt ceilings?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, I’m not going to say that he’s open to delaying the individual -- because he is not.  Because that is a deliberate, explicitly stated effort to basically eliminate Obamacare.
 
Q    But the medical device tax would qualify as something he’d be open to under regular circumstances?
 
MR. CARNEY:  I’m not going to get into specific things, but he is certainly willing to negotiate with and discuss with Congress -- not under the threat of a shutdown or default -- ways to improve the Affordable Care Act.  And that has been the case and will be the case moving forward.  And he is willing and eager to negotiate with lawmakers in Congress -- Republicans who are interested in finding common ground on our budget priorities.  And he has demonstrated that all year long.
 
Now, remember, if I may, Republicans insisted as part of the last time that we had a budget negotiation with deadlines, at the end of last year, that they would move forward with a bill that raised taxes on the wealthiest Americans and locked into place a permanent tax cut for middle-class Americans.  In exchange for that, they insisted that the Senate pass a budget.  Because the House had and the Senate --
 
Q    Negotiate on the debt ceiling --
 
MR. CARNEY:  And, by the way, they raised the debt ceiling without drama and delay, no threat of default.  But they insisted as part of this that the Senate pass a budget.  They were hopping mad about the fact that the Senate had not passed a budget because the House had passed a budget.  And so the Senate passed a budget.  As John Boehner said, he wanted regular order in the Congress, and that’s how it should be.  The House ought to pass a budget.  The Senate ought to pass a budget.  The two sides ought to come together in conference and try to work out their differences, produce a compromise budget that could then move forward.
 
So the Senate upheld its obligations.  Senator Murray did an excellent job moving a bill forward, passing a budget through the Senate, with Leader Reid, and it has languished ever since, with the House refusing -- House leaders refusing to do what they said they would do, which is appoint conferees.
 
So here we are -- the President all year long has put forward a budget proposal that is filled with compromises, filled with a demonstrable effort to find common ground, and Republicans won’t even negotiate over that.  Instead, they are obsessed with refighting an old battle from a couple of Congresses ago, which was the debate about the Affordable Care Act and its passage, and the fact that it was signed into law, and the fact that it was upheld by the Supreme Court, and the fact that it was a subject of heightened debate during the presidential election and the candidate who supported the Affordable Care Act was reelected.
 
Q    Can I ask you about the NSA story?  It seems like every week there’s a new discovery of NSA doing something that you guys swear NSA wasn’t doing -- and in this case, following innocent Americans and their social networks, and creating this, apparently, labyrinth graph of how they create networks.  Can you look at this with a straight face and say this isn’t sort of going a step beyond what you guys have said NSA was doing?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, what I can tell you is the NSA’s activities are directed against foreign intelligence targets in order to protect that nation and its interests from threats such as terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.  What I cannot do is comment publicly on every specific alleged intelligence activity.  But as a matter of policy, we have made clear that we do what other nations do, which is gather foreign intelligence.
 
Q    Wait a minute.  Wait, wait, wait.  This is about -- not against -- this is about Americans.  This is about Americans that are not foreign, that it went beyond this.  And that’s what --
 
MR. CARNEY:  I think, again --

Q    Are you denying that it was the case?
 
MR. CARNEY:  I’m saying that I’m not going to discuss specific tools or processes.  But, as you know, NSA’s activities are directed against foreign intelligence targets in order to protect the nation and its interests from threats such as terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. 
 
NSA’s foreign intelligence activities are conducted pursuant to procedures approved by the United States Attorney General and the Secretary of Defense and, where applicable, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to protect the privacy interests of Americans.
 
Q    I understand that that’s what you have to say and that that’s the statement you have to say.  But are you at all concerned that it went beyond this, that it appears that it was supposed --
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, I’m not going to address --
 
Q    -- to be about foreign -- it was supposed to be about addressing people that have potential connections overseas, but this went a step beyond.  It went beyond what you just said.
 
MR. CARNEY:  Chuck, again, I’m not going to address a specific allegation.  What I will say is -- note what the President said in his speech at the United Nations General Assembly, which is that we have begun to review the way that we gather intelligence so that we properly balance the legitimate security concerns of our citizens and allies with the privacy concerns that all people share.  And that process is underway.
 
Q    Are we going to continue to get this drip, drip, drip out of NSA, which is you tell us a certain amount, something gets leaked by Snowden, and then you guys acknowledge, okay, we were doing that -- I mean, is that how this cat-and-mouse game is going to work for a while?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Chuck, again, I’m not going to talk about specific things.
 
Carol, and then Major.
 
Q    I wanted to go back to the President’s eagerness to negotiate on a long-term budget deal.  When he says that, what’s the window for that?  And is that an offer to sit down and have negotiations with Republicans?  Does that happen after the CR, before the debt ceiling?  What are the qualifications around negotiating something long term?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, it’s an offer that’s been on the table for the whole year, virtually, or since the end of the year last year, when the --
 
Q    It’s just an open-ended offer?  Is he going to --
 
MR. CARNEY:  I think the President has demonstrated that he is open to and eager to negotiate with Republicans who want to find common ground and are willing to compromise when it comes to how we best fund our government in a way that invests in areas that help our economy grow and help our middle class be more secure, but also reduces our deficits and debt in a responsible way.
 
And that is reflected in his budget proposal.  It was the central topic of the many conversations the President had and the Vice President and the Chief of Staff and many others had with Republicans over the course of the year -- especially earlier in the year when we were hopeful that there was a willingness by Republicans to find common ground, when we were hopeful that there might be sincerity behind the assertion by Republicans that all they really wanted was the Senate to pass a budget and then there could be a conference and we could reach a compromise. 
 
