Remarks by the President at Meeting of the Export Council

Eisenhower Executive Office Building

11:30 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, good morning, everybody.  I just want to offer a few thoughts before you return to the meeting.  Obviously we've seen some significant economic progress here in the United States over the last year.  Our businesses have added almost 11 million jobs over the past 57 months.  This year our economy has already created more jobs [than] in any year since the 1990s, with still a month to go.  All told, since 2010, we've created more jobs here in the United States than Japan, Europe, and all advanced nations combined.

And one of the reasons that we've been able to create so many jobs here in the United States is because our exports have been strong.  Last year our businesses sold a record $2.3 trillion of Made in America goods and services.  And these exports support more than 11 million American jobs -- typically, by the way, jobs that pay higher wages. 

And so this Council is designed to build on this progress.  It is in part a factor in the progress that we've made.  We've had some terrific suggestions from some of our leading businesses, but also some small businesses and medium-sized businesses who are starting to sell overseas.  The recommendations that have been generated by the Council have been implemented by our various agencies, and we're here not to rest on our laurels but rather to continue to make a big push to sell even more overseas.

I've said before I will go anywhere around the world to go to bat for American companies and American workers.  We're going to keep on pushing trade agreements that benefit American companies and American workers and ensure that we've got a fair and even playing field, particularly in the fastest-growing markets.  We're going to work with Congress to try to renew trade promotion authority and secure approval for a very ambitious TransPacific Partnership agreement, which would create a higher standard for trade in the fastest-growing, most populous and dynamic region in the world, the Asia Pacific region. 

We're also announcing -- because manufacturing has been a real bright spot in our growing economy -- some additional measures to boost manufacturing here in the United States so we can sell more manufacturing goods overseas.  We're announcing today more than $290 million in new investments to launch two additional high-tech manufacturing hubs.  One is going to be focusing on flexible computer chips that can be woven into everything from the gears in a helicopter to the fabric in your shirt.  Another is going to focus on advance sensors that can dramatically cut energy costs for our factories.

So far, we have launched eight of these hubs, and we intend to get 16 done, so we're more than half of the way there.  And they’re helping us to compete for the next generation of manufacturing.  One of the reasons that manufacturing has been growing faster here than the overall economy is because of real savings on the energy front, outstanding workers, but also because our companies have retooled and once again made that investment in innovation that has been the hallmark of American manufacturing for years.

I also want to thank many of the folks around this room who’ve been working with us to find ways that we can increase and improve the pipeline for skilled workers going into the companies that ultimately end up exporting goods and services overseas.  To make sure that our workers have those skills, today, my Secretary of Labor, Tom Perez, is announcing a $100 million competition to help expand apprenticeship programs across our country.  Many of the companies around this table have helped design it or are already participating in these apprenticeship programs.  They give talented, motivated young people the chance to get an outstanding career.  They get a pathway, a door open to them that allows them to succeed and secure a position in the middle class, and it helps us recruit the kind of workers that are going to keep us competitive for years to come.

Finally, we’ve got real opportunities to make some bipartisan progress this year on some areas that will make us more competitive in this global marketplace.  For example, today our companies face the highest corporate tax rate in the world on paper.  There are so many loopholes that some end up paying a much lower rate; some pay the full freight.  It distorts our allocation of capital.  It makes us less competitive relative to businesses that are headquartered overseas.  We need to fix that. And I think that there’s genuine interest on both the Democratic and Republican side in making that happen. 

And so I just want to thank everybody on the Export Council for the outstanding work that you’ve already done.  I’m looking forward to hearing about the recommendations that you have generated during the course of this meeting.  And rest assured that I will be your partner for the remainder of my time in this office, making sure that we have the strongest, most competitive companies, the best workers, the best research and development, and the highest exports that we’ve ever seen in our history.

Thank you very much. 

Thanks, pool.  Thank you, pool.

Q    Mr. President, do you agree with John Brennan that the CIA’s interrogation techniques saved lives?

THE PRESIDENT:  We're talking about exports, Jon.  Thank you. 

Q    Mr. President, do you agree with John Brennan that the CIA’s interrogation program saved lives?

THE PRESIDENT:  We’re talking about exports, Jon.  Thank you. 

MR. McNERNEY:  Listen, thank you very much, Mr. President.  If you look historically at the PEC, there has never been a time in its history where the administration, you personally, and the people on your Cabinet have supported this group to a greater extent.  And we feel that engagement, and your presence here today once again makes that point.  It energizes us, and I think it moves the agenda along.

What we did today, we focused heavily on trade with Ambassador Froman.  I’d like to maybe come back and get your perspective on how we’re going to move that forward.  Everybody in the room is leaning forward in every kind of way to get that done. 

I think we reported out on the basis of six of our subcommittees’ recommendations we’re going to send to you, which you will get in due course.  I think the other thing we talked about was a fact-finding trip we made to Turkey and Poland, which I think gave everybody in this group an on-the-ground understanding of the impact of the leadership of Penny and Mike and others on furthering things along.

But I think if there were two things I would just sort of tee up -- and I know we have limited time with you -- one would be getting these things done.  We all think it’s the right time, and you’ve suggested that to us at the BRT and some other places. Any comments you’d have for us to help you get it done. 

And then the other thing that came up is China.  You’ve spent a lot of time with President Xi personally connecting.  Penny is going to take the leadership role, starting in Chicago next week, JCCT.  We’re trying to engage.  But any comments on China would be -- those are sort of the themes that came out of the group this morning.

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, if you heard from Mike Froman, then you heard from --

MR. McNERNEY:  The Oracle.  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  -- the guy who’s in the trenches on these trade negotiations.  I’ll just give you a couple of quick top lines. 

First of all, I’m much more optimistic about us being able to close out an agreement with our TPP partners than I was last year.  Doesn’t mean that it’s a done deal, but I think the odds of us being able to get a strong agreement are significantly higher than 50-50, whereas last year I think it was still sort of up for grabs.

The question then becomes, assuming we are able to get the kind of agreement that is good for American workers and good for American businesses, how do we proceed in Congress.  I think that despite the fact that we had an election I did not -- I wasn’t that happy with, the dynamics really don’t change in terms of the number of votes in the House and the Senate that are there to be gotten for a good trade deal.  But we have to make the case.  And I think we can make a very strong case that what we’re doing here is really setting a higher bar that will give us more access to markets, will give us greater IP protection, will make sure that U.S. companies both in goods and in services are less disadvantaged by non-tariff barriers and state support and procurement practices in these countries than they’ve been in the past.

The pushback that we’re going to get domestically derives from a couple of sources.  One is from not just labor -- not just organized labor, but a public perception generally that trade has resulted in an erosion of our manufacturing base as companies moved overseas in search of lower-wage labor.  And my essential response to those arguments is not to deny that there have been some consequences to China’s ascension to the WTO and offshoring, but rather that that horse is out of the barn.  We are now in the worst of all worlds where they have access to our markets, much of that shift in search of low-wage labor has already occurred, and yet, we don’t have access to those markets that are growing and no levers to force these other countries to increase their labor standards and their environmental standards.

So instead of fighting the last war, what we need to be doing is looking forward.  And there’s no doubt that what Mike is negotiating creates higher labor standards and greater access than the status quo.  And that’s what we should be measuring against.  

I’ll give you just one very specific example, and that’s Vietnam.  Vietnam is probably the most interesting country involved in these negotiations:  A, it's still a one-party system that provides workers very few rights, if any, and yet, in order to be part of TPP, they’re having to make some pretty radical shifts in how they treat workers.  They’re not going to suddenly have the same labor standards as Germany does, but there’s going to be an improvement.  And by us establishing a baseline for labor rights even in a country that has traditionally had no labor rights we’re improving our position not deteriorating our position. 

