Remarks by President Obama and Former President Clinton

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

4:20 P.M. EST

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Hey, everybody.  I thought it was a slow day, so I’ve --

Q    Slow news day, huh?

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  -- bring the other guy in.

Obviously, there’s a big debate going on about taxes, and about the need to grow the economy and to create jobs.  And just about every day this week, I’ve been making an argument as to why the agreement that we’ve struck to provide billions of dollars in payroll tax cuts that can immediately help rejuvenate the economy, as well as tax cuts for middle-class families, unemployment insurance for folks who desperately need it, credits for college, Child Tax Credits, as well as a range of business investments credits are so important to make sure that we keep this recovery moving.

I just had a terrific meeting with the former President, President Bill Clinton.  And we just happened to have this as a topic of conversation.  And I thought, given the fact that he presided over as good an economy as we’ve seen in our lifetimes, that it might be useful for him to share some of his thoughts.

I’m going to let him speak very briefly.  And then I’ve actually got to go over and do some -- just one more Christmas party.  So he may decide he wants to take some questions, but I want to make sure that you guys hear it from him directly.

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  Thank you very much, Mr. President.  First of all, I feel awkward being here, and now you’re going to leave me all by myself.  (Laughter.)

Let me just say a couple of things.  First of all, I still spend about an hour a day trying to study this economy.  And I’m not running for anything, and I don’t have a political agenda.  I just -- I try to figure out what to do.  

I have reviewed this agreement that the President reached with Republican leaders.  And I want to make full disclosure I make quite a bit of money now, so the position that the Republicans have urged will personally benefit me.  And on its own, I wouldn’t support it because I don’t think that my tax cut is the most economically efficient way to get the economy going again.  But I don’t want to be in the dark about the fact that I will receive the continuation of the tax rates.

However, the agreement taken as a whole is, I believe, the best bipartisan agreement we can reach to help the largest number of Americans, and to maximize the chances that the economic recovery will accelerate and create more jobs, and to minimize the chances that it will slip back, which is what has happened in other financial collapses.  Like, that’s what Japan faced, and it’s something that we have to avoid in America.

Why do I say that?  First of all, because clearly the extension of unemployment, which gives people a percentage of the income they were previously making, will -- that money will be spent and it will bolster the economy for the next couple of years.

Secondly, the conversion of the Make Work Pay Tax Credit, which the President passed before, which goes to -- went to 95 percent of the American people, converting that into an $120 billion one-year payroll tax relief act is, according to all the economic analyses, the single most effective tax cut you can do to support economic activity.  This will actually create a fair number of jobs.  I expect it to lower the unemployment rate and keep us going.  

Thirdly, and one thing I haven’t seen much about in the reports, this agreement will really help America over the long term, because it continues the credits for manufacturing jobs related to energy coming in to America.  And I’ll remind you, just in the last two years, there have been 30 high-powered battery factories either opened or presently being built in America, taking us from 2 to 20 percent of the world’s share of that.  And we’re going to probably be at 40 percent by 2014.  This is a really important thing, bringing manufacturing back to America, because it’s a huge multiplier to create new jobs.  

So in my opinion, this is a good bill.  And I hope that my fellow Democrats will support it.  I thank the Republican leaders for agreeing to include things that were important to the President.  

There is never a perfect bipartisan bill in the eyes of a partisan.  And we all see this differently.  But I really believe this will be a significant net-plus for the country.  I also think that in general a lot of people are heaving a sigh of relief that there’s finally been some agreement on something.  

But don't minimize the impact of the unemployment relief for working families, of the payroll tax relief, and of the continuation of the incentives to grow jobs, which will trigger more credit coming out of the banks.

Keep in mind, ultimately the long-term answer here is to get the $2 trillion, which banks now have in cash reserves uncommitted to loans, out there in the economy again, the $1.8 trillion in corporate treasuries not now being invested out there in the economy again.  I think this is a net-plus.

And you know how I feel.  I think the people that benefit most should pay most.  That's always been my position -- not for class warfare reasons; for reasons of fairness in rebuilding the middle class in America.  But we have the distribution of authority we have now in the Congress and what we’re going to have in January, and I think this is a much, much better agreement than would be reached were we to wait until January.  And I think it will have a much more positive impact on the economy.  

So for whatever it’s worth, that's what I think.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  That’s worth a lot.

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  I would like to say one other thing on another subject, just to be recorded on the record.  They don't need my support on this because we have some good Republican support, including the first President Bush.  I think this START agreement is very important to the future of our national security.

And it is not a radical agreement.  Boris Yeltsin and I agreed in principle on this same reduction, and there was no way in the wide world he could get it through the Russian Duma that existed at the time in his second term.  So we didn't proceed because it couldn’t be ratified there.  I’m not sure the Senate would have ratified it then, but I think they will not with enough encouragement.

But the cooperation that we will get from the Russians, and the signal that will be sent to the world on nonproliferation, when all these other things are going on which threaten to increase nuclear proliferation, is very important.  One of the things you know is that when people fool with these weapons, they're expensive to build, expensive to maintain, and expensive to secure the material that goes into making the weapons.

This is something that is profoundly important.  This ought to be way beyond party.  They’ve worked very hard.  They’ve worked out, in my opinion, the details.  And I hope it will be ratified.

Q    Mr. President.

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  Yes.

