Remarks by the President at GOP House Issues Conference

Renaissance Baltimore Harborplace Hotel, Baltimore, Maryland

12:10 P.M. EST

     THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  Thank you very much.  Thank you.  Please, everybody be seated.  Thank you.  Thank you, John, for the gracious introduction.  To Mike and Eric, thank you for hosting me.  Thank you to all of you for receiving me.  It is  wonderful to be here.  I want to also acknowledge Mark Strand, president of the Congressional Institute.  To all the family members who are here and who have to put up with us for an elective office each and every day, thank you, because I know that's tough.  (Applause.)

I very much am appreciative of not only the tone of your introduction, John, but also the invitation that you extended to me.  You know what they say, "Keep your friends close, but visit the Republican Caucus every few months."  (Laughter.)

Part of the reason I accepted your invitation to come here was because I wanted to speak with all of you, and not just to all of you.  So I'm looking forward to taking your questions and having a real conversation in a few moments.  And I hope that the conversation we begin here doesn't end here; that we can continue our dialogue in the days ahead.  It's important to me that we do so.  It's important to you, I think, that we do so.  But most importantly, it's important to the American people that we do so.

I've said this before, but I'm a big believer not just in the value of a loyal opposition, but in its necessity.  Having differences of opinion, having a real debate about matters of domestic policy and national security -- and that's not something that's only good for our country, it's absolutely essential.  It's only through the process of disagreement and debate that bad ideas get tossed out and good ideas get refined and made better.  And that kind of vigorous back and forth -- that imperfect but well-founded process, messy as it often is -- is at the heart of our democracy.  That's what makes us the greatest nation in the world.

So, yes, I want you to challenge my ideas, and I guarantee you that after reading this I may challenge a few of yours.  (Laughter.)  I want you to stand up for your beliefs, and knowing this caucus, I have no doubt that you will.  I want us to have a constructive debate.  The only thing I don't want -- and here I am listening to the American people, and I think they don't want either -- is for Washington to continue being so Washington-like.  I know folks, when we're in town there, spend a lot of time reading the polls and looking at focus groups and interpreting which party has the upper hand in November and in 2012 and so on and so on and so on.  That's their obsession.

And I'm not a pundit.  I'm just a President, so take it for what it's worth.  But I don't believe that the American people want us to focus on our job security.  They want us to focus on their job security.  (Applause.)  I don't think they want more gridlock.  I don't think they want more partisanship.  I don't think they want more obstruction.  They didn't send us to Washington to fight each other in some sort of political steel-cage match to see who comes out alive.  That's not what they want.  They sent us to Washington to work together, to get things done, and to solve the problems that they're grappling with every single day.

And I think your constituents would want to know that despite the fact it doesn't get a lot of attention, you and I have actually worked together on a number of occasions.  There have been times where we've acted in a bipartisan fashion.  And I want to thank you and your Democratic colleagues for reaching across the aisle.  There has been, for example, broad support for putting in the troops necessary in Afghanistan to deny al Qaeda safe haven, to break the Taliban's momentum, and to train Afghan security forces.  There's been broad support for disrupting, dismantling, and defeating al Qaeda.  And I know that we're all united in our admiration of our troops.  (Applause.)

So it may be useful for the international audience right now to understand -- and certainly for our enemies to have no doubt -- whatever divisions and differences may exist in Washington, the United States of America stands as one to defend our country.  (Applause.)

It's that same spirit of bipartisanship that made it possible for me to sign a defense contracting reform bill that was cosponsored by Senator McCain and members of Congress here today.  We've stood together on behalf of our nation's veterans.  Together we passed the largest increase in the VA's budget in more than 30 years and supported essential veterans' health care reforms to provide better access and medical care for those who serve in uniform.

Some of you also joined Democrats in supporting a Credit Card Bill of Rights and in extending unemployment compensation to Americans who are out of work.  Some of you joined us in stopping tobacco companies from targeting kids, expanding opportunities for young people to serve our country, and helping responsible homeowners stay in their homes.

So we have a track record of working together.  It is possible.  But, as John, you mentioned, on some very big things, we've seen party-line votes that, I'm just going to be honest, were disappointing.  Let's start with our efforts to jumpstart the economy last winter, when we were losing 700,000 jobs a month.  Our financial system teetered on the brink of collapse and the threat of a second Great Depression loomed large.  I didn't understand then, and I still don't understand, why we got opposition in this caucus for almost $300 billion in badly needed tax cuts for the American people, or COBRA coverage to help Americans who've lost jobs in this recession to keep the health insurance that they desperately needed, or opposition to putting Americans to work laying broadband and rebuilding roads and bridges and breaking ground on new construction projects.