The same is true for the other set of critics that we may receive and that is from the environmental community, although, there’s divisions between the large environmental groups.  As I said at the BRT, I don’t know exactly what Malaysia’s environmental rules are, but I guarantee you they are lower than ours.  (Laughter.)  And for us to be able to include in a TPP agreement basic environmental standards is a win for us.  It puts us not at a disadvantage; it puts us at more of an advantage. 

The final criticism -- not the final, but another criticism that we’re going to receive domestically is this issue of -- what’s the term in terms of lawsuits?

Q    (Inaudible.) 

THE PRESIDENT:  Right.  And we’ve looked at the facts and, generally speaking, I think the language that’s being used allows every country to maintain its public health and safety and welfare provisions.  Really what we’re trying to get at here is making sure that foreign companies are not treated differently than domestic companies.  That’s the primary concern, is a discriminatory application of rules in ways that are arbitrary.
And I think that that’s something that all of us should agree on.

The big bugaboo that’s lifted up there is tobacco companies suing poorer countries to make sure that anti-smoking legislation is banned, or at least tying them up with so much litigation that ultimately smaller countries cave. 

Those are issues that I think can be negotiated -- there are some areas of particular sensitivity or concern.  But overall, the principle that we should make sure that U.S. companies, when they invest or export to other countries, are abiding with their safety rules but that those public health and safety rules are not being discriminatorily applied or a ruse in order to keep us out.  That should be something everybody is in favor of.

So in terms of timing, how TPP happens versus TPA, I think regardless of the sequence, we’re going to have to make the sale, and it’s going to be very important for business to be out there and championthis and show that this is ultimately good for you, for your suppliers, for your workers.  And if you look at all the major exporters -- you take a Boeing, presumably in every congressional district you’ve got to find a bunch of suppliers who are making the case, and their workers are making the case.  So it’s not just a bunch of CEOs calling but it’s people who understand that they’ve got a stake in it. 

So I think that’s on the labor front.  On China, all of what we’re doing with TPP has a direct application to China.  China is actually not that complicated.  They will take whatever they can get.  They will exploit every advantage that they have until they meet some resistance.  But they have a great interest in the relationship with the United States and recognize the interdependence that has evolved between our two economies.

And so the key with China I think is to continue to simply press them on those areas where trade is imbalanced, whether it’s on their currency practices, whether it’s on IP protection, whether it’s on their state-owned enterprises.  The business investment treaty that they have shown an interest in negotiating could end up being a significant piece of business.  We actually saw some movement during my last trip on issues surrounding technology.  And I think that it’s indicative of their interest in trying to get this right. 

And by the way, there’s been some suggestion that by doing TPP we’re trying to contain or disadvantage China.  We’re actually not.  What we are trying to do is make sure that rather than a race to the bottom in the region there’s a reasonable bar within which we can operate.  And we hope that then China actually joins us in not necessarily formally being a member of TPP but in adopting some of the best practices that ensure fairness in operations.

And the climate change announcement that we made was very significant.  For those of you who are impacted by the power plant rule that the EPA is initiating here, it’s good to know that one of the arguments that’s always been made about us dealing with climate change or environmental issues generally here in the United States is, well, it puts us at a disadvantage with China.  Well, we’re trying to take away that excuse by making sure that China is also abiding by higher standards and in a verifiable way.  So we’re going to be focused on that. 

MR. McNERNEY:  Do you have time for one more question?

THE PRESIDENT:  One more question.

MR. McNERNEY:  I think one of the things we talked about this morning with Vice President Biden was Russia sanctions.  And I think, by and large, the business community, while there’s some debate about exactly to what degree this, that, or the other thing, that these have been implemented very successfully and very methodically, worked well with the business community to maximize impact -- or minimize the impact to us.

And so there was a pretty robust discussion that I think many of us in the room ended up saying, whether we’re in the third inning or the eighth inning, just keep moving.  And then there’s a lot of support in the business community for what you’re doing -- keeping Europe lined up, which is our biggest concern.  Merkel seems to be hanging in there.  Anyway, the Vice President gave us a very robust discussion.  Any views from you  -- I know you’ve talked to a lot of your peers on the subject.

THE PRESIDENT:  Joe has been very close to this, so he probably gave you a pretty sound overview.  I think you identified what’s been important in this process, and that is our ability to keep Europe in lockstep with us.  There may be some movement out of Congress for us to get out ahead of Europe further.  We have argued that that would be counterproductive. And we may need some help from the business community in making that argument to the soon-to-be Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and others. 

Putin does not have good cards, and he actually has not played them as well as sometimes the Western press seems to give him credit for.  There’s been an improvisational quality to this whole process because the situation in Ukraine actually took Russia by surprise.  And it’s working for him politically, domestically, but profoundly damaging in terms of their economy long term, not just short term.

Where Putin will succeed is if it creates a rift in the transatlantic relationship.  If you start seeing Europe divided from the United States that would be a strategic victory.  And I’m intent on preventing that.  And the way to prevent is making sure that we are taking into account the very real economic impact on Europe from these sanctions, being measured in terms of how we apply them, and having some strategic patience.

The notion that we can simply ratchet up sanctions further and further and further, and then, ultimately, Putin changes his mind I think is a miscalculation.  What will ultimately lead to Russia making a strategic decision is if they recognize that Europe is standing with us and will be in it for the long haul and we are, in fact, patient.  And if they see that there aren’t any cracks in the coalition, then, over time, you could see them saying that the costs to their economy outweigh whatever strategic benefits that they get.

So you’ve got, I’m sure, everything about Ukraine, soup to nuts, from Joe.  I’ll just emphasize as a takeaway for the business community that we have been successful with sanctions precisely because we’ve been systematic about it and made sure there wasn’t a lot of daylight between us and the Europeans.  That should continue.  And even though sometimes it’s tempting for us to say we can go further, it won’t do us any good if it means suddenly Europe peels off and then are backfilling various things that U.S. companies are obliged to abide by.

All right? 

MR. McNERNEY:  Terrific.  Thank you very much.

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you for the great work you’re doing.  Keep it up.  (Applause.) 

END
11:57 A.M. EST

Remarks by the President At Early Education Summit

South Court Auditorium

11:58 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  (Applause.)  Hey!  Give Alajah a big round of applause.  (Applause.)  Thank you so much.  Everybody have a seat. 

Now, Alajah clearly knows where power is.  (Laughter.)  She knows who has clout and who does not.  You did a wonderful job.  I’m so proud of you.  Good job.

MS. LANE: Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT:  You’re welcome.  (Laughter.)  In addition to Alajah, we have some important personages here.  I want to thank, first of all, America’s Secretary of Education -- somebody who is so passionate about making sure every child gets a chance in this country -- Arne Duncan.  Where’s Arne?  (Applause.)  We’ve got some of early education’s strongest supporters in Congress from both parties who are here.  We’ve got Bob Casey from the great state of Pennsylvania.  (Applause.)  We’ve got representatives Richard Richard Hanna.  Where’s Richard?  There he is.  (Applause.)  Jared Polis.  (Applause.)  Bobby Scott.  (Applause.) 

I want to thank the business leaders and philanthropists and mayors, all who came here from across America to make big new commitments to our kids.  And I know we’ve got thousands of parents and teachers and alumni from Head Start and Early Head Start watching this live in New Orleans and Fort Lauderdale.  So please give them a shout out, as well.  Thank you, guys.  (Applause.)  

Now, you may know that last week brought some good economic news, building on the momentum that we’ve seen over the past couple of years.  Over the first 11 months of 2014, our economy has created more jobs than in any full year since the 1990s.  So already -- we’ve still got a month to go -- we’ve already seen more jobs created this year than any time in over a decade.  Over the last four years, America has put more people back to work than Europe, Japan, and every other advanced economy combined.  Overall wages are rising again, which is a welcome sign for millions of families.  So for all the work we have left to do, America is outpacing most of the world.  And if we seize this moment, we have the chance to lead the next century just like we led the last one, and make sure that citizens in this country, our children, can have a better life than we did.

