Remarks by the President on Preventing Gun Violence in Minneapolis, MN

Special Operations Center
Minneapolis Police Department
Minneapolis, Minnesota

1:46 P.M. CST

THE PRESIDENT:  Hello, everybody.  Please have a seat.  Have a seat. 

Well, it is good to be back in Minnesota.  (Applause.)  It is good to be back.  Although I was commenting that they don't really have winter in Washington, D.C.  (Laughter.)  So I’ve gotten soft over these last four years.  When I was in Chicago, this was nothing.  Now it’s something.  (Laughter.)  But I’m grateful for all of you being here today.  I want to thank Chief Harteau and the entire Minneapolis Police Department for having me here today. 

There are a number of other people that I just want to acknowledge here.  First of all, a wonderful man and one of America’s greatest public servants is here -- Walter Mondale, former Vice President.  (Applause.)  Your outstanding Governor, Mark Dayton, is here.  (Applause.)  Two great Mayors -- Mayor R.T. Rybak of Minneapolis, and Mayor Chris Coleman of St. Paul.  (Applause.)  And your outstanding congressional delegation -- Senator Amy Klobuchar -- (applause) -- Senator Al Franken --  (applause) -- Representative Keith Ellison -- (applause) -- and Representative Betty McCullough.  (Applause.) 

And I should acknowledge my outstanding Attorney General -- what’s your name again?  (Laughter.)  He does a great job every single day, and I could not be prouder of Eric Holder for his leadership on this issue in particular.  (Applause.)

Now, I just had a chance to sit down with some local police officers but also community leaders, as well as folks who themselves had been victims or whose families had been victims of gun violence, to hear their ideas about how we can protect our kids and address the broader epidemic of gun violence in this country.  Because if we’re serious about preventing the kinds of tragedies that happened in Newtown, or the tragedies that happen every day in places like Chicago or Philadelphia or Minneapolis, then law enforcement and other community leaders must have a seat at the table. 

All the folks standing here behind me today, they’re the ones on the front line of this fight.  They see the awful consequences -- the lives lost, the families shattered.  They know what works, they know what doesn’t work, and they know how to get things done without regard for politics.

So we've had a very productive discussion.  And one of the things that struck me was that even though those who were sitting around that table represented very different communities, from big cities to small towns, they all believe it’s time to take some basic, common-sense steps to reduce gun violence.  We may not be able to prevent every massacre or random shooting.  No law or set of laws can keep our children completely safe.  But if there’s even one thing we can do, if there's just one life we can save, we've got an obligation to try.

That’s been the philosophy here in Minneapolis.  A few years back, you suffered a spike in violent crime involving young people.  So this city came together.  You launched a series of youth initiatives that have reduced the number of young people injured by guns by 40 percent -- 40 percent.  So when it comes to protecting our children from gun violence, you’ve shown that progress is possible.  We've still got to deal with the 60 percent that remains, but that 40 percent means lives saved -- parents whose hearts aren't broken, communities that aren't terrorized and afraid.  

We don’t have to agree on everything to agree it’s time to do something.  (Applause.)  That's my main message here today.

And each of us has a role to play.  A few weeks ago, I took action on my own to strengthen background checks, to help schools get more resource officers if they want them, and to direct the Centers for Disease Control to study the causes of violence.  Because for a long time, even looking at the evidence was considered somehow tough politics.  And so Congress had taken the approach that, we don't want to know.  Well, that's never the answer to a problem -- is not wanting to know what is going on. 

So we've been able to take some steps through administrative action.  But while these steps are important, real and lasting change also requires Congress to do its part and to do it soon, not to wait.  The good news is that we’re starting to see a consensus emerge about the action Congress needs to take. 

The vast majority of Americans -- including a majority of gun owners -- support requiring criminal background checks for anyone trying to buy a gun.  (Applause.)  So right now, Democrats and Republicans in the Senate are working on a bill that would ban anyone from selling a gun to somebody legally prohibited from owning one.  That’s common sense.  There’s no reason we can’t get that done.  That is not a liberal idea or a conservative idea; it's not a Democratic or Republican idea -- that is a smart idea. We want to keep those guns out of hands of folks who shouldn’t have them.

Senators from both parties have also come together and proposed a bill that would crack down on people who buy guns only to turn them around and sell them to criminals.  It’s a bill that would keep more guns off the street and out of the hands of people with the intent of doing harm.  (Applause.) 

And, by the way, in addition to reducing violence on the streets, it would also make life a lot easier and a lot safer for the people standing behind me here today.  (Applause.) 

We shouldn’t stop there.  We should restore the ban on military-style assault weapons and a 10-round limit for magazines.  (Applause.)  And that deserves a vote in Congress -- because weapons of war have no place on our streets, or in our schools, or threatening our law enforcement officers.  Our law enforcement officers should never be out-gunned on the streets.  (Applause.) 

But we also know that if we're going to solve the problem of gun violence, then we've got to look at root causes as well.  That means we should make it easier for young people to get access to mental health treatment.  (Applause.)  We should help communities like this one keep more cops on the beat.  (Applause.)  And since Congress hasn't confirmed a director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in six years, they should confirm your U.S. Attorney from Minnesota, Todd Jones, who is here today and who I've nominated for this post.  (Applause.)

These are common-sense measures supported by Democrats, Republicans and independents, and many of them are responsible gun owners.  And we’re seeing members of Congress from both parties put aside their differences and work together to make many of them a reality. 

But if there’s one thing that I’ve learned over the last four years, it’s that you can’t count on anything in Washington until it’s done.  And nothing is done yet.  There’s been a lot of talk, a lot of conversation, a lot of publicity, but we haven't actually taken concrete steps yet. 

Last week, the Senate held its first hearing since Newtown on the need to address gun violence and the best way to move forward, and the first people to offer testimony were Gabby Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly.  They talked about how a complex problem like this has no single solution, but if we still had a 10-round limit on magazines, for example, the gunman who shot Gabby may never have been able to inflict 33 gunshot wounds in 15 seconds.  Fifteen seconds, 33 rounds fired.  Some of the six people who lost their lives that day in Tucson might still be with us. 

Now, changing the status quo is never easy.  This will be no exception.  The only way we can reduce gun violence in this country is if the American people decide it’s important.  If you decide it’s important.  If parents and teachers, police officers and pastors, hunters and sportsmen, Americans of every background stand up and say this time it’s got to be different -- we’ve suffered too much pain to stand by and do nothing. 

And by the way, it’s really important for us to engage with folks who don’t agree with us on everything, because we hope that we can find some areas where we do agree.  And we have to recognize that there are going to be regional differences and geographic differences.  The experience that people have of guns in an urban neighborhood may not be the same as in a rural community. 

But we know, for example, from polling that universal background checks are universally supported just about, by gun owners.  The majority of gun owners, overwhelming majority of gun owners think that’s a good idea.  So if we’ve got lobbyists in Washington claiming to speak for gun owners saying something different, we need to go to the source and reach out to people directly.  We can’t allow those filters to get in the way of common sense. 

That’s why I need everybody who’s listening to keep the pressure on your member of Congress to do the right thing.  Ask them if they support common-sense reforms like requiring universal background checks, or restoring the ban on military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.  Tell them there’s no legislation to eliminate all guns; there’s no legislation being proposed to subvert the Second Amendment.  Tell them specifically what we’re talking about -- things that the majority of Americans, when they’re asked, support. 