Q    First of all, a lot of Democrats on Capitol Hill say this is a bad deal; that President Obama could have gotten more.  What’s your message to them?  And then if I could also just ask -- well, go ahead.  You can answer --

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  First, my message is, I don't believe that's true because in January, they will be in the majority.  And this would dramatically reduce their incentive to extend unemployment benefits, to support the conversion of the Make Work Pay tax credits President Obama enacted into this payroll tax deduction, which as I said, I read all these economic studies.  Every single, unbiased, economic study says the best thing you can do if you’re going to take a tax-cut path to grow the economy is to give payroll tax relief.

I just got back from a trip to Asia with my foundation.  Hong Kong, super free-market place, had a stimulus.  Well, I guess we’re not supposed to use that word any more.  (Laughter.)  You know what they did?  They gave almost 10 percent of the people -- low-income, working people -- two months free rent in public housing.  They gave some money to the seniors.  But the most important thing they did was payroll tax relief for a year.

This is -- all the people who study this believe it’s the number one thing, so I don't believe they can get a better deal by waiting.  

And I think the other thing that nobody is talking about, but I’m telling you it’s important, I live out there now, and I do a lot of this energy work, these tax credits have made us competitive again.

I didn't see a single story that credited Senator Reid’s election with the fact that with three weeks before the election, two new plants were announced in Nevada, which has the highest unemployment rate in the state, a thousand people making LED lights, a thousand people making wind turbines for that big wind farm in Texas, both companies owned by Chinese interests who said in no uncertain terms we’re here because you decided to compete with us for the future, and you gave us tax credits so we can pay higher labor costs because we save the transportation costs because of these credits.  I don't believe there is a better deal out there.

Q    And then as a follow-up, you mentioned the Republican Congress taking office in January.  What was your advice to President Obama today about how to deal with the Congress from the opposition party?

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  I have a general rule which is that whatever he asked me about my advice, and whatever I say should become public only if he decides to make it public.  He can say whatever he wants, but --

Q    What do you think?  (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Here’s what I’ll say, is I’ve been keeping the First Lady waiting for about half an hour, so I’m going to take off, but --

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  I don't want to make her mad, please go.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  You’re in good hands, and Gibbs will call last question.

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  Yes, help me.  Thank you.

Yes, go ahead.

Q    Mr. President, is there anything else that can be done in your opinion to loosen up the private credit markets that have been so tight?  I mean if people can’t get their hands on capital, how can they be the entrepreneurs that they want to be?  And this is something that the Republicans have fought all along.  What’s the next step?

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  First of all, let me just run through the numbers again.  We’re not talking about high-risk stuff.  That's what the financial regulation bill tries to stop and charges the federal regulators with -- even if the Wall Street banks get -- we all know they have to be able to have more leverage than the traditional community banks tend to want up in the Dakotas or Arkansas or anyplace else.

But let’s start with the community banks.  If they loan money conservatively, they can loan $10 for every dollar they have in the bank.  If they have $2 trillion uncommitted to loans, even though some of them may have a few mortgage issues unresolved, most of that mortgage debt has been off-loaded to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac or has vanished into cyber-sphere with those securitized subprime mortgages.  I don't like the securities, but they happened.

So what I believe is going on is, first of all, the business community has not come forward as aggressively -- the small business community.  And this bill did preserve all those small business incentives that were enacted by the Congress in the previous two years.  There are like 16 different measures that give incentives for small businesses to take loans and loan guarantees and that kind of thing.

It appears to me that the community banks, at least, are somewhat uncertain about how the financial reform bill, which I supported, applies to them and what the costs of compliance might be.  You remember, the two big things that bill did was to require the federal regulators to monitor every month the big banks that caused the meltdown and to require them to set aside more capital.

And then it set up an orderly bankruptcy mechanism and banned future bailouts.  It said -- that bill actually says:  If this happens again, the shareholders and the executives have to eat it.  

But there’s a whole lot of other things in credit cards and other matters that deal with it.  I think it is really, really important just to do an aggressive, 100 percent information drench.  I mean I would go so far as to do it bank by bank by bank by bank so that everybody knows exactly what they have to do, exactly what it costs and how quickly this can all be resolved.

And then I think it’s important to make sure that all these community banks and the people who might borrow from them understand where the small businesses of America are and where the manufacturers are with the various loan guarantees and credits and deductions that are available under these laws.

I still think -- you know, we too often assume that when a law passes, people know it passed, and they know what’s in it, and they know how it applies to them.  That may not be true in this case because there’s been so much activity and so much debate about it that was a debate that occurred in the context of a campaign rather than in the context of, “Let me tell you how this works, come here, let’s figure out how to get you a loan.”  So in my opinion, that's what needs to be done over the next two or three months.

The money is there to get this country out of this mess.  Two trillion dollars in the bank is $20 trillion in loans.  Now, there’s not that much guaranteed, but there’s plenty.  

And I also believe the same thing with big companies.  We should analyze the situation of every company that at a minimum has got a $1 billion or more in cash and ask them to be honest with us about what would it take to get you back in the investment business.

These companies clearly have a preference for reinvesting in America, or they’d have put this money somewhere else already.  They have got -- it’s an amazing thing, $1.8 trillion in corporate treasuries, 6.2 percent of their capitalized value.  It’s been since 1964 that they had those kind of cash balances relative to their value.

So those are the things that I think we have to do now, so I can’t answer your question, except the bankers I talked to in Arkansas, in small places that I visit around where I live in New York, they all say, we know we need to ramp up the activity.  We got to get the green light about how we’re going to comply with these laws, and then we’ll go.

And you might be able to actually use your program to do it.  You might be able to bring some community bankers on, bring some regulars on, work through this stuff for people.  I just think they don't know yet.

Yes.