But, yes, that offer remains on the table.
 
Q    So if he’s so eager to do it, are we going to see a big, renewed push by him in the next weeks and months?
 
MR. CARNEY:  A negotiation is not a one-way proposition.  The President has put forward ideas.  The Speaker, each time he addresses any budget issue, keeps moving further and further way. So when he first came forward with an idea that he would fund -- a proposition where he would have a continuing resolution that allowed for a clean continuance of funding for the government, he backed away from under pressure from the small faction or the less-than-majority faction within his conference, and instead launched off on this effort to try to appease the extreme wing of his party that wants -- is focused not on reducing the deficit, not on dealing with our long-term debt, but on going after this piece of legislation that the President passed.
 
Q    So there won’t be any renewed push?
 
MR. CARNEY:  No, I didn't say that.  I think the President  -- he just said that today. 
 
Q    Because usually when he’s eager to do something we see a big move.  So should we expect something like that?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Not under threat of shutdown.  Not under threat of default.  But if the Republicans are serious about negotiating the priorities that we have as a nation, to fund through congressional appropriations, yes.  And he has been willing to do it all year long, and has sought partners in trying to do that, and had many good meetings with Republicans who expressed interest in doing that.  Unfortunately, we haven’t see anything concrete from Republicans that represents the same spirit of and substantive reflection of compromise that the President’s budget represents.
 
Major.
 
Q    I understand Senator McConnell’s idea has just been floated, but it’s not very intricate.  It’s very simple -- it’s one-week, clean CR.
 
MR. CARNEY:  I get it, Major, but here I am -- you guys have BlackBerries.  I don't.  I’m not going to respond to everything that you say is showing up on your BlackBerries.  I don't have a specific response to an idea that's floated -- I’m not going to rule in or out anything that I don't have specific information on that I haven’t gotten myself. So what I can tell you --
 
Q    -- don't get email up there --
 
MR. CARNEY:  I should have a little action up here.  But the --
 
Q    It would be a one-week mechanism to keep the government open.
 
MR. CARNEY:  Major, we can do this -- other people -- I don't have a reaction to a floated proposal from a now-empty seat on the front row -- (laughter.)  CNN. 
 
But our position is the same.  We will obviously see what happens in Congress, and the President made clear just now in the Oval Office what his view is, which is that the responsible thing to do is for the House to not engage in this partisan brinksmanship, but to rather responsibly pass a bill that extends funding at current levels of our government operations so that it does not shut down and that it does not have the negative effects that I went through before.
 
Q    You said a moment ago to Chuck that if it's a good idea, the President is open to it on the health care law.  Is eliminating the medical device tax a --
 
MR. CARNEY:  No, we don’t believe that is a good idea.  It is obviously part of the affordable care -- but I'm not here -- Major, as interesting as it might be, we've already said we would not support that as part of any deal to shut down -- a threat of shutting down.  So I'm not going to get into future hypothetical negotiations the Republicans have thus far all year long not shown themselves interested in holding.
 
We'll see what happens if the Republicans change their mind and want to have serious, substantive negotiations about how we find common ground to fund our budget priorities, reduce our deficit in a responsible way, and protect the middle class.  What we have seen so far from Republicans concretely in their budget proposals are ideas that do the opposite -- that protect special interests with their tax breaks, that stick it to the middle class, and that, of course, defund or repeal the Affordable Care Act -- which, by the way, is a huge budget-buster, increases the deficit.
 
Q    Benjamin Netanyahu said, with the President, that he would be in favor of stronger sanctions if negotiations with Iran either drag on or prove less than fruitful.  Does the President support that?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Our position, the President's position from the day he took office and made clear that he was willing to have bilateral conversations with Iran if Iran were serious about resolving this issue, is that, absent progress on that issue, absent a willingness by Iran to deal with this nuclear weapons problem, that the international community ought to isolate Iran through sanctions, and make clear through sanctions and other means that the violation of its international obligations was a serious matter.  And that is what we have done.
 
And so another way of asking that which I can answer is, the sanctions regime has brought us to this point.  The international consensus that the sanctions regime -- that was made possible by the -- sorry -- the international consensus was made possible by the President's position.  We were able to change the focus of the international community from a debate about whether the United States was part of the problem to a focus on the fact that Iran was the problem.  And through the last five years, we've seen the imposition and steady escalation of sanctions in a way that has had a dramatic impact on the Iranian economy.  And I think we've seen reflections of that in the statements of members of the new government. 
 
We are encouraged by what we have heard from the new Iranian leadership.  But, as we've said all along, actions are what we are focused on.  And there was P5-plus-1 meeting in which Secretary Kerry and his Iranian counterpart participated, they had a separate pull-aside.  And there is another P5-plus-1 meeting coming up in about 16 days.
 
So that is the vehicle through which we will be able to measure concrete progress and test the theory here that Iran is serious, as Iran has said it is, about resolving this issue in a way that meets its international commitments. 
 
Q    And if it's not, stronger sanctions --
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, I think that we're certainly not going to give sanctions relief absent action by --
 
Q    But would you strengthen them, intensify them?
 
MR. CARNEY:  It's hard for me to -- we have steadily, over the past five years, strengthened and intensified, with our partners around the world, the sanctions regime against Iran.  I think right now we're exploring the possibility that Iran is serious about resolving this challenge, and we want to do that.
 
Q    Jay, you're saying that you don’t know, obviously, whether or not Iran will follow through on their promises.  But the President did call the new President on Friday, of Iran, and sort of opened up diplomatic negotiations.  So why not do the same with the House Republicans?  You're at loggerheads.  Call them.  Bring them over here.  (Laughter.)
 