And tell them now is the time for action.  That we’re not going to wait until the next Newtown or the next Aurora.  We’re not going to wait until after we lose more innocent Americans on street corners all across the country.  We’re not going to wait until somebody else’s father or son are murdered.
 
Some of the officers here today know what it’s like to look into the eyes of a parent or a grandparent, a brother or a sister who has just lost a loved one to an act of violence; to see the pain and the heartbreak from wondering why this precious life, this piece of your heart was in the wrong place at the wrong time.  It changes you.  You’re not the same afterwards. 

And obviously whatever that experience is like is nothing compared to the experience that those families are actually going through.  And it makes you realize that if there’s even one thing we can do to keep our children and our community safe, if there’s just one step we can take to prevent more families from feeling what they feel after they’ve lost a loved one, we’ve got an obligation to take that step.  We’ve got an obligation to give our police officers and our communities the tools they need to make some of the same progress that’s been made here in Minneapolis. 

There won’t be perfect solutions.  We’re not going to save every life.  But we can make a difference.  And that’s our responsibility as Americans.  And that’s what I’ll do every single day as long I’ve got the honor of serving as your President.   

So thank you.  God bless you.  God bless these United States of America.  (Applause.)  Thank you.  (Applause.)

END 
2:02 P.M. CST

Remarks by Vice President Joe Biden to the Munich Security Conference. Hotel Bayerischer Hof Munich, Germany