Q    Some of your fellow Democrats are saying that the President just didn't go in and fight hard enough for his core principles; that he caved in.  Politically, some say that he should be a one-term President.  Has he damaged not only his own political path, but has he let the party down?

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  I don't believe so.  I think -- I just respectfully disagree about that.  I think that a lot of -- look, a lot of them are hurting now.  And I get it.  And you know I did 133 events for them.  I believe the Congress in the last two years did a far better job than the American people thought they did, at least the American people that voted in the midterms.

And I went to extraordinary efforts to try to explain what I thought had been done in the ways that I thought were most favorable to them.  But we had an election.  The results are what they are.  The numbers will only get worse in January in terms of negotiating.  

And the President -- look, if we had 5 percent growth and unemployment was dropping like a rock, maybe you could have a so-called Mexican standoff, and you could say, it will be you, not me, the voters will hold responsible for raising taxes on middle-class people if they all go down next year.  That is not the circumstance we face.

The United States has suffered a severe financial collapse.  These things take longer to get over than normal recessions.  We must first make sure we keep getting over it.  We don’t want to slip back down as Japan did.  

And in order to make it happen over the long run, that’s why the question I was just asked is so good, is we have to go beyond direct investments, whether they’re stimulus projects or tax cuts, to private growth.  But to get there, we have to achieve a higher level of growth that triggers a confidence.  

So I personally believe this is a good deal and the best he could have gotten under the circumstances.  

I just disagree.  I understand why -- people have a right to disagree with him.  But I disagree.  

Yes, sir.

Q    Mr. President, you’ve made a number of very effective calls for the health care plan last year.  Have you been asked to make any calls to Democratic members on the tax deal?  

And, secondly, there are a lot of comparisons being made between the ’94 election and the 2010 election.  Do you think those are analogous?  Are they similar situations?  

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  It’s like all these things -- all of you will be under enormous pressure to develop a storyline.  And there are some parallels, and some that are different.  And you know, I’m -- I’ll let you do that.  I’m out of politics now, except to say that I care about my country and I want to get this economy going again.  

And I believe that it is necessary for these parties to work together.  And I think, for example, the storyline is how well we work with the Republicans and all that.  But we’ve played political kabuki for a year, had two government shutdowns.  We can’t afford that now.  The only reason we could do that is if the deficit was already coming down in a time when interest rates were the problem, and the economy was coming out.  People just didn’t feel it yet in ’94.

We can’t afford that.  We have got to pull together.  And both sides are going to have to eat some things they don’t like, because we cannot afford to have the kind of impasse that we had last time over a long period of time.  We don’t want to slip back into a recession.  We got to keep this thing going and accelerate its pace.  I think this is the best available option.

Mark.

Q    -- any calls --    

Q    Mr. President --

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  Oh, I’m sorry, George, I have not.  But in fairness, as soon as the election was over, I took my foundation trip to Asia.  Then I came back -- I just got back from the West Coast, doing my annual trip out there.  There are people that support the work I do and my foundation.  I flew overnight to get here today.  And I have to leave again tonight.

If I were asked to, I would be happy to talk to anyone.  But I have not been asked.  But, in fairness, the President didn’t have a chance to.  He asked me to come down today, because he knew I was going to -- Hillary and I were appearing before the Brookings Saban Forum on the Middle East tonight.

Yes, Mark.

Q    Mr. President, I get the feeling that you’re happier to be here commenting and giving advice than governing.

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  Oh, I had quite a good time governing.  (Laughter.)  I am happy to be here, I suppose, when the bullets that are fired are unlikely to hit me, unless they’re just ricocheting.   

No, I’m glad to be here because I think the President made a good decision and because I want my country to do well.  And after the ’94 election, I said the American people, in their infinite wisdom, have put us both in the same boat.  So we’re going to either row or sink.  And I want us to row.

Q    Can you give us a Haiti update?

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  What?

Q    Can you give us a Haiti update?  I know you were there.  

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  Yes.  I had a long talk with the Prime Minister today.  And he, first of all, has done I think a remarkable job of being a loyal prime minister, but not being involved in the political imbroglio that’s going on, except to try to keep calm.  

There was a decision made by the electoral council to review the vote in its entirety and to ask some outside observers to come in who are not only credible but knowledgeable.  And they will announce exactly how they propose to do that.  Today was a pretty calm day.  And they expect the weekend to be pretty calm.

We are going to have our commission meeting next week.  We may move it to the Dominican Republic.  But I think the best thing that we can do for the people of Haiti is to prove that Haitians on the commission, and the donors, are still committed to the long-term reconstruction process, whoever gets elected president.

The best thing they can do is -- everyone understands they had to carry out this election under enormously difficult circumstances.  Even getting the ID cards to everybody, as you know, proved difficult, because they were in those tented areas.  

But what I can say is it was calmer today.  It appears they are going to try to have a recount procedure, which they hope will acquire more support from across the political spectrum.  And, meanwhile, we want the commission to keep working.  

The World Bank just released about $70 billion of the $90 billion in projects we approved four months ago.  So that will go in.  We’ll be hiring more people immediately on those projects.  And we’re going to approve a lot more projects on the 14th.  And that’s my focus now.

Yes.

Q    Mr. President, I have to ask, do you think your appearance here today will help sway votes where they’re needed the most right now, among House Democrats?  

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  I have no idea.

Q    The reason I ask you that is because a lot of them are sort of antsy.  And I know you never used the term back in your first term, but they’re antsy about the precedent of triangulation.  They’re still smarting over that.  And your appearance here today might not necessarily push them in the direction that the President wants them to be pushed.