MR. CARNEY:  I love the reassertion of GOP talking points.
 
Q    I'm sorry.  Why don’t you at least talk to them?  Even if they're wrong --
 
MR. CARNEY:  Can I remind you that it was the Speaker of the House in several venues who said at the beginning of this year that he would never negotiate with the President again; that he felt doing so burned him and --
 
Q    So call him out.  Call him out and bring him over here and force him --
 
MR. CARNEY:  Ed, maybe you didn’t catch up to what the President just said, but he said he would be talking to leaders of Congress.
 
Q    So why is there not a meeting today?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, I have nothing new to report on the President's schedule. 
 
But the House of Representatives could have in the past, a few days ago, and could today, very easily avoid shutting down the government by passing a clean continuing resolution that extends funding of the government for several weeks into the future, allowing for further negotiation about our budget priorities.
 
You know, even FOX has reported this, that the Speaker had one approach he wanted to take and then the tea party yanked him in the other direction.  And we’ve seen a number of Republicans, including in the House, say that they believe if the Speaker would just put on the floor the Senate bill, a clean CR, that it would get a majority in the House, including the votes from the Republican Party necessary.  So what we have here, if these Republican lawmakers -- Raúl Labrador, Charlie Dent, Tom Cole and others -- are accurate, what we have is a proposition here where majorities of both houses are absolutely willing to pass clean continuing resolutions -- and for nongovernmental folks out there, that just means legislation that keeps the government open, without an ideological riders attached or imperatives attached -- majorities in both houses.
 
So the issue then is will the Speaker of the House do that, or will he shut down the government?  Because there’s a majority in both houses to do it.  We saw it in the Senate.  We know it exists in the House.  So this should not be about the internal politics of the House Republican conference because it’s too serious.
 
Q    Right, but that's their problem.  For you, you’re saying the President’s position is he’s in favor of a long-term budget deal.  How do you get a long-term budget deal without actually sitting down with anyone to hammer that out?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, the President has met with and spoken with countless Republicans this year, including the Speaker of the House, and has made clear in concrete ways through his budget proposals and through his offer to Speaker Boehner at the end of last year, his seriousness about compromise, his willingness to make tough choices when it comes to resolving our differences and funding our priorities, protecting the middle class and dealing with our deficits -- continuing to bring down our deficits, which, by the way, have been falling at the most precipitous rate since the end of World War II -- again, not a talking point you often hear from the Republican Party, just as you don't often hear in the midst of all this debate claims by the Republicans that this is about deficits or debt anymore.  It can't be because doing most of what they insist we do with their demands would actually increase the deficit and debt, rather than decrease it.
 
So I guess that's not their main priority anymore.  Their objective now is focused entirely on trying to prevent the implementation of a law that passed Congress, was signed into law by the President, was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States and validated across the nation in a presidential election.
 
Roger.
 
Q    Seventeen years ago, we had another government shutdown, and we had people like Gene Sperling and Sylvia Burwell and Jack Lew were around at that time.  Have they offered --
 
MR. CARNEY:  So was I. 
 
Q    But in a different capacity.
 
MR. CARNEY:  Yes, indeed.
 
Q    They were in government.  Have they offered any sort of lessons learned from that and applied them to today’s situation at all?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Yes.  But we’ve been through this already several times in terms of the prospect of shutdown or default.  And most of the people you named, with the exception of Sylvia, were here -- including Bruce Reed and others -- for parts of that.  So I think a lot of people here remember -- the Vice President and others -- what happened in ’95 and ’96.  But obviously this is a new and different time.  And we’re focused on 2013.  We’re focused on the middle class today -- the seniors and women and children who would be affected if there’s a shutdown; the veterans whose call centers would close effective 12:01 a.m. October 1st if there’s a shutdown.  So that's the President’s priority.
 
Q    So you’re saying it’s quite a bit different today than it was then?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, yes.  Not to say that past experience for all of us isn’t a useful thing to have when contemplating the future.
 
Jackie.
 
Q    There’s a lot of Democrats who think that the President has made a concession in just extending current spending which is at sequestration rates.  And the fear is that this will -- whatever comes out of this, if there is a long-term agreement, would lock in sequestration for another year.  Can you rule for the President that he would ever agree to another year’s extension of sequestration?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Jackie, it’s a fair question, but I’m not going to get ahead of where we are now, which is focusing on Congress’s responsibility to ensure that the government doesn't shut down -- the ease with which the House could do it by simply extending funding at current levels, as you mentioned, for a short period of time to allow for further negotiation and to not make this about a partisan wish list, attaching things to Congress’s essential responsibility that the tea party Republicans can't get otherwise, and that the American people rejected in an election.
 
So the President has put forward a budget.  I know you and others have looked at it and you know what his priorities are, you know where he’s been willing to compromise.  And he is willing to have those conversations.  He did not put that budget forward and say, I get this or there’s no negotiation.  That's not the approach he takes.  It’s often at times the approach Republicans take. 
 
He understands that this requires compromise and finding common ground.  But what he won’t do and what he has never suggested he would do is reduce our deficit in a way that puts all the burden on the middle class, or all the burden on our seniors, or all the burden on children through underfunding their educational opportunities.
 
So there’s a way to do this responsibly.  The President has demonstrated over the course of the last five years almost that you can inherit the largest deficits in our history, the worst financial crisis in our history -- or close to it, certainly in our lifetimes -- manage those challenges; steady our economy; save the automobile industry; see the economy begin to grow and create jobs; see it create 7.5 million private sector jobs -- do all that, pass the Affordable Care Act, which was a goal of members of both parties for a century, including Republican Presidents, and see our deficits come down by half, at a rate we haven’t seen since the 1940s. 
 