There was an interesting headline in CNN today:  "Americans disapprove of stimulus, but like every policy in it."  And there was a poll that showed that if you broke it down into its component parts, 80 percent approved of the tax cuts, 80 percent approved of the infrastructure, 80 percent approved of the assistance to the unemployed.

Well, that's what the Recovery Act was.  And let's face it, some of you have been at the ribbon-cuttings for some of these important projects in your communities.  Now, I understand some of you had some philosophical differences perhaps on the just the concept of government spending, but, as I recall, opposition was declared before we had a chance to actually meet and exchange ideas.  And I saw that as a missed opportunity.

Now, I am happy to report this morning that we saw another sign that our economy is moving in the right direction.  The latest GDP numbers show that our economy is growing by almost 6 percent -- that's the most since 2003.  To put that in perspective, this time last year, we weren't seeing positive job growth; we were seeing the economy shrink by about 6 percent.

So you've seen a 12 percent reversal during the course of this year.  This turnaround is the biggest in nearly three decades -- and it didn't happen by accident.  It happened -- as economists, conservative and liberal, will attest -- because of some of the steps that we took.

And by the way, you mentioned a Web site out here, John --  if you want to look at what's going on, on the Recovery Act, you can look on recovery.gov -- a Web site, by the way, that was Eric Cantor's idea.

Now, here's the point.  These are serious times, and what's required by all of us -- Democrats and Republicans -- is to do what's right for our country, even if it's not always what's best for our politics.  I know it may be heresy to say this, but there are things more important than good poll numbers.  And on this no one can accuse me of not living by my principles.  (Laughter.)  A middle class that's back on its feet, an economy that lifts everybody up, an America that's ascendant in the world -- that's more important than winning an election.  Our future shouldn't be shaped by what's best for our politics; our politics should be shaped by what's best for our future.

But no matter what's happened in the past, the important thing for all of us is to move forward together.  We have some issues right in front of us on which I believe we should agree, because as successful as we've been in spurring new economic growth, everybody understands that job growth has been lagging.  Some of that's predictable.  Every economist will say jobs are a lagging indicator, but that's no consolation for the folks who are out there suffering right now.  And since 7 million Americans have lost their jobs in this recession, we've got to do everything we can to accelerate it.

So, today, in line with what I stated at the State of the Union, I've proposed a new jobs tax credit for small business.  And here's how it would work.  Employers would get a tax credit of up to $5,000 for every employee they add in 2010.  They'd get a tax break for increases in wages, as well.  So, if you raise wages for employees making under $100,000, we'd refund part of your payroll tax for every dollar you increase those wages faster than inflation.  It's a simple concept.  It's easy to understand.  It would cut taxes for more than 1 million small businesses.

So I hope you join me.  Let's get this done.  I want to eliminate the capital gains tax for small business investment, and take some of the bailout money the Wall Street banks have returned and use it to help community banks start lending to small businesses again.  So join me.  I am confident that we can do this together for the American people.  And there's nothing in that proposal that runs contrary to the ideological predispositions of this caucus.  The question is:  What's going to keep us from getting this done?

I've proposed a modest fee on the nation's largest banks and financial institutions to fully recover for taxpayers' money that they provided to the financial sector when it was teetering on the brink of collapse.  And it's designed to discourage them from taking reckless risks in the future.  If you listen to the American people, John, they'll tell you they want their money back.  Let's do this together, Republicans and Democrats.

I propose that we close tax loopholes that reward companies for shipping American jobs overseas, and instead give companies greater incentive to create jobs right here at home -- right here at home.  Surely, that's something that we can do together, Republicans and Democrats.

We know that we've got a major fiscal challenge in reining in deficits that have been growing for a decade, and threaten our future.  That's why I've proposed a three-year freeze in discretionary spending other than what we need for national security.  That's something we should do together that's consistent with a lot of the talk both in Democratic caucuses and Republican caucuses.  We can't blink when it's time to actually do the job.

At this point, we know that the budget surpluses of the '90s occurred in part because of the pay-as-you-go law, which said that, well, you should pay as you go and live within our means, just like families do every day.  Twenty-four of you voted for that, and I appreciate it.  And we were able to pass it in the Senate yesterday.