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  That’s right, it may not.  But I would like to -- you know, I told President Obama, and I’ll tell you, you ought to go back and read a lecture that Franklin Roosevelt gave in 1926 before he was the Vice Presidential nominee, before he came down with polio, to his old alma mater (inaudible), in which he discussed the dilemma of the progressive movement in American politics.

I have an enormous amount of respect for the Democrats in the House.  And I’ve already told you I regret that so many of them lost.  I think some of our best people lost.  And I get where they’re coming from.

I can only tell you that my economic analysis is that given all the alternatives that I can imagine actually becoming law, this is the best economic result for America.  And I think it is enormous relief for America to think that both parties might vote for something, anything that they could both agree on.  And there is no way you can have a compromise without having something in the bill that you don’t like.  

So I don’t know if I can influence anybody.  Heck, I couldn’t -- you know, I’d go some places and the people I campaigned for won.  In some places, the people I campaigned for lost.  I don’t know.  All I can tell you is what I think.

Q    Considering your credibility on the deficit, what do you think about concerns about the short-term deficit and the long-term deficit, and where our country is going?

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  I’m happy to address that because I don’t think that -- I don’t think I did a good enough job in this election season, obviously, and I’m not sure we did.

The difference between now and when I became President, when we immediately went after the deficit, is quite simple.  When I became President, it was after 12 years in which the accumulative debt of the country had risen from $1 to $4 trillion.  It was the first period in American history when we had ever run structural deficits of any size.

And so we were having to pay too much for money.  It was costing us a lot to borrow money in the public sector, taking I think it was 14 cents of every dollar on the debt at the time.  And it was crowding out the opportunity of the private sector to borrow money, and raising their cost.  And that’s sparked the recession that we had in the early ‘90s.  

What happened this time was totally different.  This time there was a collapse of a financial system, which took interest rates to zero.  Now, I know there’s a lot of alarm now.  People say, oh, the interest rates went up on bond and in debt in the last couple of days.  And they said, oh, is it because of the increase in the -- increasing the deficit in the short term?  Is it because of the economy growing?  That doesn’t bother me.  We have to get out of deflation.  The biggest problem we have now is deflation.  

So, look, I’m a Depression-era kid.  I don’t like deficits ever, really.  We had four surpluses when I was President.  That’s what I like.  I like balanced budgets and surpluses; when you have growth.

But if I were in office now, I would have done what the President has done.  You have to first put the brakes on a contracting economy.  And then you have to somehow hold it together until growth resumes.  When growth resumes, you have to have interest rates higher than zero.  

So you should actually -- now, if they get too high, you’ll be alarmed.  But you should be encouraged that interest rates are beginning to creep up again.  It’s the sign of a healthy economy, and the idea that there would be competition for money.

I do believe that we’ll have to take aggressive and disciplined action to eliminate the structural deficit again.  And I think it was a mistake to go back to structural deficits.  I think if America were out of debt on a normal basis, and we didn’t have to borrow money from our major trading partners, we would have more economic freedom and economic security.  So I want to see what comes out of this, but I expect to support some very vigorous actions to eliminate the deficit and get us back to balance.

Yes, one more.  I’ve got to get out of here.  Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  Beyond this pending tax deal, there are enormous issues of importance that are unfinished, from education to energy, the deficit.  And this is still a very dividing country.  Do you think the American people want a President to compromise with the opposing party?  And is that a message that you think Democrats are going to have to accept?

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  Yes, but I also believe that it’s a message Republicans are going to have to accept.  Keep in mind that many of the -- the really interesting thing was -- is that a lot of the hardcore conservatives think the Republicans gave too much.  Read Charles Krauthammer’s column in the Post today.  He’s a brilliant man, and he pointed out that they got the divisive tax cuts, but most of them were targeted to middle-class working people -- that's what the payroll tax cut is -- that the unemployment benefits were extended, which some of them did not want to do, and that the American people, by two to one, support them both.  

So there are some conservatives who don't believe in the economic theory I just advanced to you; who believe that the President and Democrats got more out of this than the Republicans did.

So I think that's healthy, too, because everybody has got to give a little.

Yes, I think the one thing that always happens when you have divided government is that people no longer see principled compromise as weakness.  This system was set up to promote principled compromise.  It is an ethical thing to do.  In a democracy where no one is a dictator, we would all be at each other’s throats all the time, and we would be in a state of constant paralysis if once power is divided, there is no compromise.

Q    What’s the political fight worth having?  What would you tell Democrats the political fight worth having is right now?

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON:  Well, I think it’s worth fighting against the repeal of the health care law.  I would be in favor -- and I can give you four or five things off the top of my head I think should be done to improve it.

I think it’s worth a ferocious fight to avoid repeal of the student loan reform, which I believe is the best chance we’ve got to take America back to number one from number nine in the percent of adults in the world with four-year college degrees.

I think it’s worth fighting against repeal of the financial reform and the assurance it gives us that we won’t have another meltdown, and if we do, there won’t be another bailout.

I think there are a lot of fights worth having, and I presume the Republicans want to fight those, too, since they ran on that.  And they’ll be able to have these differences.  But this holds the promise that after the fights are over, we’ll be able to find principled compromises on those areas, as well.  And to me that's worth doing.

But first, the economy first.  We can’t go back into a recession.  We have to keep crawling out of this mess we’re in.  And this is a good first step, both on the substantive merits and on the psychological relief it gives to the American people in general, and the small business people and community bankers and others who can start doing things that will help get better in particular.

Thank you.