But in order to reach our full potential, kids like Alajah need a chance to reach their full potential.  Because what makes America exceptional isn’t just the size of our economy or our influence around the globe -- that is a byproduct of a more fundamental fact about America.  The promise we make to our children; the idea that no matter who they are, what they look like, where they start, how much their parents earn, they can make it if they try.  It’s the essential promise of America -– that where you start should not and will not determine how far you can go. 

And we’re here today because it’s never too early in a child’s life to begin delivering on that promise.  I’m preaching to the choir now, but I’m going to go ahead and preach.  Study after study shows that children who get a high-quality early education earn more over their lifetimes than peers who don’t.  They’re more likely to finish school.  They’re less likely to go to prison.  They’re more likely to hold a job.  They’re more likely to start a stable family of their own -- which means that you have a generational transmission of the early starts that kids can get.  Early education is one of the best investments we can make not just in a child’s future, but in our country.  It’s one of the best investments we can make.

Today, my Council of Economic Advisers is putting out a report showing that for every dollar we invest now, we can save more than eight dollars later on, by boosting graduation rates, increasing earnings, reducing violent crime.  And the study also shows that access to high-quality, affordable childcare means more employment and higher incomes for working parents, especially working moms.  Not surprising there.  I mean, men, we’re getting better, but we’re not where we need to be.  And moms all too often are juggling between work and childcare.  When we have good, high-quality early childhood education, then suddenly we’re freeing up everybody to be on the field. 

So early education is a win for everybody.  It saves taxpayer dollars.  It gives our children a better chance.  And some states are proving that it’s possible to give every child that chance.  For 16 years, every child in Oklahoma has been guaranteed a preschool education.  Georgia is building on their successful preschool program by launching something called “Talk With Me Baby” -- which sounds like an Al Green song, but is actually -- (laughter) -- I’m not singing.  But it’s actually a program to make sure make sure language learning begins at the very first weeks of a child’s life.  Now, let’s face it -- Oklahoma and Georgia are not places where I do particularly well politically.  They’re not known as wild-eyed liberal states.  But it just goes to show you that this is an issue that’s bigger than politics.  It’s not a red issue or a blue issue.  It’s about doing what’s best for our kids, for our country, and that’s an American issue.  And we’ve had some terrific Republican, as well as Democratic, governors and mayors who have really taken leadership on this issue because they recognize it’s a good investment. 

And that’s why, in my 2013 State of the Union Address, I laid out a plan to make sure our children have every opportunity they deserve from the moment they are born.  And I asked Congress to work with me to make high-quality pre-K available to every four-year-old in America.  Congress hasn’t gotten that done yet, but Democrats and Republicans came together to take some steps in the right direction, with new grants that will expand preschool for children across the country.   

And in the nearly two years since I called on Congress to take action, we’ve seen 34 states, along with cities and communities across our country, take action on their own.  All told, they’ve invested more than a billion dollars in our children.  In Michigan, a Republican governor signed the nation’s second-largest state budget increase for early education into law.  Last month, voters in Denver approved a ballot measure to renew and expand their preschool program through 2026.  In New York, Mayor de Blasio made pre-K for all a centerpiece of his campaign.  And this year, more than 50,000 children are enrolled in New York City preschools -- more than twice as many as in 2013.  (Applause.)  There must be a New Yorker here.  

So we’re making progress.  But here’s the thing:  For all the progress we’ve made, for all the children who are on a better path, today fewer than 3 in 10 four-year-olds are enrolled in high-quality preschool.  It’s not that working parents don’t want their kids to be in safe, high-quality learning environments every day.  It’s that they can’t afford the costs of private preschool.  And for poor children who need it most, the lack of access to a great preschool can affect their entire lives.  We’ve got kids in this country who are every bit as talented as Malia and Sasha, but they’re starting out the race a step behind.  And they deserve better.  And the whole country will do better if we fix that.  So that’s what this day is all about. 

I’m pleased to announce that my administration will award $750 million of new investment in our youngest Americans.  Secretary Duncan is awarding $250 million in new Preschool Development Grants to 18 states.  We’re giving tens of thousands more children the opportunity to go to high-quality preschool: almost 3,000 preschool students in Nevada, for example, will be able to attend full-day preschool, instead of a half-day program.  Montana will create new high-quality preschool programs that will serve kids in 16 communities, including eight communities on Indian lands.  

And in order to create a full pipeline of learning programs, from birth all the way to the beginning of Kindergarten, Secretary Burwell is announcing the winners of a $500 million competition that will bring early care and education to more than 30,000 infants and toddlers next year.  Our child care centers will partner with our Early Head Start Centers to help kids from virtually every state, from rural Virginia to my hometown of Chicago.

So we’re stepping up, but as all of you I’m sure have already heard, investing in our kids is not just the job of the federal government -- it’s the job of all of us.  So in my State of the Union Address this year, I promised to pull together a coalition of elected officials, and business leaders, and philanthropists who are willing to help more kids access the high-quality preschool that they need.  And here you are.  (Laughter.) 

Today, we are delivering on that promise with a new campaign called “Invest in Us.”  I want to highlight a few of commitments folks in this room because I think it shows how much interest there is in this issue, how much evidence there is behind making the kinds of investments for our kids that we’re talking about. 

So first of all, you’re bringing entire communities together on behalf of children.  In Northeast Ohio, for example, Cuyahoga County, the city of Cleveland, local schools, businesses, foundations, and child welfare agencies have all embraced a single plan to ensure that all three- and four-year olds have access to high-quality education.  So today the Greater Cleveland Community is announcing $10.2 million in new investments in early childhood programs.  And that’s going to make a difference.  Susie Buffett is leading an effort that will invest $15 million in Omaha.  That’s making a difference, bringing folks together.

Second, as important as preschool is, you’re working to make sure a great education starts even earlier.  The George Kaiser Family Foundation reaches out to new parents in Tulsa with a hospital visit before the baby even goes home.  After that, they provide parenting classes and literacy programs all the way through a child’s third birthday, because they believe that every parent can be a teacher and every home can be a preschool.  And as a consequence, they’re committing $25 million, in additional dollars, to help achieve that goal.  

Number three, you’re supporting early education programs that we already have.  So the Foundation for Child Development is working with the New York City Department of Education to help train early-learning teachers.  Disney is giving away $55 million worth of books and apps for young learners.  And judging by trick or treating here at the White House this year, if Disney wanted to throw in some of those princess costumes from “Frozen,” that will make a difference.  (Laughter.)  I mean, there were a lot of Elsas.  They just kept on coming, sort of nonstop.  (Laughter.) 

And finally, you’re investing in new, innovative approaches that have the chance to transform the way we teach our children.  So thanks to neuroscientists and psychologists and child development experts, we know more about how young minds work than ever before.  So we’re got the Bezos Family Foundation announcing a $5 million commitment to turn these new insights into new tools for teachers and parents, so that our children get the most out of the time and money that we invest in them. And J.B. Pritzker and M.K. Pritzker, their family foundation is committing $25 million to build on cutting-edge research to help our most vulnerable children succeed.

So all told, in addition to what we’re going to be doing at the federal level, organizations here today are making more than $330 million in new commitments.  That’s worth applauding.  (Applause.)  And that’s pretty extraordinary, that’s real money, even in Washington, that’s real money.  (Laughter.)  But it’s also just the beginning.  So I’m calling on all Americans across our country to make their own commitments to our children.  And I’m asking our members of Congress for their commitment as well.  Outside Washington, giving our children a fair shot from the earliest age is a priority that crosses party lines.   So I hope that the new Congress next year will work with me to make pre-K available for all of our kids.  It will not just grow the economy for everybody –- it will change young lives forever.