But the idea of a bipartisan fiscal commission to confront the deficits in the long term died in the Senate the other day.  So I'm going to establish such a commission by executive order and I hope that you participate, fully and genuinely, in that effort, because if we're going to actually deal with our deficit and debt, everybody here knows that we're going to have to do it together, Republican and Democrat.  No single party is going to make the tough choices involved on its own.  It's going to require all of us doing what's right for the American people.

And as I said in the State of the Union speech, there's not just a deficit of dollars in Washington, there is a deficit of trust.  So I hope you'll support my proposal to make all congressional earmarks public before they come to a vote.  And let's require lobbyists who exercise such influence to publicly disclose all their contacts on behalf of their clients, whether they are contacts with my administration or contacts with Congress.  Let's do the people's business in the bright light of day, together, Republicans and Democrats.

I know how bitter and contentious the issue of health insurance reform has become.  And I will eagerly look at the ideas and better solutions on the health care front.  If anyone here truly believes our health insurance system is working well for people, I respect your right to say so, but I just don't agree.  And neither would millions of Americans with preexisting conditions who can't get coverage today or find out that they lose their insurance just as they're getting seriously ill.  That's exactly when you need insurance.  And for too many people, they're not getting it.  I don't think a system is working when small businesses are gouged and 15,000 Americans are losing coverage every single day; when premiums have doubled and out-of-pocket costs have exploded and they're poised to do so again.

I mean, to be fair, the status quo is working for the insurance industry, but it's not working for the American people.  It's not working for our federal budget.  It needs to change.

This is a big problem, and all of us are called on to solve it.  And that's why, from the start, I sought out and supported ideas from Republicans.  I even talked about an issue that has been a holy grail for a lot of you, which was tort reform, and said that I'd be willing to work together as part of a comprehensive package to deal with it.  I just didn't get a lot of nibbles.

Creating a high-risk pool for uninsured folks with preexisting conditions, that wasn't my idea, it was Senator McCain's.  And I supported it, and it got incorporated into our approach.  Allowing insurance companies to sell coverage across state lines to add choice and competition and bring down costs for businesses and consumers -- that's an idea that some of you I suspect included in this better solutions; that's an idea that was incorporated into our package.  And I support it, provided that we do it hand in hand with broader reforms that protect benefits and protect patients and protect the American people.

A number of you have suggested creating pools where self-employed and small businesses could buy insurance.  That was a good idea.  I embraced it.  Some of you supported efforts to provide insurance to children and let kids remain covered on their parents' insurance until they're 25 or 26.  I supported that.  That's part of our package.  I supported a number of other ideas, from incentivizing wellness to creating an affordable catastrophic insurance option for young people that came from Republicans like Mike Enzi and Olympia Snowe in the Senate, and I'm sure from some of you as well.  So when you say I ought to be willing to accept Republican ideas on health care, let's be clear:  I have.

Bipartisanship -- not for its own sake but to solve problems -- that's what our constituents, the American people, need from us right now.  All of us then have a choice to make.  We have to choose whether we're going to be politicians first or partners for progress; whether we're going to put success at the polls ahead of the lasting success we can achieve together for America.  Just think about it for a while.  We don't have to put it up for a vote today.

     Let me close by saying this.  I was not elected by Democrats or Republicans, but by the American people.  That's especially true because the fastest growing group of Americans are independents.  That should tell us both something.  I'm ready and eager to work with anyone who is willing to proceed in a spirit of goodwill.  But understand, if we can't break free from partisan gridlock, if we can't move past a politics of "no," if resistance supplants constructive debate, I still have to meet my responsibilities as President.  I've got to act for the greater good –- because that, too, is a commitment that I have made.  And that's -- that, too, is what the American people sent me to Washington to do.

     So I am optimistic.  I know many of you individually.  And the irony, I think, of our political climate right now is that, compared to other countries, the differences between the two major parties on most issues is not as big as it's represented.  But we've gotten caught up in the political game in a way that's just not healthy.  It's dividing our country in ways that are preventing us from meeting the challenges of the 21st century.  I'm hopeful that the conversation we have today can help reverse that.

     So thank you very much.  Thank you, John.  (Applause.)  Now I'd like to open it up for questions.

     CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  The President has agreed to take questions and members would be encouraged to raise your hand while you remain in your seat.  (Laughter.)  The chair will take the prerogative to make the first remarks.

     Mr. President, welcome back to the House Republican Conference.

     THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.

     CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  [Off microphone.]  We are pleased to have you return.  (Inaudible) a year ago -- House Republicans said then we would make you two promises.  Number one, that most of the people in this room and their families would pray for you and your beautiful family just about every day for the next four years.  And I want to assure you we're keeping that promise.

THE PRESIDENT:  I appreciate that.

CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  [off microphone] Number two, our pledge to you, Mr. President, was that door is always open.  And we hope the (inaudible) of our invitation that we (inaudible).

Mr. President, several of us in this conference yesterday on the way into Baltimore stopped by the Salvation Army homeless facility here in Baltimore.  I met a little boy, an African American boy, in the 8th grade, named David Carter, Jr.  When he heard that I would be seeing you today his eyes lit up like I had never seen.  And I told him that if he wrote you a letter I'd give it to you, and I have.

But I had a conversation with little David, Jr. and David, Sr.  His family has been struggling with the economy.

[On microphone.]  His dad said words to me, Mr. President, that I'll never forget.  About my age and he said -- he said, Congressman, it's not like it was when we were coming up.  He said, there's just no jobs.

     Now, last year about the time you met with us, unemployment was 7.5 percent in this country.  Your administration, and your party in Congress, told us that we'd have to borrow more than $700 billion to pay for a so-called stimulus bill.  It was a piecemeal list of projects and boutique tax cuts, all of which was -- we were told -- had to be passed or unemployment would go to 8 percent, as your administration said.  Well, unemployment is 10 percent now, as you well know, Mr. President; here in Baltimore it's considerably higher.

     Now, Republicans offered a stimulus bill at the same time.  It cost half as much as the Democratic proposal in Congress, and using your economic analyst models, it would have created twice the jobs at half the cost.  It essentially was across-the-board tax relief, Mr. President.

Now we know you've come to Baltimore today and you've raised this tax credit, which was last promoted by President Jimmy Carter.  But the first question I would pose to you, very respectfully, Mr. President, is would you be willing to consider embracing -- in the name of little David Carter, Jr. and his dad, in the name of every struggling family in this country -- the kind of across-the-board tax relief that Republicans have advocated, that President Kennedy advocated, that President Reagan advocated and that has always been the means of stimulating broad-based economic growth?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, there was a lot packed into that question.  (Laughter.)  First of all, let me say I already promised that I'll be writing back to that young man and his family, and I appreciate you passing on the letter.

Q    Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT:  But let's talk about just the jobs environment generally.  You're absolutely right that when I was sworn in the hope was that unemployment would remain around 8 [percent], or in the 8 percent range.  That was just based on the estimates made by both conservative and liberal economists, because at that point not all the data had trickled in.

We had lost 650,000 jobs in December.  I'm assuming you're not faulting my policies for that.  We had lost, it turns out, 700,000 jobs in January, the month I was sworn in.  I'm assuming it wasn't my administration's policies that accounted for that.  We lost another 650,000 jobs the subsequent month, before any of my policies had gone into effect.  So I'm assuming that wasn't as a consequence of our policies; that doesn't reflect the failure of the Recovery Act.  The point being that what ended up happening was that the job losses from this recession proved to be much more severe -- in the first quarter of last year going into the second quarter of last year -- than anybody anticipated.

So I mean, I think we can score political points on the basis of the fact that we underestimated how severe the job losses were going to be.  But those job losses took place before any stimulus, whether it was the ones that you guys have proposed or the ones that we proposed, could have ever taken into effect.  Now, that's just the fact, Mike, and I don't think anybody would dispute that.  You could not find an economist who would dispute that.

Now, at the same time, as I mentioned, most economists -- Republican and Democrat, liberal and conservative -- would say that had it not been for the stimulus package that we passed, things would be much worse.  Now, they didn't fill a 7 million hole in the number of people who were unemployed.  They probably account for about 2 million, which means we still have 5 million folks in there that we've still got to deal with.  That's a lot of people.

The package that we put together at the beginning of the year, the truth is, should have reflected -- and I believe reflected what most of you would say are common sense things.  This notion that this was a radical package is just not true.  A third of them were tax cuts, and they weren't -- when you say they were "boutique" tax cuts, Mike, 95 percent of working Americans got tax cuts, small businesses got tax cuts, large businesses got help in terms of their depreciation schedules.  I mean, it was a pretty conventional list of tax cuts.  A third of it was stabilizing state budgets.

There is not a single person in here who, had it not been for what was in the stimulus package, wouldn't be going home to more teachers laid off, more firefighters laid off, more cops laid off.  A big chunk of it was unemployment insurance and COBRA, just making sure that people had some floor beneath them, and, by the way, making sure that there was enough money in their pockets that businesses had some customers.