END
4:50 P.M. EST

Remarks by the President in Meeting with the President's Export Council

Eisenhower Executive Office Building

10:19 A.M. EST

      THE PRESIDENT:  Everybody have a seat, have a seat.  Well, good morning, everybody.  And thank you for once again coming together to help us figure out how we’re going to sell a lot of stuff all around the world.

      I want to thank Secretary Locke and members of my Cabinet and administration.  I want to thank the members of Congress who are here.  And I want to thank Jim and Ursula, the chair and vice chairs of the President’s Export Council, and all the other members here today for your extraordinary work.

      Now, everyone in this room is committed to promoting a strong and growing economy -- one that’s creating jobs, fostering a thriving middle class, and extending opportunity for all who are willing to work for it.

      And as we meet here, there is an important debate I think most of you are aware of on Capitol Hill that will determine, in part, whether our economy moves forward or backward.  The bipartisan framework that we’ve forged on taxes will not only protect working Americans from seeing a major tax increase on January 1st; it will provide businesses incentives to invest, grow and hire.  And every economist that I’ve talked to or that I’ve read over the last couple of days acknowledges that this agreement would boost economic growth in the coming years and has the potential to create millions of jobs.  The average American family will start 2011 knowing that there will be more money to pay the bills each month, more money to pay for tuition, more money to raise their children.

      But if this framework fails, the reverse is true.  Americans would see it in smaller paychecks that would have the effect of fewer jobs.

      So as we meet here today to talk about one important facet of our economic strategy for the future, I urge members of Congress to move forward on this essential priority.

      Now, the top priority of my administration since I took office has been to get the American people back on their feet and back on the job in the aftermath of the most devastating recession in our lifetime.  That’s job one.  But as I said in greater detail on Monday, we’ve also got to ask ourselves how do we position our economy to be strong, growing and competitive in the long run.

      One strategy that will help us do both -– to create good jobs that pay well today and create new markets for jobs tomorrow –- is to increase our exports to the rest of the world.  That’s why, in my State of the Union address, I set a goal for America:  We will double our exports for goods and services over five years.  And I re-launched this council because, as business leaders and labor leaders, as members of Congress and as members of my administration, I value your advice in terms of how we best achieve that goal.

      What we all agree on is that we’ve got to rebuild our economy on a new and stronger foundation for growth.  And part of that means getting back to doing what America has always been known for doing -– what our workers and our businesses have always done best –- and that’s making great products and selling them around the world.

      The world wants products made in America.  We’ve got workers ready to make them.  And the fact is, exporting is good for our economy.  The more our companies export, the more they produce.  The more they produce, the more workers they hire.  Every $1 billion that we increase in exports supports more than 5,000 jobs, and companies that export often pay better wages.

      So at a time when jobs are in short supply, growing our export markets is an imperative.  And growing our exports today will create the jobs of tomorrow.  Ninety-five percent of the world’s customers and the fastest-growing markets are beyond our borders.  If we want to find new growth streams for our economy, we’ve got to compete aggressively for those customers -– because other nations are competing aggressively.  And as long as I’m President of the United States, we are going to fight for every job, every industry, every market, everywhere –- and we intend to win.

      That’s why I set this goal.  We’re on track to meet it.  Exports are up nearly 18 percent so far over last year.  Today, I’d like to offer an update on some of the steps we’ve taken to get there and steps we’re taking based on this council’s recommendations, to keep making progress.

      Earlier this year, I launched the National Export Initiative –- an effort to marshal the full resources of the federal government behind America’s businesses, large and small, in order to best help them sell their goods, services and ideas to the rest of the world.

      One of the things I pledged to do as part of this initiative was to move forward on new trade agreements with some of our key partners.  And I promised to do it in a way that secures a level playing field for our companies and a fair shake for our workers, without compromising our most cherished values.

      That’s why I am so pleased that the United States and South Korea reached agreement on a landmark trade deal last week.  We expect this deal’s tariff reductions alone to boost annual exports of American goods by up to $11 billion.  And all told, this agreement -– including the opening of the Korean services market -– will support more than 70,000 American jobs.

      I hoped to finalize this agreement -- I had hoped to finalize this agreement when I traveled to Korea last month, but I didn’t agree to it at that time for one simple reason:  It wasn’t yet good enough for our workers or our economy.  As much as I believe that looking out for American workers requires competing in the global marketplace, I also believe that as we compete in the global marketplace, we’ve got to look out for American workers.  So I said let’s take the time to get this right.  And we did.

      It is now a deal that is good for our workers, good for our businesses, good for our farmers, good for our ranchers, good for aerospace, good for electronics manufacturers.  In particular, American car and truck manufacturers will have more access to Korea’s markets.  And here at home, we’ll encourage the development of electric cars and green technologies and continue to ensure a level playing field for our automakers.

      It’s also good for our friend and ally South Korea.  They will grow their economy, gain greater access to our markets, and will also get American products that will be more affordable for Korean households and businesses.  And that means more choices for them and more jobs for us.

      And it’s good for American leadership.  As I’ve insisted all along, it -- the deal that we’ve struck includes strong protections for workers’ rights and environmental standards -– and as a consequence, I believe it’s a model for future trade agreements that I will pursue.

      It’s an agreement supported by members of Congress on both side of the aisle, and Americans on all sides of the political spectrum –- from the UAW to the Chamber of Commerce.  And I look forward to working with Congress and leaders in both parties to approve it -- because if there’s one thing we should all agree on, it’s creating jobs and opportunity for the American people.