So his record is pretty good on this.  And through a willingness to compromise, we can move forward and do more in a way that allows our economy to grow and allows it to invest in the middle class.
 
Q    On a day when you have three big things on the agenda
-- this shutdown watch, the health care -- eve of the health care open enrollment starting, and a visit by the Israeli Prime Minister, can you give a sense of what sort of the atmosphere is like in the -- does it feel like a busier-than-usual day?  Is it tense?  What's it like back there?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, it's busy.  But it's always busy here.  It's busy for most of you in covering this White House and any White House.  And we're very much focused on making sure that the implementation of the Affordable Care Act continues -- and it will; making sure that the enrollment period that opens tomorrow opens and continues for six months -- and it will; and making, as much as we can, information about that available to the public, to those millions of Americans and their families who will now have the opportunity to shop for affordable health insurance for the first time.
 
And then, on the foreign policy side, as the President noted -- I think we may have done this count, I can't remember, but I think it's accurate to say that President Obama has met with Prime Minister Netanyahu and spoken with Prime Minister Netanyahu more than he has any other foreign leader, and that reflects the closeness of the relationship between our two nations, the United States' commitment to Israel's security, and the importance of the issues that the two leaders discussed today, including Syria and Iran, where we've had major developments.
 
So busy times, to be sure.
 
Q    Jay, looking ahead to tomorrow, what is your level of confidence that this rollout is going to be ready and that it's going to rise to the expectations that the President and others have set for it?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, you would have to evaluate the expectations.  It will be ready and it will happen.  And regardless of what the Republicans do in terms of pursuing their ideological agenda, implementation continues.  As those of you know how this works, the funding for the Affordable Care Act will not be significantly affected by any effort that the Republicans decide to take to shut down the government.  And millions of Americans are going to have available to them the opportunity to enroll in these marketplaces and to purchase affordable health care for the first time in years.
 
I mean, their option -- we talked about the options available to them in the past.  And for most of these Americans, they didn’t have networks, they didn’t have doctors, they had the emergency room.  And their kids, when they had an asthma problem, they had the emergency room.  And now they'll have something far better and more reliable available to them, which is health insurance.
 
Q    Are you saying the President has nothing on his schedule regarding this tomorrow?
 
MR. CARNEY:  No, I didn’t say that at all.  I just said I don’t have any scheduling announcements to make.
 
Q    Is he going to do something?
 
MR. CARNEY:  I said I don’t have any scheduling announcements to make.
 
Q    What's it going to say to the public if he doesn’t do something? 
 
MR. CARNEY:  Peter, again, I'm not going to get into a back- and-forth about what is or is not on his schedule because I don’t have any scheduling announcements to make.
 
Yes.
 
Q    I have a question about the government shutdown.  Roger talked about 17 years ago.  A lot has changed, including some of the provisions that have been put in place to make -- to cushion the shutdown, to make it less traumatic.  I'm wondering if you have a prediction or if you've come to a consensus among yourselves about how long it might take for people to really feel it.  I mean, when the sequester happened, there were a lot of predictions from the White House that it would be awful and people would rise up and demand that it ended, and it didn’t.  I'm wondering if a shutdown this time is going to be less catastrophic than 17 years ago.
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, I would say a couple of things.  There is no question that essential functions, some of them continue.  Different parts of the federal operations are affected in different ways.  But the impacts are considerable and I listed some of them. 
 
But the sort of underpinning of your question sort of supposes that we're approaching this in terms of how much political pressure will it take for Republicans to do the right thing.  And we're hoping maybe zero and maybe they'll just do the right thing, and take up the President's year-long, essentially, offer to have substantive negotiations about how we fund the government in a way that helps it grow and create jobs and invest, and reduce our deficit in the medium and long term, rather than playing this game that has as its victims primarily regular Americans out there. 
 
And I think it's important to note, obviously, the immediate deadline we face here is the lapse in funding that would occur come midnight.  But there have been all sorts of suggestions from Republicans on Capitol Hill that they look forward to engaging in this again in just a few short weeks when the consequences would be even more serious -- far, far more serious, and unknowable in many ways, but bad in every case.
 
Q    Well, I have a question about that, which is -- you were asked this two years ago about if the President had any constitutional recourse if the debt ceiling is breached and at that time you said no.  But there have been suggestions that he's going to be violating the Constitution if he lets the debt ceiling breach go into effect; he'll be violating it if it doesn’t.  I mean, have you taken a new look at this -- it's only 17 days away -- at the legalities of this and what he could do to prevent --
 
MR. CARNEY:  I’m not sure what this is when it comes --
 
Q    Breaching the debt ceiling.
 
MR. CARNEY:  Congress has to vote to raise the debt ceiling. The President can't raise it by himself.  People have talked about the 14th Amendment, and this administration does not believe that the 14th Amendment gives the power to ignore the debt ceiling.  And even if the President could ignore the debt ceiling, the fact that there is significant controversy around the President's authority to act unilaterally means that it would not be a credible alternative to Congress raising the debt ceiling, and would not be taken seriously by the global economy and markets.
 
As the President said today, the reason why this is so serious is because the world looks to the United States as the world economic leader, and relies on the stability and good faith and credit of the United States enormously.  And that is why it is so important to maintain that, and never even to flirt with the possibility that it would not be maintained in order to -- for any reason -- and in this case, in order to achieve this narrow political piece of business that tea party Republicans couldn’t achieve through other means.
 