     You take those two things out, that accounts for the majority of the stimulus package.  Are there people in this room who think that was a bad idea?  A portion of it was dealing with the AMT, the alternative minimum tax -- not a proposal of mine; that's not a consequence of my policies that we have a tax system where we keep on putting off a potential tax hike that is embedded in the budget that we have to fix each year.  That cost about $70 billion.

     And then the last portion of it was infrastructure which, as I said, a lot of you have gone to appear at ribbon-cuttings for the same projects that you voted against.

     Now, I say all this not to re-litigate the past, but it's simply to state that the component parts of the Recovery Act are consistent with what many of you say are important things to do -- rebuilding our infrastructure, tax cuts for families and businesses, and making sure that we were providing states and individuals some support when the roof was caving in.

     And the notion that I would somehow resist doing something that cost half as much but would produce twice as many jobs -- why would I resist that?  I wouldn't.  I mean, that's my point, is that -- I am not an ideologue.  I'm not.  It doesn't make sense if somebody could tell me you could do this cheaper and get increased results that I wouldn't say, great.  The problem is, I couldn't find credible economists who would back up the claims that you just made.

     Now, we can -- here's what I know going forward, though.  I mean, we're talking -- we were talking about the past.  We can talk about this going forward.  I have looked at every idea out there in terms of accelerating job growth to match the economic growth that's already taken place.  The jobs credit that I'm discussing right now is one that a lot of people think would be the most cost-effective way for encouraging people to pick up their hiring.

     There may be other ideas that you guys have; I am happy to look at them and I'm happy to embrace them.  I suspect I will embrace some of them.  Some of them I've already embraced.

     But the question I think we're going to have to ask ourselves is, as we move forward, are we going to be examining each of these issues based on what's good for the country, what the evidence tells us, or are we going to be trying to position ourselves so that come November we're able to say, "The other party, it's their fault."  If we take the latter approach then we're probably not going to get much agreement.  If we take the former, I suspect there's going to be a lot of overlap.  All right?

     Q    Mr. President, will you consider supporting across-the-board tax relief, as President Kennedy did?

     THE PRESIDENT:  Here's what I'm going to do, Mike.  What I'm going to do is I'm going to take a look at what you guys are proposing.  And the reason I say this, before you say, "Okay," I think is important to know -- what you may consider across-the-board tax cuts could be, for example, greater tax cuts for people who are making a billion dollars.  I may not agree to a tax cut for Warren Buffet.  You may be calling for an across-the-board tax cut for the banking industry right now.  I may not agree to that.

     So I think that we've got to look at what specific proposals you're putting forward, and -- this is the last point I'll make -- if you're calling for just across-the-board tax cuts, and then on the other hand saying that we're somehow going to balance our budget, I'm going to want to take a look at your math and see how that works, because the issue of deficit and debt is another area where there has been a tendency for some inconsistent statements.  How's that?  All right?

     CONGRESSMAN RYAN:  Thank you.  Mr. President, first off, thanks for agreeing to accept our invitation here.  It is a real pleasure and honor to have you with us here today.

     THE PRESIDENT:  Good to see you.  Is this your crew right here, by the way?

     CONGRESSMAN RYAN:  It is.  This is my daughter Liza, my son Charlie and Sam, and this is my wife Janna.
 
     THE PRESIDENT:  Hey, guys.

CONGRESSMAN RYAN:  Say hi, everybody.  (Laughter.)  I serve as a ranking member of the budget committee, so I'm going to talk a little budget if you don't mind.  The spending bills that you've signed into law, the domestic discretionary spending has been increased by 84 percent.  You now want to freeze spending at this elevated beginning next year.  This means that total spending in your budget would grow at 3/100ths of 1 percent less than otherwise.  I would simply submit that we could do more and start now.

     You've also said that you want to take a scalpel to the budget and go through it line by line.  We want to give you that scalpel.  I have a proposal with my home state senator, Russ Feingold, bipartisan proposal, to create a constitutional version of the line-item veto.  (Applause.)  Problem is, we can't even get a vote on the proposal.

So my question is, why not start freezing spending now, and would you support a line-item veto in helping us get a vote on it in the House?

THE PRESIDENT:  Let me respond to the two specific questions, but I want to just push back a little bit on the underlying premise about us increasing spending by 84 percent.