9:22 A.M. (Local) THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, Wolfgang, let me begin by saying thank you and our expectations are very high as well. (Laughter.) The good news is we’re not going anywhere. The bad news is we’re not going anywhere. (Laughter.) So you have nothing to worry about along those lines. It’s a delight to be back, and it’s a particular delight to be back here starting this morning off observing a tribute to an old friend. One of the great privileges of my career is that I was elected the same year that Sam Nunn was, in 1972, to the United States Senate. And in 1976, one of my -- our closest friends in the Senate arrived. His name was Dick Lugar. I had the privilege of over 30 years chairing or sitting alongside of Dick Lugar on the Foreign Relations Committee. And Sam and Dick and I can say one thing that is rare in politics period, in American politics now: I don’t ever remember there being a harsh word exchanged in over 36 years among any of the three of us. And I always looked to, and still look to, the leadership of Dick and Sam on so many issues. In each of our countries, we’ve had fine men and women who have made significant contributions while they were actively involved in the political process. But many of them, upon leaving that political office they held, recede into private life and their contributions end. I would suggest that Dick Lugar’s* [*sic- Sam Nunn’s] contributions have been as profound from the day he left the United States Senate and public elective office as they have been when he was in public office, and I believe you’ll see the same thing can be said of my very close friend, Sam Nunn* [*sic Dick Lugar]. We, as a country, are lucky to have them both and I would argue everyone assembled in this conference is lucky they are still deeply involved in the security interests of all of us involved. So again, congratulations, Sam. Congratulations. (Applause.) It’s great to be back among friends. When I say among friends, I mean not only the distinguished guests that are from around the world who have joined us in this conference. I also mean to be back here in Germany, to be back here in Europe. I have traveled over 640,000 miles since I’ve been Vice President, and most of the time the President sends me to places that he doesn’t want to go. (Laughter.) So I’ve spent an awful lot of time with McCain and others in Afghanistan and Iraq, and so it’s nice to be here in Germany. (Laughter.) It’s nice to be invited back. (Applause.) You remain, to state the obvious, America’s oldest and our closest allies. And it’s hard to imagine a single threat or a single opportunity that cannot be addressed more effectively if we do so together. Simply put, President Obama and I continue to believe that, Europe is the cornerstone of our engagement with the rest of the world and is the catalyst for our global cooperation. It’s that basic. Nothing has changed. Where we come from is a place that understands that this European alliance is critical to our interests. When I came to Munich four years ago this week, I focused on the challenges of our time, and how this new administration in our first term of office planned on dealing with those challenges. Those challenges included Iraq and Afghanistan; addressing the failure of Iran to meet the international obligations with regard to its nuclear program; managing the crisis of the global economy, which was in a precarious position at that moment; fighting terrorism; repairing our relationships between the United States and Russia. And today, I’m pleased to report on the undeniable progress that we’ve made together in each of these fields. Four years ago, American foreign policy -- and the majority of the discussions with our friends and partners -- was dominated by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Today, we’re in the process of turning the page on more than a decade of conflict following the September 11, 2001 attack, and we ended the war in Iraq responsibly. And together we’re responsibly drawing down in Afghanistan, and by the end of next year, the transition will be complete. Four years ago, Iran had succeeded in dividing the international community over how to address the illicit and destabilizing nuclear program they had underway. We needed to change that dynamic by giving Iran the opportunity to make clear its intentions to the world. As I told the conference then, and I quote: “We will be willing to talk to Iran and offer a very clear choice: Continue down the course and there will be continued pressure and isolation; abandon the illicit nuclear program and your support for terrorism, there will be meaningful incentives.” We were criticized at the time for suggesting we would engage Iran along those lines. Well, we all know what path Iran has chosen. And so the international community came together, and the United States, the European Union and the United Nations imposed what Iran -- the Iranian leaders are acknowledging to be the most robust sanctions in history. As President Obama has made clear to Iranian leaders, our policy is not containment -- it is not containment. It is to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. But we’ve also made clear that Iran’s leaders need not sentence their people to economic deprivation and international isolation. There is still time, there is still space for diplomacy, backed by pressure, to succeed. The ball is in the government of Iran’s court, and it’s well past time for Tehran to adopt a serious, good-faith approach to negotiations with the P5-plus-1. Four years ago, the world was mired in the deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression. Today, times remain tough for too many American and European families -- but conditions are improving. The United States is taking difficult but critical steps to put ourselves on a sounder economic footing. And I might add, it’s never been a real good bet to bet against America. We’re going to do just fine in terms of our economic “crisis” and the cliffs that are about to approach. We’re determined to continue in a balanced way to cut our debt in the coming years and have made significant strides towards that goal. Last year, with the help of my colleagues in the United States Congress, we reached a difficult agreement on reducing our spending over the next 10 years by close to $1 trillion. Just the end of this year, we agreed on a very difficult decision about our tax code, raising another $600 billion, making significant compromises. There is more to be done, because it’s essential, both for the wellbeing of our citizens, and also for our nation’s ability to meet what Wolfgang stated at the outset: our strategic obligations to the rest of the world. Because the strength of our economy at home is the most fundamental source of our power and influence in the world. But I must say, the same must and can be said of Europe, whose contributions to global stability and prosperity are critical, yet also depend on the strength of your economy and your economic and financial commitment to security. Believe me when I say that I realize how difficult this is with an economy having slipped back into recession last year and the ever-present temptation to back away from commitments on defense spending. But I also know that maintaining our capabilities is what enables us to advance our common global agenda. That’s just one reason why a strong and capable Europe is profoundly in America’s interest, and I might add, presumptuously, the world’s interest. We have seen positive steps recently to address the eurozone crisis, with the European Central Bank pledging to stand behind countries willing to launch reforms, and with Greece, Ireland, Poland* [*sic-Portugal], Spain and Italy all taking important steps to put their economies on a sounder path. Governments across the eurozone must also remain focused on growth and jobs. These may be fundamentally European problems, requiring European solutions, but their resolution has tremendous impact on the United States of America and on the global economy. Now, just imagine what we can do as we get our respective houses in order. Already, Europe is America’s largest economic partner, and the numbers are staggering: over $600 billion in annual trade that creates and sustains millions of jobs on the continent and at home, and a $5 trillion overall commercial relationship. But the potential is so much greater still. There’s a lot of interest lately in the idea of a comprehensive transatlantic trade and investment agreement. The reason we don’t have one already is not because no one ever thought of it; it’s because there have always been difficult issues, such as regulations and standards, which continue to divide us. The question now is whether the political will exists to resolve those longstanding differences. And if so, we should pursue a transatlantic partnership. And if we go down that road, we should try to do it on one tank of gas and avoid protracted rounds of negotiations. This is within our reach. It would be good for growth, job creation, and be good on both sides of the Atlantic; it would strengthen our global trading system; and it would, importantly, help us strategically as a key element -- add another element of our transatlantic alliance. I believe we can overcome these differences and get this done, because the rewards for success are almost boundless. When I addressed this conference four years ago, many of our nations had been scarred in recent memory by the scourge of international terrorism -- 9/11 in the United States, 7/7 in the U.K., 3/11 in Spain. Core al Qaeda was on the ascendancy. Osama bin Laden was alive and well and plotting against our countries, inspiring followers. Four years ago, I spoke of a shared struggle against a “small number of violent extremists beyond the call of reason” and said “we will and we must defeat them.” Now, as a result of the joint efforts of all of our countries and renewed and relentless focus on counterterrorism, the cooperation of our law enforcement agencies, and President Obama’s unflinching determination to bring Osama bin Laden to justice, those -- we’ve made progress. We’ve dealt that organization, al Qaeda, a crippling blow, made all our homelands more secure. But even as we look as -- took the fight to core Al Qaeda in the FATA, we were cognizant of an evolving threat posed by affiliates like AQAP in Yemen, al-Shabaab in Somalia, AQI in Iraq and Syria and AQIM in North Africa. Most of these groups do not pose the same threat, with the same capacity, to our homelands as core al Qaeda once did. And in some cases they are merely amalgams of disparate groups adopting a name. But increasingly they are targeting Western interests overseas. That’s why we have been just as relentless in taking them on. Today, across North Africa and in parts of the Middle East, extremists are seeking to exploit the following: increasingly porous borders; a broad swath of ungoverned territory; readily available weapons; new governments that lack the capacity and sometimes the will to contend with extremism; a swelling generation of disaffected young people whose futures are stifled by stagnant economies. This is not a call to spend tens of billions of dollars and deploy thousands and tens of thousands of boots on the ground, as once occurred. It requires a more integrated strategy, a more coordinated strategy. And the threat that spreads across many nations and millions of square miles cannot and will not be eliminated overnight, and we all know that. But meeting these challenges is going to require us to continue to work together, including through the United Nations, NATO, the G8 and other key international institutions. And it will take a comprehensive approach -- employing the full range of the tools at our disposal -- including our militaries. That’s why the United States applauds and stands with France and other partners in Mali, and why we are providing intelligence support, transportation for the French and African troops and refueling capability for French aircraft. The fight against AQIM may be far from America’s borders, but it is fundamentally in America’s interest. And finally, four years ago at this conference, we proposed the United States and Russia, Mr. Ambassador, press the “reset button,” a phrase that became more used than I had intended when I used the phrase. But the whole idea was to pursue a common agenda around common interests. I would think -- I think Foreign Minister Lavrov would agree that important steps -- that important step enabled us to do some good things: to negotiate, ratify and implement the New START Treaty; to activate unprecedented sanctions on Iran; and unity on North Korea; to build the northern distribution network that supplies the United States and ISAF forces in Afghanistan; to expand economic and trade relationships -- including both Russian accession to the WTO and extension of the permanent normal trade relations to Russia; to negotiate a civilian nuclear cooperation agreement; to build a bilateral presidential commission that networks Russian and American officials and publics on the broadest cooperative agenda the United States and Russia have ever tried to share. But I also made clear four years ago, we are not naïve -- neither Russia or the United States. I said we would not agree with Russia on everything. For example, the United States will not recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states. We will not recognize any nation having a sphere of influence. It will remain America’s view that sovereign states have the right to make their own decisions and choose their own alliances. All that remains the U.S. position; it will not change. But in the meantime, other clear differences have emerged as well. It’s no secret that we have serious differences on issues like Syria, missile defense, NATO enlargement, democracy, human rights. These differences are real. But we continue to see opportunities for the United States and Russia to partner in ways that advance our mutual security interest and the interest of the international community -- whether by safeguarding and reducing nuclear arsenals, boosting our trade and investment to help each other unlock the enormous innovative potential of our societies, working collaboratively to advance freedom of navigation in the Arctic while preserving access to natural resources. New challenges -- there are new challenges in the years to come. Over the next four years and beyond, Europe and the United States will turn our attention to a new set of challenges no less daunting than the ones that came when I addressed this conference four years ago. But I would also -- I argue no less soluble than those challenges we faced four years