Q    So his hands are completely tied on that?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, we don’t -- it is up to the Congress to pay the debts of the United States.  Congress has the power to do that, according to the Constitution.  It is up to the Congress to appropriate funds and ensure that the government remains open and functioning.  And the President hopes that Congress takes those responsibilities seriously.
 
Q    May I follow on the debt ceiling?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Yes.
 
Q    -- 17 years ago, for a while the interns and volunteers were actually running the shop, and there was a danger to U.S. security.  If interns and volunteers were to --
 
MR. CARNEY:  I don’t believe that has been the case and is not the case now that volunteers or interns would be working.  They will not. 
 
All the way in the back.  Oh, sorry, L.A. Times, and then Alexis.
 
Q    I wanted to ask -- the President, when he campaigned last year, talked a lot about how his reelection would break the fever in Washington.  I was wondering what you think his analysis is now -- why hasn’t that happened?  Did he misjudge Republicans?
 
MR. CARNEY:  It’s a pretty stubborn fever, clearly.
 
Q    And that’s it?  That’s what he thinks?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Well, again, that’s what I -- that’s my observation, not his.  I think we all can assess without anyone’s assistance that Republican intransigence remains quite real. 
 
I mean, here we have an opportunity to ensure that the government shuts down -- does not shut down.  Democrats, the President aren’t asking for anything.  They’re not attaching anything to this proposal; not attaching anything to the proposal that Congress fulfill its responsibility to pay the bills of the United States.  And yet, the prospect of shutdown and the prospect of default are on the table because Republicans want to attach to those fundamental responsibilities highly partisan political agenda items that they have not been able to achieve through the normal legislative process or through the electoral process.
 
Q    So does the President concede that that was not a realistic campaign promise?
 
MR. CARNEY:  No, he hopes and believes that common sense will prevail and that we can get about the business of reaching reasonable compromise when it comes to our budget priorities. 
 
There’s no agreement to reach when it comes to the debt ceiling.  That should never be flirted with, reaching it, and it should never be used as a negotiating ploy.  And that’s the President’s very firm position.
 
Alexis, last one.
 
Q    Jay, two quick mop-up questions.  Just to clarify -- by the time that you came out here today -- I just want to make sure I understand -- the President and the Vice President have not had any discussions about the shutdown with leaders as of today?
 
MR. CARNEY:  I have no conversations involving the President or the Vice President to report to you today.
 
Q    But it’s --
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, we don’t read out every conversation, so I’m not going to -- I’m not asking you to parse my words.  I’m just saying the President spoke to this on camera just moments ago.  I don’t have anything more beyond that to report.
 
Q    But he also has on his schedule today a meeting with the Cabinet.  Can you elaborate on whether he wants to talk to them about the plans for a responsible shutdown, which is an enormous operation government-wise?  Is that the purpose of the meeting?
 
MR. CARNEY:  I would simply say that I expect that that would be a topic, the potential for a lapse in funding.  But I wouldn’t rule out other topics.
 
Q    And also, just to add -- everyone in the federal government who would be expected to either be furloughed or be considered excepted, they know that as of now, correct?
 
MR. CARNEY:  I would refer you to OMB in terms of the notification process.  I’m not sure.
 
Q    But here in the --
 
MR. CARNEY:  Again, I can’t speak for every person in the --
 
Q    How about in your office?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Yes, in my office, people know.
 
Q    Everybody knows?
 
MR. CARNEY:  Yes. 
 
Thanks very much.
 
END  
2:38 P.M. EDT

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Statement by the President

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

5:00 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:  Good afternoon, everybody.  Of all the responsibilities the Constitution endows to Congress, two should be fairly simple:  pass a budget, and pay America’s bills.

But if the United States Congress does not fulfill its responsibility to pass a budget today, much of the United States government will be forced to shut down tomorrow.  And I want to be very clear about what that shutdown would mean -- what will remain open and what will not.

With regard to operations that will continue:  If you’re on Social Security, you will keep receiving your checks.  If you’re on Medicare, your doctor will still see you.  Everyone’s mail will still be delivered.  And government operations related to national security or public safety will go on.  Our troops will continue to serve with skill, honor, and courage.  Air traffic controllers, prison guards, those who are with border control -- our Border Patrol will remain on their posts, but their paychecks will be delayed until the government reopens.  NASA will shut down almost entirely, but Mission Control will remain open to support the astronauts serving on the Space Station.

I also want to be very clear about what would change.  Office buildings would close.  Paychecks would be delayed.  Vital services that seniors and veterans, women and children, businesses and our economy depend on would be hamstrung.  Business owners would see delays in raising capital, seeking infrastructure permits, or rebuilding after Hurricane Sandy.  Veterans who’ve sacrificed for their country will find their support centers unstaffed.  Tourists will find every one of America’s national parks and monuments, from Yosemite to the Smithsonian to the Statue of Liberty, immediately closed.  And of course, the communities and small businesses that rely on these national treasures for their livelihoods will be out of customers and out of luck.

And in keeping with the broad ramifications of a shutdown, I think it’s important that everybody understand the federal government is America’s largest employer.  More than 2 million civilian workers and 1.4 million active-duty military serve in all 50 states and all around the world.  In the event of a government shutdown, hundreds of thousands of these dedicated public servants who stay on the job will do so without pay -- and several hundred thousand more will be immediately and indefinitely furloughed without pay. 

What, of course, will not be furloughed are the bills that they have to pay -- their mortgages, their tuition payments, their car notes.  These Americans are our neighbors.  Their kids go to our schools.  They worship where we do.  They serve their country with pride.  They are the customers of every business in this country.  And they would be hurt greatly, and as a consequence, all of us will be hurt greatly, should Congress choose to shut the people’s government down.