Just ask Chuck Mills.  Where is Chuck?  Chuck is here.  There’s Chuck, right there.  Chuck was born in 1962, the youngest of six children, raised by a single mom.  A lot of the kids in the neighborhoods where Chuck grew up did not finish school, and a lot of those young people ended up in prison.  But in 1966, Chuck’s mom saw a flier at a church for a new program called “Project Head Start.”  Chuck became part of just the second class of Head Start students -– and two years later, he had learned so much that he skipped kindergarten and went straight to first grade.  And Chuck’s been overachieving ever since.  (Laughter.)  He graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy.  Captain Mills piloted Marine One for two different Presidents.  That is something that you want the best people for.  (Laughter.)  Today, Chuck is the founder and CEO of not one, but two companies in Northern Virginia.  “My life,” Chuck said, “can be summed up in the words, ‘Wasn’t supposed to.’”

“Wasn’t supposed to.”  Well, that’s not just Chuck’s story; that’s America’s story.  America is a nation that “wasn’t supposed to.”  Our entire story is improbable.  All of us are here because this country gave someone in our family a chance to beat the odds.  None of us were supposed to.  Those of us lucky enough to share in this country’s promise now have a responsibility to ensure that for all the young people coming behind us who aren’t supposed to, that they have those same opportunities. 

There are a whole bunch of Chucks out there, all across the country.  We have to invest in them.  We have to invest in our communities.  We have to invest in us.  And if we do that, we give every child the same chance that we got, then America will remain the greatest nation on Earth.  And I thank all of you for the extraordinary efforts you are making in fulfilling that promise.

Thank you, God bless you.  God bless America.  (Applause.)

END                                             
12:16 P.M. EST

Remarks by the President to Senior Leaders of the Federal Workforce

Washington Hilton

Washington, D.C.

11:47 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  Thank you so much, everybody.  Thank you very much.  Everybody, have a seat, have a seat.  (Applause.)  Thank you very much.  Thank you.  Well, thank you for that introduction, Elliott, and your service.  Thanks to all of my members of the Cabinet who are here today.  And welcome, everybody who is here, as well as joining us online. 

My message here is simple:  Thank you.  I’d like to come bearing raises and perks.  (Laughter.)  But I can’t.  (Laughter.)  But what I can do is tell you how important you are not just to me, but to the country. 

Many of you do what you do at extraordinary sacrifice.  You could work at a lot of places.  You made a decision at some point in your life to serve your country -- your country is stronger because you made that decision.  You keep America running -- our airports, our embassies, our financial system.  You take care of our troops and their families.  You do it without fanfare -– in fact, doing your job right often means nobody hears about you.  (Laughter.)  They only report when something goes wrong, or when there’s a shutdown and suddenly somebody notices -- oh, we need that and nobody is doing it.  (Laughter.) 

And in recent years, it’s gotten more challenging for so many of you.  You work under tough circumstances, whether it’s sequestration, pay freeze, shutdown, and, more importantly, a political climate where folks too often talk down government for cheap applause.  (Applause.)   

So my main message is, thank you.  But part of my message today also is to recognize that we do have an issue that we’ve got to address, and that is, Americans don’t trust government like we used to.  Part of that is a very deliberate strategy of trying to undermine government.  Part of it is political opportunism.  But part of it is our need to constantly adapt to the demands of the 21st century.

That’s why we need you, and that’s why we need the best and brightest of coming generations to serve.  And that’s why those of us who believe that government can and must be a force for good; those of us that believe that together, we can keep our country safe, and guarantee basic security, and make sure everybody has a shot at success; those of us who believe, as President Lincoln did, that there are some things we should and must do on our own, but there are some things that we can and should do better together; those of us who believe in both individual initiative, but also the common good -- we’ve got to work harder to make sure that government works.

We have to constantly ask ourselves, how can we serve Americans better?  How can we yank this government into the 21st century and make it smarter and faster and more responsive?  Because if all we’re doing is hunkering down and trying to push back against complaints and criticisms -- many of which are unfair -- but we’re not engaging in self-reflection and trying to figure out how every single day we can be doing our jobs a little bit better, then we’re failing the American people, and we’re failing an incredible tradition that helped to build this country that you are a part of.

So I’ve got a couple suggestions in this process; I want to know yours.  But first, I want to just offer a few examples of people who ask themselves that question:  How can I do it better every single day, and, as a consequence, make this country stronger?

Case study number one:  When the Ebola outbreak began, Gary Penner and the State Department’s Medical Services team helped swiftly transport American aid workers with Ebola to the United States for life-saving treatment.  And then Gary traveled to our embassies in Liberia and Sierra Leone and Guinea to brief all our personnel in the region on the steps they should take to stay safe.  And at a time of stress and fear, Gary and his team helped keep people calm and prepared and healthy.  And so Gary’s been an integral part of a team that, as we speak, is in West Africa saving lives.  And for that, we want to thank Gary.  (Applause.) 

Example number two:  We worked with the international community to destroy Syria’s declared chemical weapons, which have made the region and the world safer.  And it was Kevin Tokarski’s job to help get those stockpiles out of Syria and onto a ship so they could be taken away and destroyed.  You probably never heard of Kevin’s team at the Transportation Department -- that’s what happens when you do your job well.  (Applause.)  Fortunately for the world, they did their job well, and we thank you, Kevin, for not making news and getting those chemical weapons out.  (Applause.)  

Example number three:  Although everybody here is doing remarkable work, let’s face it, usually what we do isn’t rocket science -- unless it is.  (Laughter.)  So Julie Kramer White is helping America launch a new era of space exploration.  Julie is NASA’s chief engineer for Orion, the new spacecraft that could carry humans farther into space than we’ve ever seen before.  (Applause.)  I’m sure you were all as proud as I was to see Orion’s first successful flight test last Friday.  America was already the first nation to land a rover on Mars; when an American is the first human to set foot there, we’ll have Julie and her team to thank.  And at that point, I’ll be out of the presidency and I might hitch a ride.  (Laughter.)  So thank you, Julie, for your great work.  (Applause.) 

I could go on indefinitely.  Our senior leaders here and around the globe are the best of the best.  I have to tell you, by the way, increasingly, we’re attracting folks from the private sector to come and work with us and help brainstorm with us around issues, and it always amuses me when they have been around here for a while and they report back to me, wow, these people are really smart, they really work hard.  (Laughter.)  Yes, it shouldn’t surprise you.  But it's a testament to the fact that, too often, you don’t get that notice.  And with your help, we’re working to give you a little more support to keep attracting the new talent that we’re going to need for the future.

So first, we’re creating a new initiative called the White House Leadership Development Program for Future Senior Career Executives.  Talented civil servants are going to have a chance to rotate through different agencies on high-priority assignments, and then they’ll bring back their new expertise to their home agency.  We want great ideas to have the chance to spread.  We want people to get new experiences that reenergize them, reinvigorate them.  We want those ideas to cross-pollinate across agencies.  We want the next generation of leaders to have the experience of solving problems and building relationships across the government.  Because one thing that we have to acknowledge is that our government often statutorily was organized for the needs of the 1930s or ‘40s or ‘60s, and too often, we get stove-piped at a time when we need people with different skillsets and different agencies to be working together.  So this is a terrific opportunity for folks to create networks across government.  

Second, we want to do more to recruit, develop, and retain exceptional civil servants, and nobody knows how to do that better than you.  So we’re creating a White House Advisory Group on Senior Executive Service Reform, and it's going to include leaders from large and small agencies as well as rising leaders –- we want to hear from them too.  And we also want to make sure you’re hearing from your employees.  Every year, they give feedback through the federal employee survey, but too few of you see it.  So starting today, all of you are going to have access to a website where we’ve assembled that feedback in a way that’s clear and easy to read.  It’s called UnlockTalent.gov -- it's worth checking out.  

One of the things that we know in the private sector about continuous improvement is you've got to have the folks right there on the front lines able to make suggestions and know that they're heard, and to not simply be rewarded for doing an outstanding job, but to see their ideas implemented in ways that really make a difference.  Because most of the time, people get involved in government because they want to make a difference.  And there’s no greater satisfaction than when you see something that you identified as a better way of doing things implemented. 