ago. President Obama will say more about this agenda next week in his State of the Union address, and I’ve learned as Vice President it’s not a good thing to steal the President’s thunder, John. (Laughter.) I’ve learned that. I’ve gotten better after four years of this. But it will reflect our shared interests in the following areas: advancing a comprehensive nuclear agenda to strengthen the nonproliferation regime, reduce global stockpiles and secure nuclear materials -- and I am looking forward -- Sam told me of the initiative that he and his colleagues are thinking about, and we’re anxious to hear it -- getting -- combating climate change, moving it up on the agenda; enhancing our development initiatives to promote global health and food security and end extreme poverty in the near future; strengthening our alliances, which are essentially -- essential to our ability to meet our challenges in the 21st century; continuing to take down barriers to trade including with Europe to spur growth on both sides of the Atlantic; maintaining our commitment to the elusive but essential goal of Middle East Peace; and strengthening the -- engaging the democracies in Southeast Asia, Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa and across the Middle East. And this afternoon, I’ll be meeting here in Munich with the leaders of the Syrian Opposition Coalition, as many of you have already done. President Obama and I and nearly all of our partners and allies are convinced that President Assad, a tyrant, hell-bent on clinging to power, is no longer fit to lead the Syrian people and he must go. We can all agree -- but we can all agree not on how or what we do -- we can all agree on the increasingly desperate plight of the Syrian people and the responsibility of the international community to address that plight. Just this week the international community came together to raise -- to pledge $1.5 billion in pledges for humanitarian support for the Syrian people and refugees fleeing the violence. As part of that effort, President Obama announced that we would be contributing $155 million, bringing the total of humanitarian aid for Syria to $365 million -- the largest contribution of any nation’s humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people. We also provided more than $50 million in non-lethal assistance to the Syrian opposition and are working, alongside our partners to help them become more inclusive and cohesive. As President Obama said last week, we’re under no illusions. The days ahead will continue to be very difficult. But the opposition continues to grow stronger. And as the Syrian people have their chance to forge their own future, they will continue to find a partner in the United States of America. Europe remains I might add -– Europe remains essential to that entire effort. As I said at the outset, Europe is the cornerstone of our engagement with the world, and Europe is the catalyst -- our catalyst for global cooperation. And as I hope we’ll all agree, although our mutual agenda has shifted over the past four years, one important thing remains unchanged: We need to work together; we need to stick together. We need you as much as you need us. Neither the United States nor any other country can alone address the challenges we face. We know that. Europe remains America’s indispensable partner of first resort. And, if you forgive some presumptuousness, I believe we remain your indispensable partner. I stand before you as a proud Atlanticist for my entire career and a firm believer in the transatlantic ties that have never been deeper, in my view, broader or more important at any time since I was elected as a kid in 1972. Time and again, when it comes to a search for partners in this extremely complex world, Europe and America still look to each other before they look anywhere else. Our soldiers, diplomats, security personnel, and citizens continue to stand shoulder-to-shoulder. In Afghanistan, America looks to Europe, which provides about 30,000 troops and trainers and has spent almost $15 billion. Our collaboration on missile defense is protecting both of our populations -– and our agreements with Romania, Spain and Turkey provide tangible proof of that cooperation. Our intensified counterterrorism cooperation has helped keep 800 million citizens safer than they had been in the recent past. In Libya, NATO acted quickly, effectively and decisively. And now we are working together to support Libya in building effective institutions of governance that have never existed before. European partnership remains an indispensable force in advancing democracy and universal rights. We’ve joined forces in response to the unprecedented promise and unresolved turmoil of the Arab Spring. From Tunis to Tripoli, Cairo to Sana’a, our collaboration could not be closer. And it’s going to be required to continue. We also know there is unfinished business in our common project of a Europe whole and free. Georgia and the states of the Balkans have unfulfilled aspirations for Euro-Atlantic integration. The pace of these integration efforts will be determined by the aspirants themselves. But we too share a responsibility for helping them achieve their rightful place in Europe and the Transatlantic Alliance. The broader focus also needs to be kept in mind. But folks, our interests well go -- go well beyond the territory of our nations. In a changing world, what’s unique about our collaboration with Europe is that the issues we address truly span the globe. That’s all the more essential in a changing world, where emerging powers and far-flung events can have profound impact in each of our countries. It’s a simple fact that nations like Brazil, India, China, South Africa, Indonesia will continue play an ever greater role in the global security and economic affairs of the world. And it’s in all of our interests that they emerge as responsible, fully integrated actors on the world stage. That’s why America’s engagement with these countries -— and particularly in Asia -— plays an increasingly prominent role in our conduct of our foreign affairs. This engagement does not come at Europe’s expense. Many of you I know talk to us, talk to me about are we taking our focus off of Europe as we’ve reasserted that we are a Pacific power -- and we are a Pacific power. It’s quite the opposite. It is profoundly in Europe’s interest for America to engage more broadly with the world, and we should be doing it more fully together. In the economic realm, European customers and companies gain from the United States advocating on behalf of greater market access or fairer rules of the road in international trade. Europe also gains from peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region, and the United States -– along with our allies in the region –- have helped guarantee that. At the request of President Obama and Chinese President Hu two years ago, we were asked -- they asked us both -- both President Xi -- Vice President Xi and I to spend some more time together. We traveled to each other’s countries, spent literally scores of hours together, spent 10 days together in each of our countries -- five and five. And I believe that --President Obama and I believe that this -- establishing personal relationships with an emerging Chinese leadership -- is critically important not only to the United States, but that we know and they know where we stand. We fully understand one another. I say to my colleagues in the House and the Senate, Tip O’Neill used to say, all politics is local. I believe all politics, particularly international politics, is personal. I think personal relationships matter. So when I visited China I made it absolutely clear that the United States does not view China with hostile intent and that we can cooperate and compete simultaneously. I’ve said many times, the rise of a peaceful and responsible China that contributes to global security and prosperity is in the interests of all nations. And we all have a role to play in encouraging Beijing to define its interests more in terms of common global concerns than merely introspective concerns. The United States is a Pacific power. And the world’s greatest military alliance helps make us an Atlantic power as well. As our new defense strategy makes clear, we will remain both a Pacific power and an Atlantic power. And I would respectfully suggest it’s very much in Europe’s interest that we do so. The bottom line is that the USA, Europe -- we all have an important and specific interest in an Asia-Pacific region that is peaceful and growing –- as do our Russian friends and our Japanese friends. So we ought to intensify our cooperation in advance of those interests, moving forward together. I have to discuss today just -- I’ve discussed today just some of the challenges that we face over the next four years and many more years to come. There are many more that I could name and inevitably others on the horizon that only will emerge in time. In a complex world, there is a comfort in knowing that we can face them together though because we’ve done it in the past. Together we can again provide the doubters -- prove the doubters wrong who never tire of tedious question that from my first -- as a young senator, chairman of the European Affairs Subcommittee of Foreign Relations Committee, attended my first meeting on NATO in 1976 and the question was: Whither NATO? I have never attended a conference where that wasn’t a subset of the conference: Whither NATO? Are we going to make it? Are we going to stick together? Ladies and gentlemen, we should scoff at the notion that we cannot make it together. We have to. America, North America and Europe have to meet these security challenges of the modern world together. And we will continue to do so. So I thank you very much for inviting me back to Munich, and to begin by laying out some of the plans of our administration over the next four years. It’s an honor to be with you today, and I look forward to having some private meetings with a number of you and say to my Senate and House friends, if you’re willing, I’d like to buy you lunch or something before you’re out of here, okay? (Laughter.) All right, thank you all so very much for allowing me to be here today, and I appreciate all you’ve done. (Applause.) AMBASSADOR ISCHINGER: Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President. Thank you so much. We have time for just one or two questions. The Vice President was kind enough to accept to take a few questions. I have a whole bunch of questions here. I’m sure that Sergei Lavrov will want to comment on the U.S.-Russian relationship, so the two questions I thought I should choose from this stack -- one is on Iran and one is on China. I’ll start with the question on Iran: Many argue that the time for direct U.S.-Iranian negotiations has come. When is that going to happen, and if not, why not? THE VICE PRESIDENT: When the Iranian leadership, Supreme Leader, is serious. We have made it clear at the outset that we would not -- we would be prepared to meet bilaterally with the Iranian leadership. We would not make it a secret that we were doing that. We would let our partners know if that occasion presented itself. That offer stands, but it must be real and tangible, and there has to be an agenda that they’re prepared to speak to. We are not just prepared to do it for the exercise. AMBASSADOR ISCHINGER: The other question is about -- and you talked about that, the relationship with China, the so-called pivot or the rebalancing. I read the question: How concerned are you, Mr. Vice President, about the conflicts brewing in the Pacific? If Henry Kissinger is right, U.S.-China relations are the single most important bilateral relationship, he said. What are your plans, what are the administration’s plans to make sure that this will develop into a constructive partnership and not into a kind of new Cold War confrontation? THE VICE PRESIDENT: I am confident that it’s in the interests of China and the emerging Chinese leadership that it not result in conflict. The last thing that they need at this moment -- and they’re dealing with the incredible potential and incredibly complex problems relative to their economy, their growth and their national needs -- is to engage in anything remotely approaching military competition with the United States. I do not believe that is their intention. It clearly is not our intention. We work and coordinate with our Russian friends and our Japanese friends as well. The bottom line here is that we believe the most important thing to assure that this not occur is to have a frank -- and I mean frank, straightforward, private dialogue with the emerging leadership in China, letting them know what our interests are, letting them know what we believe our role is, and let them make judgments about whether or not that in any way conflicts with their growth patterns or their -- what they believe ability to maintain their own national security interest. The only thing, as I said in one of my -- as I said, we spent 10 days together, my colleague, the ascendant President, still Vice President of China, President Xi. And we both acknowledged that the most dangerous thing is, at this juncture and the next several years of our relationship, is a misunderstanding. The only conflict worse than one that is intended, as my father would say, was one that’s unintended. And so it’s very important we speak frankly about -- for example, I referred to the China Sea. I pointed out it’s not China’s sea; it’s international waters. They have great interests and they have as much interest as anyone else does. It’s a matter of laying out clearly what the parameters of the relationship are and those of the neighbors. And I am convinced that it is -- if we do our job correctly and we, in fact, interface directly with the leadership, that there will be intense competition, there will be occasional misunderstandings, but there will not be -- my children -- my son, who is with me today, a 40-year-old man, will not, when he is my age, be looking at China as a sworn enemy. I do not believe that’s in the cards. I believe there is healthy competition from a growing, emerging China, which I would argue is in the interest of all of us. I’ll conclude by saying I went so far as to say, and I believe it was acknowledged, that one of the reasons China has been able to have this period of sort of sustained growth and stability is because of a U.S. presence in the Pacific, not in spite of. And so I believe we can, with a lot of hard work and direct dialogue, avoid confrontation and manage what will be an intense competition, particularly in the economic field. But then again, I am an American; I look forward to competition. Thank you. (Applause.) END 9:57 A.M. (Local)