      Another thing that we said we’d do is to go to bat as a stronger advocate for our businesses abroad.  This is an effort that I pledged to lead personally.  And that’s why, on the same trip where we were working to get the Korea deal done, I visited India to highlight the role American business played there and took the opportunity to sell our exports to one of the fastest-growing markets in the world.  While I was there, we reached several landmark deals -– from Boeing jets and GE engines to medical and mining equipment -– deals that are worth nearly $10 billion in exports and will support more than 50,000 American jobs.

      I also believe that strong economic partnerships can create prosperity at home and advance it around the world.  And that’s why we focused on deepening our economic cooperation with Russia on a range of fronts -- from aerospace to agriculture, including restarting American poultry exports earlier this year, which was an important victory for many American farmers.  I believe that Russia belongs in the WTO and that we should support all efforts to make that happen.  I think President Medvedev is doing important work trying to reform and move Russia forward on a whole host of issues, and I told him that the United States would be a partner with him in that effort.  Welcoming Russia to the WTO would be good for them; it would also be good for us and good for the global economy.

      Finally, we’ve also been working to reform our export control system with high-tech companies like some of yours in mind, so that American firms that make products with national security implications can stay competitive even as we better protect our national security interests.

      When this council met in September, some of you asked that we make it easier for businesses to participate in these reform efforts.  So today, I’m pleased to announce that we’re publishing a first set of guidelines for what products should be controlled going forward, and the licensing policies that will apply to them.  As an example, we’ve applied those policies to one category of products.  In that one category, about three-quarters of products previously subjected to stricter controls will be shifted to a more flexible list, and many are expected to fall off the list altogether.  And we want input from businesses, from Congress and from our allies as we complete this reform.

      Today, we’re also unveiling a new export control reform web page as part of the revamped Export.gov.  This is something that Secretary Locke mentioned in our last meeting.  Typically, all businesses that export have to go through a maze of different lists, different formats, from different departments, to make sure they’re not selling their products somewhere or to someone that they shouldn’t be.  As important as that is, the process is repetitive, it’s redundant, and particularly onerous for small businesses without the means to navigate it all.

      So we’re changing that.  Effective today, businesses can, for the very first time, go to Export.gov and download one consolidated list of entities that have special export requirements.

      So that’s a lot of work that we’ve been doing to double our exports, to open up new markets and level the playing field for American workers and businesses -- all with the overarching purpose of growing and strengthening the American economy.

      I’m very much looking forward to the discussion we’re going to be having as you guys continue your work.  I’m grateful for all of you for being here, because while those of us around this table may not always agree on every issue, what does bind us together is that we want to see our businesses grow.  We want to see our workers get hired.  We want our people to succeed.  We want America to compete.  We want to stay on top in the 21st century.  And I’m confident we can do that with your help.

      So thank you very much, everybody.  And I think you guys are going to strike this podium so I can sit down and listen a little bit.  Thank you.  (Applause.)

                                    END                        10:30 A.M. EST

Remarks by President Obama and President Komorowski of Poland after Bilateral Meeting

Oval Office

11:45 A.M. EST

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Good morning, everybody.  I want to extend the warmest possible greetings to President Komorowski and his delegation.  Poland is one of our strongest and closest allies in the world and is a leader in Europe.  And so it is fitting that my first visitor from Central and Eastern Europe is, in fact, the Polish President.  

Before I mention the substance of our meeting, let me just say something very quickly to the American news crews about something that's on everybody’s minds -- and that is the current debate about the tax agreement that we've come up with.

We announced this agreement, and over the last couple of days economists throughout the country have looked at what would be the results of getting this agreement through Congress.  And I think it’s worth noting that the majority of economists have upwardly revised their forecasts for economic growth and noted that as a consequence of this agreement we could expect to see more job growth in 2011 and 2012 than they originally anticipated.  

And I just think it’s very important for Congress to examine the agreement, look at the facts, have a thorough debate, but get this done.  The American people are watching and they’re expecting action on our parts.

I don't think you need to translate that.  

Now, having said that, I just want to say that I first spoke to President Komorowski in the wake of a tragedy that broke the hearts not only of the Polish people but caused the entire world to grieve.  The loss of President Kaczynski, the First Lady, the entire planeload full of extraordinary Polish leaders caused extraordinary shock.  But I have been so impressed with the steady hand and the leadership that President Komorowski has shown as he stepped in to guide the Polish people forward.

Something that the Polish people and the American people have long shared is not only a love of freedom but also a deep faith and resilience in the face of hardship.  And President Komorowski exhibited all those traits as the leader of Poland during this difficult period.  

So, given these strong bonds between our two peoples -- bonds that I feel very personally given that I'm from Chicago, which has the largest Polish population outside of Poland -- this has been a very productive meeting and we discussed a wide range of issues.

We started with the issue that is at the heart of our relationship, and that is our status as allies in NATO.  And coming out of the Lisbon summit, we once again reaffirmed the centrality of Article 5 as the central tenet of the NATO Alliance.  And I reiterated my determination and the American people’s determination to always stand by Poland in its defense and its security needs.  

And that commitment is exemplified by the joint adoption at Lisbon by NATO of a NATO-wide missile defense capacity.  It’s exemplified by the air force detachment that will be placed in Poland as part of our ongoing relationship in the training process.  It is indicated by the SM-3s and the interceptors that are going to be located in Poland as part of our phased adoptive approach to missile defense.  And most importantly, it’s affirmed by the fact that not only are we NATO allies but strong bilateral allies and that bond between our two countries is unbreakable.

I know that was a mouthful, I’m sorry.  (Laughter.)

(Pause for translation.)