Third, in recognition of those who go above and beyond every day, we’re creating an award to recognize outstanding service.  I’m surprised this hasn’t been done before, but we're going to start.  When an American needs something from their government –- whether an education grant, or a passport, or help turning a great idea into a small business -– they’re interacting with many of you.  You can make enormous differences in the lives of individual Americans every single day. 

We are going to honor the people who do this job best.  Because ultimately, that’s what it’s about -– making sure our government serves the American people.  And I’m going to keep doing everything I can to support you and your teams.  I want you to know that I’ve got your back, because I know that for many of you, this job is more than just a paycheck -- it’s a chance to serve the country that you love.  That’s why some of the best civil servants never quite leave the job.  Even after they retire, or could retire, they keep on serving.   

Which brings me to two public servants that many of you know.  When Elton Lester began his career at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the department was still pretty new.  He was the only person of color in the General Counsel’s office.  And today, thanks in part to Elton’s efforts, HUD’s workforce has grown more diverse.  And now Elton helps oversee every one of HUD’s insured housing and assisted housing programs even though, after more than 40 years in public service, he could retire.  He could be getting a check every month and not working.  And that's dedication, that he’s still showing up, because he knows his stuff and he wants to make a difference.

Dwight Ink was a member of the civil service under seven Presidents -- briefed President Eisenhower, led the recovery effort after the 1964 Alaskan earthquake.  I confess I didn't know there was an earthquake in Alaska in 1964.  (Laughter.)  I was three at the time.  (Laughter.)

When he was 70, he retired -- kind of.  He stayed active on the issue he’s most passionate about, and that's strengthening the civil service, helped lead public administration organizations, wrote articles about how to make government better.  Today, Dwight is 92.  He’s still at it.  He and his wife, Dona, are here with us here today.  I’d ask all of you to join me in giving Dwight and all the retired civil servants here a big round of applause.  There’s Dwight back there.  (Applause.) 

So that's the kind of spirit of service that built America.  That's the commitment that keeps America strong.  And now it’s up to us to build upon the work that generations of public servants have done to make our nation stronger and more prosperous.  And every day, I am proud to be your partner.

This is going to continue to be a tough environment.  There’s not going to be a lot of new money flowing.  There is going to continue to be ideological battles about -- for those who think that the market is king and there’s no room for any kind of regulatory efforts to make our air and water cleaner, or to make our workers be in a safer work environment, to assure that every child, not just some, get opportunity.  It’s going to continue to be easy copy for the press to focus on the one thing that goes wrong instead of the 99 things that go right -- that's not going to change.

But what I tell my team in the White House every single day, and I want to tell all of you -- and some of you know this and some of you have lived it, Dwight certainly has -- there is no greater opportunity to help more people, to make a bigger difference -- in some cases to help millions, in some cases to help billions around the world -- than to be in the positions that we are privileged to be in right now.

And for the short time that we're on this Earth, I always tell my daughters there are two things you need to learn.  One is you need to learn how to love and make connections with people, to show empathy and be able to stand in somebody else’s shoes, and understand what it is to be a friend or a spouse or a parent.  And the other thing is being useful, just being of use -- knowing that when you wake up every day, you have the chance to maybe make sure that somebody who didn't have a job last week has a job; to make sure that somebody who is driving to work gets there safely because the road is safe; to make sure that somebody who didn't have health care now has it, and as a consequence, are able to catch that disease before it kills them; to make sure that some child somewhere that doesn't have much of a chance suddenly gets that chance, and their whole world, their whole life suddenly unfolds differently because of what you did. 

What an incredible privilege that is.  (Applause.)  What better way to spend your careers than what you do right now.  I want you to wake up every day knowing that the President of the United States appreciates you for making that difference. 

Thank you.  God bless you, God bless America.  (Applause.)

END
12:06 P.M. EST

Remarks by Vice President Joe Biden to the 2014 Saban Forum

The Willard Hotel

Washington, D.C.

 

1:10 P.M. EST

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  We're a few minutes late because I was in the back with Haim.  I was interviewing for a place on one of his many networks he owns.  So I don't know how I did, but we’ll talk about it later.

Look, folks, it’s a delight to be here.  And, Joe, it’s a delight to see you.  I haven’t seen Joe Lieberman in such a long time, and, Hadassah.  Joe’s chair in the Senate, seat in the Senate was directly in front of mine for a number of years when Joe was there.  And every time Joe would get up to speak, I’d whisper in his ear, say it ain’t so, Joe.  (Laughter.)  Say it ain’t so.  It’s good to see you, Joe.

And, Nita, it’s good to see you.  I shouldn’t probably do this -- Robert Wexler is here I’m told, an old, old buddy.  And I see Sandy.  It’s hard to see in this light.  And Dan Shapiro.  There are so many good friends that are here.

Before I begin, I’d like to say a brief word about the failed rescue mission that occurred yesterday.  As, with all of you I’m sure,  our prayers are with the families of Luke Somers, who was murdered yesterday by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

We, [and] the intelligence community worked very, very hard and relentlessly with the government to try to figure out how we could rescue Luke, who was a photo-journalist. Like Dan Pearl and Steven Sotloff and James Foley, and so many other brave women and men who’ve traveled from the safety of this country into harm’s way to tell the stories of the lives of others faraway- a noble mission. 

The truth of the matter is since the conflict really began involving us in almost over 10 years, the percentage of journalists and Foreign Service officers who’ve been killed is almost as high on a percentage basis as some of our military missions.

And to state the obvious, the women and men who -- of the Special Forces, who were engaged in these two rescue missions did an incredible job and inflicted serious damage on the captors.  But this time they were unable to save Luke.

But I think that we should also note, the President and I are grateful to the Yemeni government for their cooperation in these efforts to fight the terrorists. 

We can only -- I’ll speak for myself, I can only imagine how Luke’s parents feel today.  Murdered in the second attempt, came so close.  This is a despicable crime.  And we mean what we say when we say from -- speaking for the intelligence community, the military, the government as a whole, we will be relentless in our efforts to bring to justice those who have caused -- some already have been brought to justice in the raid.  But there’s much more to do.  It’s a tragic reminder of the violence we face in the Middle East and a potent reminder of what Israelis face every day.

Haim, members of the Israeli Cabinet, Cabinet ministers, party leaders, old friends, members of the diplomatic corps, it’s a pleasure to look out and see so many old faces, people I’ve worked with -- and I hate to admit this -- for over 40 years to make good on our commitment to guarantee a secure nation-state of Israel that is secure, survivable and is -- I’ve said before, if there weren’t an Israel, we’d have to invent one.  If there weren’t an Israel -- we always talk about Israel from this perspective as if we're doing some favor.  We are meeting a moral obligation, but it’s so much more than a moral obligation.   It’s overwhelmingly in the self-interest of the United States of America to have a secure, democratic friend, a strategic partner like Israel.  As I said, it’s no favor.  It’s an obligation, but it’s also a strategic necessity. 

Israel today is the strongest nation in the Middle East.  But it bothers me sometimes -- I remember when I first got here as a kid, a 29-year-old kid, Israel was very much looked upon by the rest of the world as being somewhat fragile, sitting on the banks of the Mediterranean with millions of Arabs looking at them and wanting to see them gone, et cetera. 

And as the Israelis themselves and the United States helping build Israel into the physically capable power that it is today, there seems to be a mindset that's changed in some parts of the world, that somehow there isn’t still -- Israel is still not under siege.  Just because it’s strong, just because it’s vibrant, just because it is physically capable does not mean that it’s not under siege.  Be it that mother who every day opens the door and puts their child on a bus to go school, be it that father who has -- it amazes me how quickly people’s memories fade about how vulnerable individuals within that country—and the country—remains because of the nature of the arrayed forces against it.