Remarks by the President at Ceremony for the 2011 National Medals of Science, and National Medals of Technology and Innovation

East Room

2:22 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  (Applause.)  Thank you so much. Please, everyone have a seat.  Well, it is my incredible pleasure and honor to welcome this incredibly talented group of men and women in the White House.  And I want to congratulate them on earning America’s highest honor for invention and discovery -- the National Medals of Science, and the National Medals of Technology and Innovation.

Before we start, I want to acknowledge the head of the National Science Foundation, Dr. Subra Suresh, as well as the members of my Cabinet who are with us here today.  Where is everybody?  Where did Subra go?  (Laughter.)  There you go.  All right, I just wanted to make sure they all showed up.  (Applause.)

I especially want to thank Secretary Steven Chu, who announced this morning that he will be leaving the Department of Energy.  That will be a loss for us.  Steve has been a great friend, a tremendous colleague over the past four years, working on a whole range of energy issues, but also designing a cap to plug a hole in the middle of the Gulf of Mexico when nobody else could figure it out.  And that’s typical of the incredible contributions that he’s made to this country.  Because of his leadership, this country is further along on the path to energy independence.  It’s better positioned for the jobs and industries of the future. 

So, Steve, you have earned more than your fair share of relaxation time, but we are grateful for your extraordinary service.  So thank you.  (Applause.)

Now, this is the most collection of brainpower we’ve had under this roof in a long time -- (laughter) -- maybe since the last time we gave out these medals.  I have no way to prove that, and I know this crowd likes proof.  (Laughter.)  But I can’t imagine too many people competing with those who we honor here today.

If there is one idea that sets this country apart, one idea that makes us different from every other nation on Earth, it’s that here in America, success does not depend on where you were born or what your last name is.  Success depends on the ideas that you can dream up, the possibilities that you envision, and the hard work, the blood, sweat and tears you’re willing to put in to make them real.

We don’t always recognize the genius behind these ideas right away.  The New York Times once described Robert Goddard’s belief that rockets could one day go to the moon as “[lacking] the knowledge ladled out daily in high schools.”  (Laughter.)    One engineer called Einstein’s brand-new theory of relativity “voodoo nonsense.”  But with enough time, we usually come around. And we don’t give folks the same treatment that Galileo got when he came up with new ideas.  (Laughter.)  And today, it’s clearer than ever that our future as a nation depends on keeping that spirit of curiosity and innovation alive in our time.

So these honorees are at the forefront of that mission.  Thanks to the sacrifices they’ve made, the chances they’ve taken, the gallons of coffee they’ve consumed -- (laughter) -- we now have batteries that power everything from cell phones to electric cars.  We have a map of the human genome and new ways to produce renewable energy.  We’re learning to grow organs in the lab and better understand what’s happening in our deepest oceans.  And if that’s not enough, the people on this stage are also going to be responsible for devising a formula to tame frizzy hair -- (laughter) -- as well as inspiring the game Tetris. 
 
But what also makes these individuals unique is how they’ve gotten here -- the obstacles they’ve overcome and the commitments they’ve made to push the boundaries of our understanding.

Jim Gates’s father, for example, was in the Army, and by the time Jim was in 6th grade, he had attended six different schools. But he still remembers the day he came home and saw his father standing on the porch with a big smile on his face.  And that’s how Jim knew he had gotten into MIT -- on his way to becoming one of our foremost experts in supersymmetry and string theory.

When Gholam Peyman first accepted a position at the University of Illinois, his office was a converted restroom.  (Laughter.)  But he carved out enough space for himself, his secretary and his lab equipment.  And today he’s known as the father of LASIK eye surgery.

Sandra Moore Faber had a passion for astronomy from the very beginning.  But when she visited one of our nation’s top observatories as a grad student, they didn’t have a dorm for female astronomers, so Sandra ended up sleeping on the sofa in the caretaker’s cottage.  Now, luckily, that didn’t slow her down, and she became one of the world’s foremost experts in the evolution of the universe.

In a global economy where the best jobs follow talent -- whether in Calcutta or Cleveland -- we need to do everything we can to encourage that same kind of passion, make it easier for more young people to blaze a new trail.

Right now, only about a third of undergraduate students are graduating with degrees in science, technology, engineering and math -- areas that will be crucial if we expect to complete the work that has been done by these folks and compete for the jobs of the future.  And that’s why we’ve worked to make more affordable college opportunities, and set a goal of training 100,000 new math and science teachers over the next decade.  And we’re working to train 2 million Americans at our community colleges with the skills businesses are looking for right now. 

We also need to do something about all the students who come here from around the world to study but we then send home once they graduate.  On Tuesday, I was in Las Vegas talking about the need for comprehensive immigration reform.  And one important piece of that reform is allowing more of the best and brightest minds from around the world to start businesses, initiate new discoveries, create jobs here in the United States of America.  If we want to grow our economy and strengthen the middle class, we need an immigration system built for the 21st century.  It’s that simple.

One of the scientists being honored today is Jan Vilcek.  Jan was born in Slovakia to Jewish parents who fled the Nazis during World War II.  To keep their young son safe, his parents placed him in an orphanage run by Catholic nuns.  And later, he and his mother were taken in by some brave farmers in a remote Slovak village and hidden until the war was over.  And today, Jan is a pioneer in the study of the immune system and the treatment of inflammatory diseases like arthritis.

People like Jan obviously had enormous talent.  In some fundamental ways, they were destined to be on this stage.  The minds they were born with, the drive they innately possess, the positive forces that shaped their lives were more powerful than the forces aligned against them.  So they beat the odds.  But even with all those gifts, every one of today’s honorees also had somebody who offered them a hand -- a teacher who sparked their interest; a scholarship that paved the way -- and an opportunity to come to America and bring even the most distant dream within our reach.  