So a shutdown will have a very real economic impact on real people, right away.  Past shutdowns have disrupted the economy significantly.  This one would, too.  It would throw a wrench into the gears of our economy at a time when those gears have gained some traction. 

Five years ago right now, our economy was in meltdown.  Today, our businesses have created 7.5 million new jobs over the past three and a half years.  The housing market is healing and our deficits are falling fast.  The idea of putting the American people’s hard-earned progress at risk is the height of irresponsibility. 

And it doesn’t have to happen.  Let me repeat this:  It does not have to happen.  All of this is entirely preventable if the House chooses to do what the Senate has already done -- and that’s the simple act of funding our government without making extraneous and controversial demands in the process, the same way other Congresses have for more than 200 years.

Unfortunately, right now House Republicans continue to tie funding of the government to ideological demands like limiting a woman’s access to contraception, or delaying the Affordable Care Act, all to save face after making some impossible promises to the extreme right wing of their party. 

So let me be clear about this.  An important part of the Affordable Care Act takes effect tomorrow no matter what Congress decides to do today.  The Affordable Care Act is moving forward. That funding is already in place.  You can’t shut it down.  This is a law that passed both houses of Congress; a law that bears my signature; a law that the Supreme Court upheld as constitutional; a law that voters chose not to repeal last November; a law that is already providing benefits to millions of Americans in the form of young people staying on their parents’ plan until they’re 26, seniors getting cheaper prescription drugs, making sure that insurance companies aren't imposing lifetime limits when you already have health insurance, providing rebates for consumers when insurance companies are spending too much money on overhead instead of health care.  Those things are already happening.

Starting tomorrow, tens of millions of Americans will be able to visit HealthCare.gov to shop for affordable health care coverage.  So Americans who’ve lived for years in some cases with the fear that one illness could send them into bankruptcy, Americans who’ve been priced out of the market just because they’ve been sick once, they’ll finally be able to afford coverage -- quality coverage -- many of them for the first time in their lives. 

Some of them may be sick as we speak.  And this is their best opportunity to get some security and some relief.  Tens of thousands of Americans die every single year because they don’t have access to affordable health care.  Despite this, Republicans have said that if we lock these Americans out of affordable health care for one more year -- if we sacrifice the health care of millions of Americans -- then they’ll fund the government for a couple more months.  Does anybody truly believe that we won’t have this fight again in a couple more months?  Even at Christmas?

So here’s the bottom line:  I’m always willing to work with anyone of either party to make sure the Affordable Care Act works better, to make sure our government works better.  I’m always willing to work with anyone to grow our economy faster, or to create new jobs faster, to get our fiscal house in order for the long run.  I’ve demonstrated this time and time again, oftentimes to the consternation of my own party. 

But one faction of one party, in one house of Congress, in one branch of government doesn’t get to shut down the entire government just to refight the results of an election. 

Keeping the people’s government open is not a concession to me.  Keeping vital services running and hundreds of thousands of Americans on the job is not something you “give” to the other side.  It’s our basic responsibility.  It’s something that we’re doing for our military, and our businesses, and our economy, and all the hardworking people out there -- the person working for the Agricultural Department out in some rural community who’s out there helping some farmers make sure that they’re making some modest profit for all the hard work they’re putting in.  They’re the person working for HUD who’s helping somebody buy a house for the first time.  They’re somebody in a VA office who’s counseling one of our vets who’s got PTSD. 

That’s who we’re here to serve.  That’s why we’re supposed to be carrying out these responsibilities.  It’s why we should be avoiding these kinds of constant brinksmanship.  It’s something that we do in the ordinary process of this extraordinary system of government that we have.  You don’t get to extract a ransom for doing your job; for doing what you’re supposed to be doing anyway; or just because there’s a law there that you don’t like.

The American people sent us here to govern.  They sent us here to make sure that we’re doing everything we can to make their lives a little bit better -- to create new jobs, to restore economic security, to rebuild the prospects of upward mobility.  That’s what they expect. 

And they understand that there are differences between the parties and we’re going to be having some tough fights around those differences.  And I respect the fact that the other party is not supposed to agree with me 100 percent of the time, just like I don’t agree with them.  But they do also expect that we don’t bring the entire government to a halt or the entire economy to a halt just because of those differences. 

That’s what they deserve.  They’ve worked too hard, for too long to recover from previous crises just to have folks here in Washington manufacture yet another one that they have to dig themselves out of. 

So Congress needs to keep our government open, needs to pay our bills on time, and never, ever threaten the full faith and credit of the United States of America. 

And time is running out.  My hope and expectation is that in the eleventh hour, once again, that Congress will choose to do the right thing and that the House of Representatives, in particular, will choose the right thing. 

Thank you very much.

                    END              5:12 P.M. EDT

-----

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

President Obama Announces More Key Administration Posts

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, President Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individual to a key Administration post:

  • Alan Cohen – Member, Social Security Advisory Board 

The President also announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to key Administration posts:

  • Thomas R. Nides – Chairman, Board of Trustees of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
  • Laura Paulson – Member, Committee for the Preservation of the White House
  • Quyen D. Chu – Member, Board of Directors of the Vietnam Education Foundation
  • Anhlan P. Nguyen – Member, Board of Directors of the Vietnam Education Foundation 

President Obama said, “The extraordinary dedication these men and women bring to their new roles will greatly serve the American people.  I am grateful they have agreed to serve in this Administration and I look forward to working with them in the months and years to come.”

President Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individual to a key Administration post:

Alan Cohen, Nominee for Member, Social Security Advisory Board

Alan Cohen served as the Senior Budget Advisor and Chief Counselor for Social Security for the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance from 2001 to 2012.  From 1993 to 2001, Mr. Cohen served as Senior Advisor for Budget and Economics to the Secretary of the Treasury.  During this period, from 1999 to 2000, he was detailed to be a Budget Advisor in the Domestic Policy Office in the Office of the Vice President.  From 1992 to 1993, he served as the Budget Economist for the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance.  From 1983 to 1992, Mr. Cohen was first the Senior Economist, and then the Assistant Staff Director for Budget Priorities on the U.S. Senate Budget Committee.  From 1979 to 1983, Mr. Cohen worked as a Policy Analyst/Economist at the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  Mr. Cohen received a B.A. from Grinnell College, an M.P.P. from the University of Michigan, and a Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin.

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

Thomas R. Nides, Appointee for Chairman, Board of Trustees of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars

Thomas R. Nides is Vice Chairman of Morgan Stanley, a position he has held since 2013.  Previously, he served as Deputy Secretary for Management and Resources at the Department of State from 2010 to 2013.  Prior to joining the Administration, Mr. Nides was the Chief Operating Officer of Morgan Stanley from 2005 to 2010.  Prior to this, he was Worldwide President and Chief Executive Officer of Burson-Marsteller, Chief Administrative Officer of Credit Suisse First Boston, Senior Vice President of Fannie Mae, and Chief of Staff to the United States Trade Representative.  He has served on the boards of New York Cares, the Urban Alliance Foundation, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Local Initiatives Support Corporation, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, and the Advisory Board of the National Zoo.  Mr. Nides received a B.S. from the University of Minnesota. 

Laura Paulson, Appointee for Member, Committee for the Preservation of the White House

Laura Paulson is Chairman of Americas at Christie’s and a Senior International Director in Post-War and Contemporary Art.  She is an expert in the appraisal and evaluation of Impressionist works, Modern Art, Old Masters, American Paintings, and Decorative Arts.  Before joining Christie’s in 1989, Ms. Paulson was Director of the Luhring Augustine Gallery and worked at the David McKee Gallery in New York City.  She is a member of the Professional Fine Arts Committee for Fine Arts and Preservation in the Embassies, and a National Committee member of the American Friends of the Israeli Museum.  She serves on the Advisory Board for the Hunter College Foundation Board and the Board of Visitors of the University of Oregon.  Ms. Paulson received a B.A. in Art History from the University of Oregon.

Quyen D. Chu, Appointee for Member, Board of Directors of the Vietnam Education Foundation

Quyen D. Chu is Chief of Surgical Oncology at LSU Health Science Center in Shreveport, Louisiana.  He is also Director of the Peritoneal Surface Malignancies Program and Charles Knight, Sr. Endowed Professor of Surgery at Louisiana State University.  His involvement with the Vietnam Education Foundation includes serving as host and coordinator of the 2012 Annual Conference, held in Shreveport, Louisiana.  In 2013, he received the Vietnamese-American Youth Excellence Recognition Award from the Vietnamese Culture & Science Association.  He was named among “Top Doctors” by U.S. News & World Report and Castle Connolly, and in 2009 and 2010, he was named “Most Influential Doctor” by USA Today.  Dr. Chu received a B.A. from Dartmouth College, an M.B.A. from Centenary College, and an M.D. from Brown University’s School Of Medicine.

Anhlan P. Nguyen, Appointee for Member, Board of Directors of the Vietnam Education Foundation

Anhlan P. Nguyen is an IT Portfolio Manager at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, a position she has held since 2002.  She was first appointed to the Board of Directors of the Vietnam Education Foundation in 2012.  From 1995 to 2002, she was an IT principal consultant and project manager at Metro Information Services/Keane, Inc. in Houston, Texas.  Ms. Nguyen has been Chair of the Board of Directors of the Vietnamese Culture and Science Association since 2005, and in 1990, she founded the Vietnamese Youth Center of Toronto.  She received the Women’s Leadership Empowerment Award from the Texas Women Empowerment Foundation in 2011.  Ms. Nguyen received a B.S. and an M.S. in Computer Science from the University of Toronto.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

President Obama Announces Another Key Administration Post

WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individual to a key Administration post:

  • Lanhee J. Chen – Member, Social Security Advisory Board 

President Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individual to a key Administration post:

Dr. Lanhee J. Chen, Nominee for Member, Social Security Advisory Board

Dr. Lanhee J. Chen is a Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Lecturer in Public Policy at Stanford University, and Lecturer in Law at Stanford Law School.  Previously, Dr. Chen was the Policy Director for the Romney-Ryan presidential campaign, Governor Romney’s chief policy adviser, and a senior strategist on the campaign.  He also served as Domestic Policy Director of Governor Romney's first presidential campaign in 2008.  In 2010, Dr. Chen was the Deputy Campaign Manager and Policy Director of Steve Poizner’s California gubernatorial campaign.  Previously, he was an Associate Attorney at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP.  In 2008, Dr. Chen served as Senior Counselor to the Deputy Secretary at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  In 2004, he was a health policy adviser to the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign.  Dr. Chen was the Winnie Neubauer Visiting Fellow in Health Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation and worked as a health policy advocate for the ERISA Industry Committee.  Dr. Chen received an A.B. from Harvard College, an A.M. and Ph.D. in Political Science from Harvard University, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Presidential Proclamation -- National Energy Action Month, 2013

NATIONAL ENERGY ACTION MONTH, 2013

- - - - - - -

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

To meet the challenges of the 21st century, we must work to ensure a clean, safe, and sustainable energy future. This National Energy Action Month, we can build on the progress we have made by recommitting to increasing our energy security, strengthening our economy, combatting climate change, and improving the environment.