Rockets from the southern frontier; Hezbollah in the north; Nusrah and ISIL on the north and east;  And across the region; a demographic wave that is gigantic; a sectarian conflict that is reminiscent of predictions of -- 700 years ago of a Sunni-Shia war; a profound political, society upheaval; more profound than any upheaval that's occurred in the region in a century. 

And looming over everything is Iran and its nuclear program -- the long and dangerous reach of its regional ambitions is felt not just by Israel, but by everyone else in the neighborhood.  And it’s a really tough, tough neighborhood.  I know that's the biggest understatement anyone has said to you today because all of you know it, feel it, taste it and have experienced it.

And it requires uncommon courage.  And the uncommon courage is that displayed by the people of Israel.  From the outset, they’ve lived under siege -- from the outset.  And more recently, they’ve lived in daily defiance of rockets, terrorist tunnels, unconscionable acts of terrorism like this month’s attack -- last month’s attack on a synagogue that took the lives of Jews at prayers, including three Americans, as well as a brave Israeli police officer. 

But for Israel, this tough neighborhood is home.  This tough neighborhood is where they live and will live forever.

I recently heard a story about Chaim Weizmann, who, as we all know was the first Prime Minister [sic].  I’m told he was lobbying the British House of Lords to establish a State of Israel when he was asked pointedly:  Why do you Jews insist on Palestine when there are so many underdeveloped countries you could settle in conveniently? 

And Weizmann’s reply was, that’s like my asking why you drove 20 miles to visit your mother last Sunday when there were so many nice old ladies on your own street.  (Laughter.)  Pretty apt.  Pretty apt.

My father said it a different way.  Joe knew my dad.  Joe was the first guy that told me that -- my dad would be referred to as a righteous Christian because at my dad’s dinner table -- it was a place where we sat to have conversation, and incidentally eat.  And my dad couldn’t understand -- when I was a kid in grade school and then in high school, he couldn’t understand when I was in grade school why there was even a debate about whether or not the State of Israel should be established.  And it totally perplexed him that even in the Jewish community in the United States there was some debate.  For he believed and -- which all of you do, I hope -- that the only ultimate guarantor of the security of the Jewish people worldwide in the face of such tragedy and history, the only way to ensure that phrase that became so prevalent after World War II, “never again,” was that for it to make a difference, there was only one place in the world that could be secure -- guaranteed -- and that is a State of Israel for the Jewish people.

I remember saying to my dad, but Dad, here in America… He said, pray God, Joey, that will always be the case.  And then he went through and told me the history of what happened and when it was so certain the Jews in Germany and in Spain and other places were part of the fabric of the society, et cetera.

Well, there’s never been any doubt in my mind.  There’s never been any doubt--though I want you to know, because I know some of you importune me not infrequently -- there’s no doubt in President Obama’s mind either, that we have an obligation to match the steel and the spine of the people of Israel with an ironclad, nonnegotiable commitment to Israel’s physical security.

And that's why we’ve invested over $1 billion -- and I know I’m going to repeat myself here, of some things you've already heard and said and you know, but it’s worthy for the press to hear it -- $1 billion in the production and development of Iron Dome batteries and interceptors -— including almost a quarter of a billion dollars in emergency funding this summer.  

As those rockets rained down and terrorists tunnels in from Gaza appeared, President Obama steadfastly stood before the world and defended Israel’s right to defend itself -— by itself —- like any other nation. 

Earlier this year, he backed up that commitment once again by securing over $3 billion in foreign military financing.  This is the largest amount of U.S. security assistance for Israel in all of history; over $17 billion since we took office, $8.5 million a day.

Prime Minister Netanyahu has, as Minister Livni knows, has been my friend for over 30 years.  We drive each other crazy.  But he has truly been a personal friend for well over 30 years.  He acknowledged this.  I was with him when he acknowledged it in front of the President, and he said it subsequently that this administration’s support to Israel’s security is “unprecedented.”

The President and I have now met with the Prime Minister more than any world leader.  Just last month, we held the U.S.-Israeli Consultative Group at the White House -— a regular gathering of defense, diplomatic, and intelligence leaders of both countries.  It features some of the most candid, strategic conversations we have with any nation -- especially with regard to Iran.

Again, I’m importuned because I speak all over the country and I’m going to say something outrageous, I have long, long ties with the American Jewish community.  And I get asked questions that perplex me.  About, does the President really mean it?  I get asked questions, do you mean what you say about Iran?  Look, I get asked questions, does Israel know what you're doing?  Ask any of our Israeli friends here.  They have been in every jot and tittle of everything we’ve thought about as it relates to engaging Iran from the very beginning.

Look, we’re close friends -- the American people, the Israeli people, our governments.  There’s absolutely no daylight -- none -- between us and the Israelis on the question of Israel’s security.  But as friends, we have an obligation to speak honestly with one another; to talk about -– not avoid -— the tactical disagreements we have, and we have tactical disagreements; to lay out for one another each of our perspectives.

I know none of you have ever -- I assume none of you have ever doubted I’ve meant whatever I have said to you.  The problem is I sometime say all that I think to you. 

We have been in constant, unrelenting contact with our friends in Israel and continue to do so; just as Israel has been absolutely candid with us when we have -- when they have tactical differences.  That's what friends do because we have no difference in our strategic perspectives.

And by the way folks, I say to my Israeli friends and to all of you who know Israel as well as I do -- and you all do -- that you can hear the same discussions in the Israeli parliament, the same differences.  You can hear the same discussions in synagogues in Israel.  You can hear the same discussions in cafes in Israel, the same differences that our governments discuss -- mostly privately. 

But I urge -- and you are the most influential group that could be assembled in one room in this country on the U.S.-Israeli relationship -- let’s not make more of what are normal disagreements that occur between friends than warrants.

Israel disagrees with us on a number of our tactics.  They have a different perspectives on how to proceed.  But, folks, that’s the downside of democracy.  It also has an upside.  We never have to wonder where the other guy is standing.

Occasionally, politics on both sides of this divide -- these tactical divides-- is used to try to gain advantage.  But you're all sophisticated enough to know that.  So I urge you, let’s talk about what the facts are, what the perspective is of each of us.

With regard to Iran, from the very beginning we’ve consulted with the Israeli government, militarily, intelligence -- I’ve spent hours, myself personally, and I’m not doing the negotiation.  Jake Sullivan, my guy, was the guy who was doing a lot of this, and Bill Burns.  But every aspect of this policy has been discussed in detail. 

You all are very familiar with and occasionally use the word “chutzpah.”  I hope I made you aware of an Irish phrase “malarkey” -- malarkey.  There’s been a lot of malarkey around our position on Iran.  So let me state it absolutely clearly: 

We will not let Iran acquire a nuclear weapon.  Period.  Period.  End of discussion.  It will not happen on our watch.

A diplomatic solution that puts significant and verifiable constraints on Iran’s nuclear program represents the best and most sustainable chance to ensure that America, Israel, the entire Middle East will never be menaced by a nuclear-armed Iran.

And we remain committed to seek an agreement that meaningfully and verifiably blocks Iran from the pathways that it has available to it to create fissile material for a bomb; a nuclear breakout in its uranium enrichment facilities; the plutonium path, using Iran’s Arak reactor; or a covert nuclear program. 

That’s why, through hard-nosed diplomacy, we’ve rallied the world to put in place the toughest multilateral sanctions regime in history against the Iranian government.  That’s what brought Iran to the negotiation table in the first place.  Up to that time, Iran had been making steady progress in every administration -- in every administration they’d been making steady progress.  I don't know how many conversations I had with the Prime Minister and others about how we could never put together a regime of sanctions that could hold.  My guy turned out to be right.  We could and he did.

As a consequence of our negotiations, Iran has frozen significant elements of its program in exchange for very moderate sanctions relief through this so-called Joint Plan of Action, reached over one year ago and extended for an additional seven months just two weeks ago. 