And that reminds us of our obligations to each other and to this country.  We can -- no matter how many talented folks there are in this country, if we’re not offering a hand up, a lot of those folks are going to miss out on what might be their destiny. We can make it easier for our young people to learn the skills of the future.  We can attract the brightest minds to our shore.  We can celebrate and lift up and spotlight researchers and scientists like the ones here today, so that somewhere, a boy on an Army base, or a girl looking through a telescope, or a young scientist working out of a converted bathroom can make it their goal to stand where these honorees will be standing when they receive their medals. 

That’s what we can do and that’s what we must do.  That’s what I intend to do as long as I’m President.

So I want to congratulate these extraordinary Americans once again for all their accomplishments.  I want to wish our military aides the best of luck as they attempt to read the citations. (Laughter.)  Because I can assure you they practiced hard on this all week long. 

You good?  You feel good?  (Laughter.)  All right.  There are a lot of syllables in some of these things.  (Laughter.)  I won’t know the difference, but they will.  (Laughter.) 

Congratulations, everybody.  (Applause.)

(The citations are read and the medals are presented.)

MILITARY AIDE:  Allen J. Bard.  2011 National Medal of Science to Allen J. Bard, University of Texas, Austin.  For contributions in electrochemistry, including electroluminescence, semiconductor photoelectrochemistry, electroanalytical chemistry, and the invention of the scanning electrochemical microscope.  (Applause.)

Sallie W. Chisholm.  2011 National Medal of Science to Sallie W. Chisholm, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.  For contributions to the discovery and understanding of the dominant photosynthetic organisms in the ocean, promotion of the field of microbial oceanography, and influence on marine policy and management.  (Applause.)

Sidney D. Drell.  2011 National Medal of Science to
Sidney D. Drell, Stanford University.  For contributions to quantum field theory and quantum chromodynamics, application of science to inform national policies in security and intelligence, and distinguished contributions as an advisor to the United States government.  (Applause.) 

Sandra M. Faber.  2011 National Medal of Science to
Sandra M. Faber, University of California, Santa Cruz.  For leadership in numerous path-breaking studies of extra-galactic astronomy and galaxy formation, and for oversight of the construction of important instruments, including the Keck telescopes.  (Applause.)

Sylvester James Gates, Jr.  2011 National Medal of Science to Sylvester James Gates, Jr., University of Maryland.  For contributions to the mathematics of supersymmetry in particle, field, and string theories and extraordinary efforts to engage the public on the beauty and wonder of fundamental physics.  (Applause.)

Solomon W. Golomb.  2011 National Medal of Science to Solomon, W. Golomb, University of Southern California.  For pioneering work in shift register sequences that changed the course of communications from analog to digital, and for numerous innovations in reliable and secure space, radar, cellular, wireless, and spread-spectrum communications.  (Applause.) 

John B. Goodenough.  2011 National Medal of Science to
John B. Goodenough, University of Texas, Austin.  For groundbreaking cathode research that led to the first commercial lithium ion battery, which has since revolutionized consumer electronics with technical applications for portable and stationary power.  (Applause.) 

M. Frederick Hawthorne.  2011 National Medal of Science to M. Frederick Hawthorne, University of Missouri.  For highly creative pioneering research in inorganic, organometallic, and medicinal borane chemistry; sustained and profound contributions to scientific and technical advice related to national security; and for effective, prolific, and devoted service to the broad field of chemical sciences.  (Applause.) 

Leroy Hood.  2011 National Medal of Science to Leroy Hood, Institute for Systems Biology.  For pioneering spirit, passion, vision, inventions, and leadership combined with unique cross-disciplinary approaches resulting in entrepreneurial ventures, transformative commercial products, and several new scientific disciplines that have challenged and transformed the fields of biotechnology, genomics, proteomics, personalized medicine, and science education.  (Applause.) 

Barry C. Mazur.  2011 National Medal of Science to
Barry C. Mazur, Harvard University.  For original and landmark contributions to differential topology, number theory, and arithmetic algebraic geometry, where, among other applications, his work was fundamental to Wiles’ proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem, and for his dedication to communicating subtle mathematical ideas to the broader public.  (Applause.)

Lucy Shapiro.  2011 National Medal of Science to
Lucy Shapiro, Stanford University.  For the pioneering discovery that the bacterial cell is controlled by an integrated genetic circuit functioning in time and space that serves as a systems engineering paradigm underlying cell differentiation and ultimately the generation of diversity in all organisms.  (Applause.)

Anne M. Treisman.  2011 National Medal of Science to
Anne M. Treisman, Princeton University.  For a 50-year career of penetrating originality and depth that has led to the understanding of fundamental attentional limits in the human mind and brain.  (Applause.)

Frances H. Arnold.  2011 National Medal of Technology and Innovation to Frances H. Arnold, California Institute of Technology.  For pioneering research on biofuels and chemicals that could lead to the replacement of pollution-generating materials.  (Applause.)

George Carruthers.  2011 National Medal of Technology and Innovation to George Carruthers, U.S. Naval Research Lab.  For invention of the Far UV Electrographic Camera, which significantly improved our understanding of space and earth science.  (Applause.)

Robert Langer.  2011 National Medal of Technology and Innovation to Robert Langer, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.  For inventions and discoveries that led to the development of controlled drug release systems, engineered tissues, angiogenesis inhibitors, and new biomaterials.  (Applause and laughter.)

Norman R. McCombs.  2011 National Medal of Technology and Innovation to Norman R. McCombs, AirSep Corporation.  For the development and commercialization of pressure swing adsorption oxygen-supply systems with a wide range of medical and industrial applications that have led to improved health and substantially reduced health care costs.  (Applause.)

Gholam A. Peyman.  2011 National Medal of Technology and Innovation to Gholam A. Peyman, University of Arizona College of Medicine and Arizona Retinal Specialists.  For invention of the LASIK surgical technique, and for developing the field of intraocular drug administration and expanding the field of retinal surgery.  (Applause.)

Arthur H. Rosenfeld.  2011 National Medal of Technology and Innovation to Arthur H. Rosenfeld, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy and California Institute for Energy and Environment and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.  For extraordinary leadership in the development of energy-efficient building technologies and related standards and policies.  (Applause.)

Jan T. Vilcek.  2011 National Medal of Technology and Innovation to Jan T. Vilcek, New York University School of Medicine.  For pioneering work on interferons and key contributions to the development of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies.  (Applause.)

Rangaswamy Srinivasan and James Wynne.  2011 National Medal of Technology and innovation to Samuel Blum, Rangaswamy Srinivasan, and James Wynne, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center.  For the pioneering discovery of excimer laser ablative photodecomposition of human and animal tissue, laying the foundation for PRK and LASIK, laser refractive surgical techniques that have revolutionized vision enhancement.  (Applause.)

Edward Campbell.  2011 National Medal of Technology and innovation to Raytheon BBN Technologies, Cambridge, Massachusetts.  For sustained innovation through the engineering of first-of-a-kind, practical systems in acoustics, signal processing, and information technology.  (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT:  That wasn’t bad.  (Laughter.) 

Well, again, I just want to congratulate all the honorees here today.  Can everybody please give them one more big round of applause?  (Applause.)  We are so grateful to all of you.  The incredible contributions that you’ve made have enhanced our lives in immeasurable ways, in ways that are practical but also inspirational. 

And so we know that you are going to continue to inspire and in many cases teach the next generation of inventors and scientists who will discover things that we can’t even dream of at this point.  So thank you so much for everything that you’ve done. 