As a Nation, we are taking control of our energy future, and my Administration remains committed to our long-term energy security. Today, we produce more oil than we have in 15 years and import less oil than we have in 20 years. Since I took office, we have more than doubled the amount of renewable electricity we generate from wind and quintupled the amount we generate from solar energy. We are building our first new nuclear power plants in decades, and we produce more natural gas than any other country. And we have done this while creating hundreds of thousands of good jobs and sending less carbon pollution into the environment than we have in nearly two decades.

While we have made significant progress, more work remains. The continuing cycle of spiking gasoline prices hurts American families and our businesses' bottom lines, and it reflects our economy's outsized demand for oil. To transition to a secure energy future, we must increase our production of clean energy, minimize waste and maximize efficiency, further reduce our oil imports, eliminate inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, and continue to develop more energy sources here at home. Because meeting global energy challenges requires international action, we must also engage with partners around the world to reduce carbon pollution, and we must build global markets for new advanced technologies. If we take these actions, we can curb climate change, save money for consumers, and use our resources to create good American jobs.

A clean energy economy has the potential to fuel economic growth for decades to come. But we must invest in the technologies of the future and fund breakthrough research to make these technologies better and cheaper. With the American spirit of innovation powering our progress, our Nation can lead the world in creating green jobs and technologies that are vital to both a clean energy future and the fight against climate change.

Years from now, our children may wonder if we did all we could to leave a safe, clean, and stable world for them to inherit. If we keep our eyes on the long arc of our future and commit to doing what this moment demands, the answer will be yes.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim October 2013 as National Energy Action Month. I call upon the citizens of the United States to recognize this month by working together to achieve greater energy security, a more robust economy, and a healthier environment for our children.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirtieth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-eighth.

BARACK OBAMA

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Presidential Proclamation -- National Substance Abuse Prevention Month, 2013

NATIONAL SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH, 2013

- - - - - - -

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

Today, too many Americans face futures limited by substance use, which threatens health, safety, and academic performance. Substance use disorders are linked to crime, motor vehicle crashes, and fatalities. This month, we recognize substance abuse prevention programs across our country, and we do our part to build healthier neighborhoods and brighter futures.

This year's theme, "Learn it! Live it!" encourages Americans to come together, learn how substance use affects our communities, and live to set a positive example for our families, friends, and neighbors. My Administration's National Drug Control Strategy begins with a commitment to stop drug use before it begins. We have expanded evidence-based national and community-focused programs that work to prevent substance use where young people learn, grow, and play. We support substance-free workplaces, and we provide information on effective strategies to parents and communities nationwide. Through the Affordable Care Act, we expanded substance use disorder and mental health benefits for more than 60 million Americans. And beginning this month, those who have been locked out of health insurance can sign up for affordable coverage by visiting www.HealthCare.gov.

Because adult role models play an integral role in preventing youth substance abuse, we must lead by example, adopt positive behaviors, and talk to our kids about living substance-free. This month, we stand with local coalitions and community organizations as they advance their drive to keep young people, families, and neighborhoods free from drug and alcohol abuse. I encourage parents, schools, health officials, law enforcement professionals, faith-based organizations, workplaces, the recovery community, and all Americans to join in this effort. If we take up the mantle of healthy lifestyles together, we can help our children avoid the devastating consequences of substance abuse and give them the chance to explore their limitless potential.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim October 2013 as National Substance Abuse Prevention Month. I call upon all Americans to engage in appropriate programs and activities to promote comprehensive substance abuse prevention efforts within their communities.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirtieth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-eighth.

BARACK OBAMA

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Presidential Proclamation -- National Cybersecurity Awareness Month, 2013

NATIONAL CYBERSECURITY AWARENESS MONTH, 2013

- - - - - - -

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

In an increasingly interconnected world, many Americans rely on the Internet and digital tools every day -- from communicating with colleagues, friends, and family across the globe to banking and shopping without leaving our homes. Technology is reshaping every aspect of our lives, and protecting our digital infrastructure from cyber threats is one of our highest security priorities. This month, we expand public awareness about cybersecurity, and we recommit to enhancing the security and resilience of our Nation's infrastructure while maintaining an environment that encourages efficiency and innovation.

Incredible advances in technology also bring increased risk of disruptive cyber incidents. My Administration is dedicated to building a system of protections in both the private and public sectors to keep out malicious forces while preserving the openness and extraordinary power of the Internet. Our national and economic security depend on a reliable digital infrastructure in the face of threats, which is why earlier this year, I signed an Executive Order and issued a Presidential Policy Directive to strengthen this critical infrastructure. In tandem, these actions will enable us to develop and implement a framework of best practices for cybersecurity, increase information sharing between the Federal Government and industry partners, and build collaborative partnerships.

All of us have a role to play in safeguarding the networks we use in our daily lives. Understanding the risks associated with being online can help secure personal information and prevent identity theft and fraud. The Department of Homeland Security's "Stop.Think.Connect." campaign empowers digital citizens with the tools to make smart decisions as they navigate cyberspace. For more information on computing practices, visit www.DHS.gov/StopThinkConnect.

Our digital infrastructure is a strategic national asset, and my Administration is committed to strengthening this vital resource. As we mark the 10th anniversary of Cybersecurity Awareness Month, let us welcome the great possibilities cyberspace provides and continue to invest in the security measures and innovation that will enable us to safely and fully realize those possibilities.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim October 2013 as National Cybersecurity Awareness Month. I call upon the people of the United States to recognize the importance of cybersecurity and to observe this month with activities, events, and training that will enhance our national security and resilience.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirtieth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-eighth.

BARACK OBAMA