The agreement has brought significant benefits. Hasn’t solved the whole problem, but the agreement -- before the agreement, Iran was accumulating a growing stockpile of low-enriched uranium.  Now that stockpile is no longer growing.

Remember the Prime Minister standing up, famously drawing -- with that famous drawing at the United Nations with the line, standing there as he spoke of Iran’s path to the bomb.  Before the Joint Plan of Action, Iran was inching up that -- toward that red line, accumulating 20 percent-enriched uranium, far closer to bomb grade. 

Now, Iran has moved in the opposite direction, neutralizing its entire stockpile of 20 percent-enriched uranium.  And under the new extension, it has committed additional steps to turn this material into reactor fuel, taking it off the table and away from a breakout scenario.

Before, Iran was installing new and more sophisticated centrifuges.  They have a lot of them on the sideline.  But now, under the Joint Plan of Action, they have not installed or operated any additional centrifuges, including the next-generation models.

And the terms of the new extension place tighter curbs on its ability to pursue an advanced centrifuge program.  Before, Iran was moving toward a heavy-water plutonium reactor at Arak. 

Now, that effort, too, is frozen.   Inspectors -- inspections before were limited.  Now Iran has allowed daily access at Natanz and Fordow, and inspections at new sites such as centrifuge production facilities -- access that has been expanded even further in the new extension. 

This doesn't solve the problem, but this matters.  The more frequent and intrusive monitoring we have, the sooner we’ll be able to know if Iran tries to break out or sneak out, and the longer we have to do what is necessary to prevent it occurring.

The Joint Plan of Action is not a perfect or permanent solution.  But it provides us time to negotiate, to see if it’s possible to reach a comprehensive agreement that can peacefully ensure that Iran will not develop a nuclear weapon.

And all of this was accomplished with very modest sanctions relief.  And if Iran takes the concrete, verifiable steps necessary to achieve a comprehensive deal, it will it begin to receive true relief from nuclear-related sanctions and be able to offer a better future to its people.

In the meantime, make no mistake about it:  the Iranian economy remains under tremendous pressure.  The overwhelming majority of the sanctions remain in place.  It is true that Iran will be able to repatriate $4.9 billion in revenues as a consequence of the new extension, but that’s very modest relief overall, a small fraction of the $100 billion in Iranian funds that remain blocked around the world; the $60 billion to $70 billion Iran needs each year to fund its imports; the $35 billion it needs to close its budget deficit.

Sanctions have already done significant damage to Iran’s economy and continue to do so.  The Iranian riyal is about -- has depreciated about 50 percent since June of 2012.  Since 2011, sanctions have caused Iran to lose over $200 billion in oil revenue, including $35 billion just since the signing of the Joint Plan of Action.  Iran’s annual inflation rate is about 21 percent.  Iran’s economy is 20 to 25 percent smaller today than it would have been had it remained out -- had it remained on its pre-2011 trajectory.  The bottom falling out of oil prices has further complicated Iran’s economic outlook.

And crucially, for the first time, we have a diplomatic context in which the Iranians are continuing to make progress -- they can no longer continue to make progress on their nuclear program while they talk. 

None of these constraints would be in place without the Joint Plan of Action.  And as we pursue a comprehensive agreement, one thing I can guarantee you is that the President -- what the President told you a year ago, right at this forum, Haim, he said:  We will not accept a bad deal. 

Our decision to extend the Joint Plan of Action proved that we will continue to press the Iranians to get a good deal that satisfies our bottom lines.  The result of our determination has been that the Iranians have begun to show flexibility on some important issues. 

This progress was not enough to lead to an agreement.  But it was enough to justify an extension to see whether -- whether or not, now that Iran understands the firmness of our core requirements, whether or not we can reach an agreement that keeps America, our allies, Israel, and the world safe.

     And so we have agreed to extend these talks for seven additional months, with the goal of completing a broad agreement on the core elements in four months and technical annexes over the next three months after that.  

We believe that we have enough leverage to reach a comprehensive agreement.  There are no guarantees of success, though, to state the obvious.  But there are steps we can take -— and steps we can hold off on -– that increase the odds or diminish the odds that we could succeed.

I know there are some in this room and some on the Hill that this is the moment for additional sanctions.  Remember back several years ago when the understandable pessimism was, could we hold the P5-plus-1 together?  Could we hold Russia?  Could we hold China?  One of the elements, as Martin Indyk can tell you and others, that are stake here is the need to hold the P5-plus-1 together tightly.  And actions we take can impact on that probability. 

There may well come the time when increased pressure is needed and welcome.  I’ve met with over 168 members of the House and Senate.  I’ve made it clear there may very well be a time when we are not only welcoming, we're asking for additional sanctions.

Should Iran violate the terms of our agreement, Congress and the administration could immediately impose new sanctions.  And the President has made it clear that he’d be part of that.  But now is not the right time to do that.  We could end up with the worst of all worlds:  breaking up the coalition, no peaceful resolution of Iran’s nuclear programs; and less leverage to achieve one.

And with all that is happening in the region, this is not the time to risk a breakdown when we still have a chance for a breakthrough.  This is the moment to give our negotiators a little bit more time and space to see if they can reach an agreement that benefits everyone. 

Our strategy has been underestimated from the beginning.  I told, you remember, many people said we couldn’t even put together the coalition to keep the most successful sanctions in modern history.  Some people including some of you in this room, good people, Democrats and Republicans, said the Joint Plan of Action was a mistake.  Look where we find ourselves.  It has frozen its program, it’s given us a shot for a peaceful solution. 

I tell you I think it’s less than an even shot, but it’s a shot.  Some said Iran would never abide by the terms of the Joint Plan of Action.  But according to each and every monthly report by the IAEA, Iran has held up its end of the bargain and honored the agreement.

Some said that the modest sanctions relief would provide the ability to see a collapse in the sanctions regime, predicted that companies would flood back into Iran.  And we know -- we all know, we can name the companies in different countries who could hardly wait to flow back in to Iran.  But they haven’t.  They haven’t. 

So we have made progress, real progress in that the program is basically frozen. And we’ve sharpened some fundamental choices for the Iranians:  either seize an historic opportunity to prove that its nuclear program is peaceful and fully rejoin the world economy and the community of nations or face unrelenting pressure.

This is not the time, nor do I have the -- nor do we have the time now, but all of you in this room know, there’s a lot of change taking place inside Iran, as well -- some good, some bad.  But the idea there’s one single monolith in Iran that is able to be sustained, I think that is a foolish view of modern history.  It could be worse.  But it also could be better.

A good deal exists that would benefit America, Iran, Israel and the world –- if Iran is willing to take the deal.  I’m making no predictions that they will.  But I guarantee you unless they do, there will be no agreement.

And as we move forward, just as we have done so far, we will continue to consult on every jot and tittle, every detail with our Israeli friends every step of the way. 

But you all know as well as I do, Israel’s future as a democratic homeland for the Jewish people depends on far more than prevailing and keeping Iran from becoming a nuclear-armed nation.  It depends on reaching a two-state solution -- two states for two people.

Ladies and gentlemen, it’s -- it is a difficult job to stay engaged -- for Israelis and for us -- in trying to figure out how to arrive at such a solution.  But we continue to believe that -- at least I do, and the President does -- that the vast majority of Israelis and Palestinians, they think that it is the right way to go.  But it’s frightening.  It’s frightening and the chances that have to be taken are very, very difficult for leaders to step up and take.  And I understand that.

The fact is that I think we have no choice but to continue to try.  I -- ultimately, every one of these decisions will be left and should be left to the government of Israel.  But the end result of a two-state solution with each enjoying self-determination, security and mutual recognition is I think -- not only is the right thing vis-à-vis the Palestinians and Israelis, but has the potential to unlock a whole new potential. 

Given the demographic realities that remain, the best and only option to ensure the survival of a democratic state, a Jewish homeland in Israel is such a negotiation.