I hope that all of you enjoy this wonderful reception.  Feel free to party here.  (Laughter.)  This looks like a somewhat wild crowd.  (Laughter.)  So just remember there are Secret Service here -- (laughter) -- if you guys get out of hand.  (Laughter.)

Thank you very much, everybody.  (Applause.)
  
END
2:52 P.M. EST

Remarks by the President on Comprehensive Immigration Reform

Del Sol High School
Las Vegas, Nevada

11:40 A.M. PST
 
THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you!  (Applause.)  Thank you!  Thank you so much.  (Applause.)  It is good to be back in Las Vegas!  (Applause.)  And it is good to be among so many good friends.
 
Let me start off by thanking everybody at Del Sol High School for hosting us.  (Applause.)  Go Dragons!  Let me especially thank your outstanding principal, Lisa Primas.  (Applause.) 
 
There are all kinds of notable guests here, but I just want to mention a few.  First of all, our outstanding Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, is here.  (Applause.)  Our wonderful Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar.  (Applause.)  Former Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis.  (Applause.)  Two of the outstanding members of the congressional delegation from Nevada, Steve Horsford and Dina Titus.  (Applause.)  Your own mayor, Carolyn Goodman.  (Applause.) 
 
But we also have some mayors that flew in because they know how important the issue we’re going to talk about today is.  Marie Lopez Rogers from Avondale, Arizona.  (Applause.)  Kasim Reed from Atlanta, Georgia.  (Applause.)  Greg Stanton from Phoenix, Arizona.  (Applause.)  And Ashley Swearengin from Fresno, California.  (Applause.) 
 
And all of you are here, as well as some of the top labor leaders in the country.  And we are just so grateful.  Some outstanding business leaders are here as well.  And of course, we’ve got wonderful students here, so I could not be prouder of our students.  (Applause.)
 
Now, those of you have a seat, feel free to take a seat.  I don’t mind. 
 
AUDIENCE MEMBER:  I love you, Mr. President!
 
THE PRESIDENT:  I love you back.  (Applause.) 
 
Now, last week, I had the honor of being sworn in for a second term as President of the United States.  (Applause.)  And during my inaugural address, I talked about how making progress on the defining challenges of our time doesn’t require us to settle every debate or ignore every difference that we may have, but it does require us to find common ground and move forward in common purpose.  It requires us to act.  
 
I know that some issues will be harder to lift than others.  Some debates will be more contentious.  That’s to be expected.  But the reason I came here today is because of a challenge where the differences are dwindling; where a broad consensus is emerging; and where a call for action can now be heard coming from all across America.  I’m here today because the time has come for common-sense, comprehensive immigration reform.  (Applause.)  The time is now.  Now is the time.  Now is the time.  Now is the time.
 
AUDIENCE:  Sí se puede!  Sí se puede!
 
THE PRESIDENT:  Now is the time.  
 
I’m here because most Americans agree that it’s time to fix a system that’s been broken for way too long.  I’m here because business leaders, faith leaders, labor leaders, law enforcement, and leaders from both parties are coming together to say now is the time to find a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful immigrants who still see America as the land of opportunity.  Now is the time to do this so we can strengthen our economy and strengthen our country’s future.
 
Think about it -- we define ourselves as a nation of immigrants.  That’s who we are -- in our bones.  The promise we see in those who come here from every corner of the globe, that’s always been one of our greatest strengths.  It keeps our workforce young.  It keeps our country on the cutting edge.  And it’s helped build the greatest economic engine the world has ever known. 
 
After all, immigrants helped start businesses like Google and Yahoo!.  They created entire new industries that, in turn, created new jobs and new prosperity for our citizens.  In recent years, one in four high-tech startups in America were founded by immigrants.  One in four new small business owners were immigrants, including right here in Nevada -- folks who came here seeking opportunity and now want to share that opportunity with other Americans. 
 
But we all know that today, we have an immigration system that’s out of date and badly broken; a system that’s holding us back instead of helping us grow our economy and strengthen our middle class.  
 
Right now, we have 11 million undocumented immigrants in America; 11 million men and women from all over the world who live their lives in the shadows.  Yes, they broke the rules.  They crossed the border illegally.  Maybe they overstayed their visas.  Those are facts.  Nobody disputes them.  But these 11 million men and women are now here.  Many of them have been here for years.  And the overwhelming majority of these individuals aren’t looking for any trouble.  They’re contributing members of the community.  They're looking out for their families.  They're looking out for their neighbors.  They're woven into the fabric of our lives.  
 
Every day, like the rest of us, they go out and try to earn a living.  Often they do that in a shadow economy -- a place where employers may offer them less than the minimum wage or make them work overtime without extra pay.  And when that happens, it’s not just bad for them, it’s bad for the entire economy.  Because all the businesses that are trying to do the right thing -- that are hiring people legally, paying a decent wage, following the rules -- they’re the ones who suffer.   They've got to compete against companies that are breaking the rules.  And the wages and working conditions of American workers are threatened, too.
 
So if we're truly committed to strengthening our middle class and providing more ladders of opportunity to those who are willing to work hard to make it into the middle class, we've got to fix the system. 
 
We have to make sure that every business and every worker in America is playing by the same set of rules.  We have to bring this shadow economy into the light so that everybody is held accountable -- businesses for who they hire, and immigrants for getting on the right side of the law.  That’s common sense.  And that’s why we need comprehensive immigration reform.  (Applause.)
 
There’s another economic reason why we need reform.  It’s not just about the folks who come here illegally and have the effect they have on our economy.  It’s also about the folks who try to come here legally but have a hard time doing so, and the effect that has on our economy. 
 
Right now, there are brilliant students from all over the world sitting in classrooms at our top universities.  They’re earning degrees in the fields of the future, like engineering and computer science.  But once they finish school, once they earn that diploma, there’s a good chance they’ll have to leave our country.  Think about that. 
 
Intel was started with the help of an immigrant who studied here and then stayed here.  Instagram was started with the help of an immigrant who studied here and then stayed here.  Right now in one of those classrooms, there’s a student wrestling with how to turn their big idea -- their Intel or Instagram -- into a big business.  We’re giving them all the skills they need to figure that out, but then we’re going to turn around and tell them to start that business and create those jobs in China or India or Mexico or someplace else?  That’s not how you grow new industries in America.  That’s how you give new industries to our competitors.   That’s why we need comprehensive immigration reform.  (Applause.)
 
Now, during my first term, we took steps to try and patch up some of the worst cracks in the system.
 
First, we strengthened security at the borders so that we could finally stem the tide of illegal immigrants.  We put more boots on the ground on the southern border than at any time in our history.  And today, illegal crossings are down nearly 80 percent from their peak in 2000.  (Applause.) 
 
Second, we focused our enforcement efforts on criminals who are here illegally and who endanger our communities.  And today, deportations of criminals is at its highest level ever.  (Applause.) 
 
And third, we took up the cause of the DREAMers -- (applause) -- the young people who were brought to this country as children, young people who have grown up here, built their lives here, have futures here.  We said that if you’re able to meet some basic criteria like pursuing an education, then we’ll consider offering you the chance to come out of the shadows so that you can live here and work here legally, so that you can finally have the dignity of knowing you belong.
 
But because this change isn’t permanent, we need Congress to act -- and not just on the DREAM Act.  We need Congress to act on a comprehensive approach that finally deals with the 11 million undocumented immigrants who are in the country right now.  That's what we need.  (Applause.) 
 