We also discussed the tremendous sacrifices that the Polish military are making as part of the ISAF alliance in Afghanistan, and reaffirmed what all of us agreed to in Lisbon, that next year will be a year in which transition begins so that we can start giving Afghans more responsibility for their security and, over time, make sure that our emphasis is more on training rather than direct combat in that nation.

I also thanked the President for the very strong support that the Polish government, as well as the governments throughout Eastern Europe and Central Europe have shown towards the New START treaty.  As we embark on a debate of that treaty in the United States Senate, I indicated to him how important it was for U.S. senators to hear from those who are Russia’s neighbors that they feel it is very important to make sure that the New START treaty is ratified so that we can continue the verification process that is so important in reducing risks throughout that region.

And finally, because our relationship is not restricted to security, we discussed a range of economic issues, as well, including Polish leadership on energy independence issues in Central and Eastern Europe.  And we also discussed Poland’s leadership as a key democracy and how it can help its neighbors to continue down a path of greater freedom and greater openness and transparency.

This year we mark the 30th anniversary of Solidarity.  And all those around the world remember how inspired we were by the brave Poles who sought their freedom, including a young -- or younger -- President Komorowski, who, himself, was imprisoned.  And we continue to draw inspiration from the tremendous strides that Poland has made.  We continue to deeply appreciate the strong friendship between our two countries.

And I’m so grateful to President Komorowski for having come here today because it is one more reaffirmation that our alliance is strong and will continue to be strong for decades to come.

PRESIDENT KOMOROWSKI:  (As translated.)  Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to express the absolute same perspective on what happened in Lisbon.  This goes both for the full acceptance of the arrangements by NATO as to the future of Afghan operation.  And first and above all, this is about the reaffirmation of the significance of Article 5 Washington treaty.  
And we agreed that what happened in Lisbon was the renewal and the reaffirmation of the internal cohesion of the Alliance and also the sense of the existence of NATO as the Alliance as going to defend the territorial integrity of its member states.

And this is also connected with the reaffirmation of the necessity to implement the language from the contingency plans in the forms of exercises, also NATO infrastructure in the territory of the member states.  And an element of this is also the American activity and presence in the form of the military participation both in Europe and in Poland.  

NATO now plays new roles, but it does not reject its old role, which continues as fundamental for its future.  I allowed myself to illustrate this to President Obama in a very illustrative way, a very picturesque way.  I simply said that if we are to go hunting very far away from our house, we have to be absolutely sure that our house, our women and our children are well guarded.  And then you hunt better.

And I also wanted to say that this is needed to renew and reaffirm good Polish-American relations.  And the fundament of these relations is both American and Polish love for freedom.  And we want also to make sure that this reaffirmation is a visible sign that these relations, instead of some difficulties underway, are getting stronger and not weaker.

And thirdly, I wanted to say also that we talked about something that is very important for creating very good texture for the cooperation between the United States and Poland.  Poland is economically successful.  We are the only country that has kept positive GDP growth in Europe.  We want to see the greatest interest and the activity of the American capital in Poland.  

However, on the principles of healthy competition, because I am absolutely convinced that as in other areas of our life, in economy, it also stands true good competition is always good.

And the last thing but is also very important is the Polish attitude to the current issues, which are very important from the perspective of the security of our world.  Poland supports and fully accepts the aspiration for the ratification of the New START because we believe that this is the investment in a better and safer future.  And this is also the investment in the real control over the current situation.  

If you live just next door with somebody for 1,000 years, it is not possible to reset all the past relations using just one push of the reset button.  We are not able to fully reset and delete 1,000 years of uneasy history with Russians.  But we do not want to be an obstacle; we want to be a help in the process of resetting the relations between the Western world with Russia. We want to invest in relations with Russia.

Two days ago in Poland we had a visit of President of the Russian Federation Medvedev.  And it is our very open will, our greatest conviction and open heart with which we want to invest in better relations with Russia.  

But we also are absolutely sure of this old Russian proverb, “You have to have the confidence but you also have to verify,” because then, perhaps at the end of the process we will also push the reset button after 1,000 years of our history.  And this is what we would like to have very much.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Thank you so much.  

So we’ve got time for two questions.  I think on the American side I’m going to call on Bill Plante.

Q    Mr. President, now that you’ve negotiated with the Republicans, are you willing to negotiate with the Democrats who think they’ve -- that you’ve betrayed them on the tax package?
And when you talked to the Republicans, did they give you any assurances that they would take up START and “don’t ask” in the lame duck?

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Well, first of all, Bill, I think it is inaccurate to characterize Democrats writ large as feeling “betrayed.”  I think Democrats are looking at this bill, and you’ve already had a whole bunch of them who said this makes sense.  And I think the more they look at it, the more of them are going to say this makes sense.  

As I’ve indicated, you’ve just had economists over the last 24, 48 hours examine this and say this is going to boost the economy, it is going to grow the economy, it is going to increase the likelihood that we can drive down the unemployment rate.  And it’s going to make sure that 2 million people who stand to lose unemployment insurance at the end of this month get it; that folks who count on college tax credits or child tax credits or the Earned Income Tax Credit, that they’re getting relief; and that tens of millions of Americans are not going to see their paychecks shrink come January 1st.  

So this is the right thing to do.  I expect everybody to examine it carefully.  When they do, I think they’re going to feel confident that, in fact, this is the right course -- while understanding that for the next two years we’re going to have a big debate about taxes and we’re going to have a big debate about the budget and we’re going to have a big debate about deficits.  And Republicans are going to have to explain to the American people over the next two years how making those tax cuts for the high end permanent squares with their stated desire to start reducing deficits and debt.  