Like you, I understand the obstacles.  And we have no illusions about Hamas.  It says a great deal that this terrorist group chooses to pour its resources into the ground for sophisticated tunnels to infiltrate Israel, instead of building hospitals and schools and meeting the needs of the people of Gaza.  

But I also remain convinced, as I said, that the vast majority of Israelis and the vast majority of Palestinians believe -- as President Obama said in Jerusalem last year -—

that peace is possible, peace is necessary, and peace is just. 

And just think of the opportunities it could provide.  As you look across the region, for the first time in modern history, a surprising thing is happening.  Israel and several of its Arab neighbors -- Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and others –- find themselves on the same side of two very important struggles:  the fight against violent extremism, including ISIL, or as our Arab friends say, Daesh; and a regional struggle against Iran and its proxies.  

For perhaps the first time in history, Israel – Israel’s-- interests are in general convergence with those basic interests as well as the Arabs.  That creates a chance -— nothing more, just a chance -- for closer relations between Israel and the Arab world.

In some ways, this is already unfolding in quiet dialogue between security officials from countries whose diplomats

wouldn’t greet each other at airports in the recent past, and still won’t.  But the only way to fully realize this opportunity -- one that would give Israel more opportunities in the region than it now has -- is for Israel and the Palestinians to make progress toward peace. 

And it’s the quickest way to destroy -- and the quickest way to destroy any prospects of a true strategic realignment in the region, which would take time, but can begin, is to deny a political horizon toward a two-state solution -— or worse, to allow a cycle of provocation and violence to be unleashed and unleash instability on the ground. 

And it’s because of America’s commitment to Israel’s security –- not in spite of it -— we are frank with our allies when we have concerns.   We appreciated the critical statesmanship of Prime Minister Netanyahu, and King Abdullah of Jordan, and President Abbas in working out to reaffirm the historic status quo and to make sure that tensions over the

Temple Mount and Haram-al-Sharif don’t boil over into a conflict and conflagration in Jerusalem that engulfs the entire country.

But all sides have more work to do to lessen tensions and prevent further provocations, and I think they understand that in my conversations, at least. 

We’re frank about this with the Palestinians.  And we have to be tough and honest -- have tough and honest conversations with them about what they need to do, and they need to do so much more to combat the instances of incitement, including on social media. 

And we’re frank with our Israeli friends about the actions that we consider counterproductive:  expanding settlement activity and construction, including in sensitive areas in East Jerusalem and the West Bank; the demolition of the homes of relatives of attackers.  That can't be a justification for the abhorrent killing of innocent civilians.  [Sic] There is no justification.  But punishment of families -— collective punishment -— risks stoking tensions even further.

We’ve also spoken about our shared concern about preventing vigilante attacks against Israeli Arabs and Palestinians, and investigating those that occur, and swiftly bringing to justice the perpetrators of those crimes.  And that's what the government is doing now and has been, quite frankly.

It is simply too easy for provocations from either side to ignite violence that no one can control, which ultimately hurts everyone.  In all of these instances, all around the world, the lowest common denominator has the ability to bring everything down.  And it’s hard as hell to overcome that lowest common denominator.

We know from long experience that none of these issues are easy or simple.  But we believe there is a better path.  And if Israel and the Palestinians can find their way to peace, the possibilities are limitless.

There is no one threat that worries me more though than the rising tide of anti-Semitism around the world.  With the encouragement of some of you in this audience, including Joe, I remember holding hearings in the mid ‘80s about anti-Semitism in Europe and being criticized:  Why was I holding those hearings?  But you were right, Joe.

When we were expanding NATO, I remember you calling me after I was in Poland, and I was asked before 3,000 people at the University of Warsaw is there anything that could stop Poland’s admission.  I said, yes, anti-Semitism -- because of what was going on at the prison -- at the death camp.

But anti-Semitism goes hand in hand -- it’s bad under any circumstance, but now it goes hand in hand in what I would call an overall effort to delegitimize Israel -- to delegitimize Israel in almost every quarter.

You see it all over the world.  This summer, during the conflict in Gaza, we saw too many people in too many places

cross the line from legitimate criticism into demonization and outright anti-Semitism.  You saw it in demonstrations that devolved into mobs that torched synagogues.  You see it in menacing messages on social media.  You see it in attacks on religious Jews on streets of major European cities.  

It is a fundamental threat not simply to Jews, primarily -- but not simply to Jews, but to legitimization of the State of Israel and to democracy itself.  There can be no tolerance for anti-Semitism.  And I’m proud that America works to expose and combat such bigotry wherever it finds it around the world. 

And, as the President said in Jerusalem:  Make no mistake -– those who adhere to the ideology rejecting Israel’s right to exist, they might as well reject the earth beneath them or the sky above, because Israel is not going anywhere.  Anywhere. 

The preservation of a secure, democratic Israel is the only certain guarantor of the freedom and security for Jews worldwide.  Joe and others have heard me tell this story, but it was -- I remember how it struck me.

As a young senator, I’ve had the great privilege of meeting and getting to know every Prime Minister in Israel since Golda Meir.  I was permitted to -- well, I won’t go into it.  But I was in Israel just before the Yom Kippur War, days before.  And I was meeting with Prime Minister Golda Meir, which was one of the -- because of my job, I’ve gotten to meet almost every world leader in the last 40 years.  Not figuratively, literally.  And she was impressive.  I just was so excited to meet her.  And I sat in front of her desk.  And she had that bank of maps behind her, she kept pulling up and down.  She had -- you know those charts. 

And I was sitting next to a guy who was her aide, on my right, in a seat in front of her, a guy named Rabin.  And she kept me there for the better part -- I could have stayed another two hours, about an hour and a half.  And she went into vivid detail with me about the Six Day War, and reading me letters from Israeli soldiers who had died, to their families, et cetera, and then -- and chain-smoking and flipping to another map and show me where -- as I said, this went on for well over an hour.  And I was engrossed, but I was getting more morose as every minute went on.  And I know you remember this story, Joe, but it’s absolutely true.  She -- and finally, she just looked at me as if we had been talking about a recent football match or something.  And she said, would you like a photo opportunity?  And I looked at her, and I said, well, yes, Madam Prime Minister.

And those double-doors that open out into that little square outside the office there, walked outside, and there were a battery of reporters and mostly cameramen.  They weren’t asking questions.  They were just taking pictures.  And I was standing to her right.  And we were both looking straight ahead.  While looking straight ahead without turning her head to talk to me, she said, Senator, you look so worried.  And I turned to her -- I was supposed to keep looking straight -- I turned to her, and I said, well, I am, Madam Prime Minister, what you just laid out.  She said, oh, without looking at me, just looking straight ahead.  She said, don't worry.  We Jews have a secret weapon in our struggle with the Arabs. 

And I thought she was about to tell me something profound.  It turned out it was profound, but I thought she was going to tell me about some weapon or some plan or whatever.  And I turned and looked at her.  She still didn't turn and look at me.  Looking straight ahead, she said, our secret weapon is we have no place else to do.

As long as we keep that mind as Americans, no matter how frustrated we may get -- and it’s personal dealings occasionally -- and as I said to -- I just spoke to 4,000 members of North American federation -- Jewish Federation [of North America], and the [sic] Israeli Prime Minister in the front row, and I said, send a message to Bibi, I love him.  I love him.  And I had signed a picture years ago to him.  I said, Bibi, I don't agree with a damn thing you have to say, but I love you.  (Laughter.) 

I agree with a lot he has to say.  But if friends can't acknowledge -- if friends can't acknowledge the very things that are acknowledged in each of our countries vis-à-vis one another, then it’s not much of a friendship. 

So my message to you all is, please, let’s keep whatever disagreements we have in perspective because they don't go to the heart, the soul, they don't go to the essence of who we are as Americans and who Israelis are.  There is no daylight.  None, none, none, between Israel’s security and the United States.

God bless you all and may God protect Israel and our troops.  Thank you.  (Applause.)

END

1:52 P.M. EST