Now, the good news is that for the first time in many years, Republicans and Democrats seem ready to tackle this problem together.  (Applause.)  Members of both parties, in both chambers, are actively working on a solution.  Yesterday, a bipartisan group of senators announced their principles for comprehensive immigration reform, which are very much in line with the principles I’ve proposed and campaigned on for the last few years.  So at this moment, it looks like there’s a genuine desire to get this done soon, and that’s very encouraging. 
 
But this time, action must follow.  (Applause.)  We can't allow immigration reform to get bogged down in an endless debate.  We've been debating this a very long time.  So it's not as if we don't know technically what needs to get done.  As a consequence, to help move this process along, today I’m laying out my ideas for immigration reform.  And my hope is that this provides some key markers to members of Congress as they craft a bill, because the ideas I’m proposing have traditionally been supported by both Democrats like Ted Kennedy and Republicans like President George W. Bush.  You don't get that matchup very often.  (Laughter.)  So we know where the consensus should be. 
 
Now, of course, there will be rigorous debate about many of the details, and every stakeholder should engage in real give and take in the process.  But it’s important for us to recognize that the foundation for bipartisan action is already in place.  And if Congress is unable to move forward in a timely fashion, I will send up a bill based on my proposal and insist that they vote on it right away.  (Applause.)
 
So the principles are pretty straightforward.  There are a lot of details behind it.  We're going to hand out a bunch of paper so that everybody will know exactly what we're talking about.  But the principles are pretty straightforward. 
 
First, I believe we need to stay focused on enforcement.  That means continuing to strengthen security at our borders.  It means cracking down more forcefully on businesses that knowingly hire undocumented workers.  To be fair, most businesses want to do the right thing, but a lot of them have a hard time figuring out who’s here legally, who’s not.  So we need to implement a national system that allows businesses to quickly and accurately verify someone’s employment status.  And if they still knowingly hire undocumented workers, then we need to ramp up the penalties.
 
Second, we have to deal with the 11 million individuals who are here illegally.  We all agree that these men and women should have to earn their way to citizenship.  But for comprehensive immigration reform to work, it must be clear from the outset that there is a pathway to citizenship.  (Applause.) 
 
We’ve got to lay out a path -- a process that includes passing a background check, paying taxes, paying a penalty, learning English, and then going to the back of the line, behind all the folks who are trying to come here legally.  That's only fair, right?  (Applause.)
 
So that means it won’t be a quick process but it will be a fair process.  And it will lift these individuals out of the shadows and give them a chance to earn their way to a green card and eventually to citizenship.  (Applause.)
 
And the third principle is we’ve got to bring our legal immigration system into the 21st century because it no longer reflects the realities of our time.  (Applause.)  For example, if you are a citizen, you shouldn’t have to wait years before your family is able to join you in America.  You shouldn't have to wait years.  (Applause.)
 
If you’re a foreign student who wants to pursue a career in science or technology, or a foreign entrepreneur who wants to start a business with the backing of American investors, we should help you do that here.  Because if you succeed, you’ll create American businesses and American jobs.  You’ll help us grow our economy.  You’ll help us strengthen our middle class. 
 
So that’s what comprehensive immigration reform looks like:  smarter enforcement; a pathway to earned citizenship; improvements in the legal immigration system so that we continue to be a magnet for the best and the brightest all around the world.  It’s pretty straightforward.  
 
The question now is simple:  Do we have the resolve as a people, as a country, as a government to finally put this issue behind us?  I believe that we do.  I believe that we do.  (Applause.)  I believe we are finally at a moment where comprehensive immigration reform is within our grasp. 
 
But I promise you this:  The closer we get, the more emotional this debate is going to become.  Immigration has always been an issue that enflames passions.  That’s not surprising.  There are few things that are more important to us as a society than who gets to come here and call our country home; who gets the privilege of becoming a citizen of the United States of America.  That's a big deal.
 
When we talk about that in the abstract, it’s easy sometimes for the discussion to take on a feeling of “us” versus “them.”  And when that happens, a lot of folks forget that most of “us” used to be “them.”  We forget that.  (Applause.)  
 
It’s really important for us to remember our history.  Unless you’re one of the first Americans, a Native American, you came from someplace else.  Somebody brought you.  (Applause.)
 
Ken Salazar, he’s of Mexican American descent, but he points that his family has been living where he lives for 400 years, so he didn't immigrate anywhere.  (Laughter.) 
 
The Irish who left behind a land of famine.  The Germans who fled persecution.  The Scandinavians who arrived eager to pioneer out west.  The Polish.  The Russians.  The Italians.  The Chinese.  The Japanese.  The West Indians.  The huddled masses who came through Ellis Island on one coast and Angel Island on the other.  (Applause.)  All those folks, before they were “us,” they were “them.” 
 
And when each new wave of immigrants arrived, they faced resistance from those who were already here.  They faced hardship.  They faced racism.  They faced ridicule.  But over time, as they went about their daily lives, as they earned a living, as they raised a family, as they built a community, as their kids went to school here, they did their part to build a nation. 
 
They were the Einsteins and the Carnegies.  But they were also the millions of women and men whose names history may not remember, but whose actions helped make us who we are; who built this country hand by hand, brick by brick.  (Applause.)  They all came here knowing that what makes somebody an American is not just blood or birth, but allegiance to our founding principles and the faith in the idea that anyone from anywhere can write the next great chapter of our story.
 
And that’s still true today.  Just ask Alan Aleman.  Alan is here this afternoon -- where is Alan?  He's around here -- there he is right here.  (Applause.)  Alan was born in Mexico.  (Applause.)  He was brought to this country by his parents when he was a child.  Growing up, Alan went to an American school, pledged allegiance to the American flag, felt American in every way -- and he was, except for one:  on paper.  
 
In high school, Alan watched his friends come of age -- driving around town with their new licenses, earning some extra cash from their summer jobs at the mall.  He knew he couldn’t do those things.  But it didn’t matter that much.  What mattered to Alan was earning an education so that he could live up to his God-given potential.
 
Last year, when Alan heard the news that we were going to offer a chance for folks like him to emerge from the shadows -- even if it's just for two years at a time -- he was one of the first to sign up.  And a few months ago he was one of the first people in Nevada to get approved.  (Applause.)  In that moment, Alan said, “I felt the fear vanish.  I felt accepted.”
 
So today, Alan is in his second year at the College of Southern Nevada.  (Applause.)  Alan is studying to become a doctor.  (Applause.)  He hopes to join the Air Force.  He’s working hard every single day to build a better life for himself and his family.  And all he wants is the opportunity to do his part to build a better America.  (Applause.)   
 
So in the coming weeks, as the idea of reform becomes more real and the debate becomes more heated, and there are folks who are trying to pull this thing apart, remember Alan and all those who share the same hopes and the same dreams.  Remember that this is not just a debate about policy.  It’s about people.  It’s about men and women and young people who want nothing more than the chance to earn their way into the American story. 
 
Throughout our history, that has only made our nation stronger.  And it’s how we will make sure that this century is the same as the last:  an American century welcoming of everybody who aspires to do something more, and who is willing to work hard to do it, and is willing to pledge that allegiance to our flag. 
 
Thank you.  God bless you.  And God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)
 
END
12:05 P.M. PST