I don’t think that formula works.  But they’ll have the opportunity to make the case.  I’ll have the opportunity to make the case that we’ve got to have tax reform; that we’ve got to simplify the system; that we do have to cut spending where it makes sense.  But we’re also going to have to make sure that we’ve got a tax code that is fair and that looks after the interest of middle-class Americans and continues to grow the economy.

With respect to START, I feel confident that when you’ve got previous secretaries of state, defense, basically the entire national security apparatus of previous Democratic and Republican administrations, our closest allies who are most impacted by relations with Russia, and as President Komorowski indicated, have a thousand years of uneasy relations with Russia, saying that the New START treaty is important, that we are going to be able to get it through the Senate.  

That’s not linked to taxes.  That’s something that on its own merits is close to get done -- needs to get done.  And I have discussed it with Senate Republican leader McConnell.  I am confident that we are going to be able to get the START treaty on the floor, debated and completed before we break for the holidays.      

Q    This is a question for both Presidents.  Have you at all discussed the inclusion of Poland into the visa waiver program?  And if so, Mr. President, what has your administration done in order to include Poland into this program?

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  I will -- why don’t I answer that just very quickly.  First of all, I want all Poles and Polish Americans to know that President Komorowski raised this issue very robustly with me.  I am well aware that this is a source of irritation between two great friends and allies, and we should resolve it.

The challenge I have right now is, is that there is a congressional law that prevents my administration from taking unilateral executive action.  So we’re going to have to work with Congress to make some modifications potentially on the law.  

In the meantime, what I indicated to President Komorowski is that I am going to make this a priority.  And I want to solve this issue before very long.  My expectation is, is that this problem will be solved during my presidency.

Q    So it has not been your priority in the past two years?

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  I’m sorry, what I said was that it has been a priority and we’ve been continuing to work on it, but it hasn’t gotten solved yet.  

PRESIDENT KOMOROWSKI:  (As translated.)  It’s nice for me to hear President Obama reaffirm that we have talked about it.  I take these declarations with good faith.  I feel simply committed to say that Polish public opinion completely does not understand why all the neighbors of Poland, the neighborhood of Poland, can use that visa waiver program and we can’t.  

So Poles somehow cope, because we are a member of the European Union and we can travel and we can work in all the member states of the European Union.  So I just want to say that I know that it would be quite logical for us to be able also to travel without visas to the United States.

But from the perspective of Poland, we have said everything about it.  And we also -- I’m completely sure that this issue will be reconsidered and revisited by the American party, also from the perspective of the relations between the citizens of Poland and the United States.  

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Well, Mr. President, thank you so much for the wonderful visit.  And I just want to make -- as the press leaves, you might want to note that I got this beautiful Christmas tree ornament from the President and it’s already on my tree.  We hung it up.  And it’s the prettiest one on the tree, so you may want to take a look at it.  

PRESIDENT KOMOROWSKI:  I also want to say that I’m absolutely convinced that your numerous neighbors from Chicago make exactly the same decorations.  (Laughter.)  And I also have a decoration from the White House, a Christmas tree decoration, and I’m going to put it on my Christmas tree in Warsaw.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Merry Christmas.  Thank you.

Thank you, everybody.

END
12:16 P.M. EST

Declaraciones del Presidente sobre la votación por la Cámara de Representantes para aprobar la Ley DREAM

Felicito a la Cámara de Representantes, su presidenta Pelosi, el congresista Berman, el Grupo Hispano del Congreso (Congressional Hispanic Caucus) y otros líderes del Congreso por dar el histórico paso de aprobar hoy la Ley DREAM en una votación bipartidista. Esta votación no sólo es lo correcto para los jóvenes de talento que quieren ponerse al servicio del país al que conocen como propio, ya sea continuando su educación o prestando servicio militar, sino que es lo correcto para Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. Su talento nos enriquece, y el éxito de sus esfuerzos contribuirá al éxito y seguridad de nuestra nación. Y como concluyó la Oficina de Presupuesto del Congreso (Congressional Budget Office), entidad no partidista, la Ley DREAM puede recortar en $2,200 millones el déficit en los próximos 10 años. Insto enérgicamente al Senado de Estados Unidos a que también apruebe la Ley DREAM para que pueda yo promulgarla lo antes posible.  

Esta votación es un paso de vital importancia para hacer lo que el pueblo estadounidense espera de quienes dictan la política: que trabajemos juntos para hacerles frente a los problemas más urgentes del país. La Ley DREAM corrige una de las peores fallas de un sistema de inmigración aquejado de problemas, una falla que fuerza a muchachos que han crecido en Estados Unidos, hablan inglés, han sobresalido en sus comunidades en sus studios, como atletas o voluntarios, a poner en suspenso su vida y talento, lo que tiene un precio muy alto para ellos y nuestra nación.

También felicito a la Cámara de Representantes por ir más allá de los trillados debates falsos y frases hechas que durante demasiado tiempo llevaron a los extremos las discusiones sobre inmigración. La Ley DREAM no es una amnistía; se trata de rendimiento de cuentas y de aprovechar la fuente de talento en la que ya hemos invertido. La Ley DREAM es parte de un debate más extenso que se requiere para restaurar la responsabilidad y el rendimiento de cuentas generalizados en nuestro fallido sistema de inmigración. Mi gobierno continuará haciendo todo lo posible para avanzar con la reforma de inmigración; la votación de hoy en la Cámara de Representantes es un paso importante en este vital esfuerzo.