     Now, look, I talked to Peter Orszag right before I came here, because I suspected I'd be hearing this -- I'd be hearing this argument.  The fact of the matter is, is that most of the increases in this year's budget, this past year's budget, were not as a consequence of policies that we initiated but instead were built in as a consequence of the automatic stabilizers that kick in because of this enormous recession.

     So the increase in the budget for this past year was actually predicted before I was even sworn into office and had initiated any policies.  Whoever was in there, Paul -- and I don't think you'll dispute that -- whoever was in there would have seen those same increases because of, on the one hand, huge drops in revenue, but at the same time people were hurting and needed help.  And a lot of these things happened automatically.

     Now, the reason that I'm not proposing the discretionary freeze take into effect this year -- we prepared a budget for 2010, it's now going forward -- is, again, I am just listening to the consensus among people who know the economy best.  And what they will say is that if you either increase taxes or significantly lowered spending when the economy remains somewhat fragile, that that would have a destimulative effect and potentially you'd see a lot of folks losing business, more folks potentially losing jobs.  That would be a mistake when the economy has not fully taken off.  That's why I've proposed to do it for the next fiscal year.  So that's point number two.

     With respect to the line-item veto, I actually -- I think there's not a President out there that wouldn't love to have it.  And I think that this is an area where we can have a serious conversation.  I know it is a bipartisan proposal by you and Russ Feingold.  I don't like being held up with big bills that have stuff in them that are wasteful but I've got to sign because it's a defense authorization bill and I've got to make sure that our troops are getting the funding that they need.

     I will tell you, I would love for Congress itself to show discipline on both sides of the aisle.  I think one thing that you have to acknowledge, Paul, because you study this stuff and take it pretty seriously, that the earmarks problem is not unique to one party and you end up getting a lot of pushback when you start going after specific projects of any one of you in your districts, because wasteful spending is usually spent somehow outside of your district.  Have you noticed that?  The spending in your district tends to seem pretty sensible.

     So I would love to see more restraint within Congress.  I'd like to work on the earmarks reforms that I mentioned in terms of putting earmarks online, because I think sunshine is the best disinfectant.  But I am willing to have a serious conversation on the line-item veto issue.

     CONGRESSMAN RYAN:  I'd like to walk you through that, because we have a version we think is constitutional.

     THE PRESIDENT:  Let me take a look at it.

     CONGRESSMAN RYAN:  I would simply say that automatic stabilizer spending is mandatory spending.  The discretionary spending, the bills that Congress signs that you sign into law, that has increased 84 percent.

     THE PRESIDENT:  We'll have a longer debate on the budget numbers, all right?

     CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  Shelley Moore Capito, West Virginia.

     CONGRESSWOMAN CAPITO:  Thank you, Mr. President, for joining us here today.  As you said in the State of the Union address on Wednesday, jobs and the economy are number one.  And I think everyone in this room, certainly I, agree with you on that.

     I represent the state of West Virginia.  We're resource-rich.  We have a lot of coal and a lot of natural gas.  But our -- my miners and the folks who are working and those who are unemployed are very concerned about some of your policies in these areas:  cap and trade, an aggressive EPA, and the looming prospect of higher taxes.  In our minds, these are job-killing policies.  So I'm asking you if you would be willing to re-look at some of these policies, with a high unemployment and the unsure economy that we have now, to assure West Virginians that you're listening.

     THE PRESIDENT:  Look, I listen all the time, including to your governor, who's somebody who I enjoyed working with a lot before the campaign and now that I'm President.  And I know that West Virginia struggles with unemployment, and I know how important coal is to West Virginia and a lot of the natural resources there.  That's part of the reason why I've said that we need a comprehensive energy policy that sets us up for a long-term future.

     For example, nobody has been a bigger promoter of clean coal technology than I am.  Testament to that, I ended up being in a whole bunch of advertisements that you guys saw all the time about investing in ways for us to burn coal more cleanly.

     I've said that I'm a promoter of nuclear energy, something that I think over the last three decades has been subject to a lot of partisan wrangling and ideological wrangling.  I don't think it makes sense.  I think that that has to be part of our energy mix.  I've said that I am supportive -- and I said this two nights ago at the State of the Union -- that I am in favor of increased production.

     So if you look at the ideas that this caucus has, again with respect to energy, I'm for a lot of what you said you are for.

The one thing that I've also said, though, and here we have a serious disagreement and my hope is we can work through these disagreements -- there's going to be an effort on the Senate side to do so on a bipartisan basis -- is that we have to plan for the future.

And the future is that clean energy -- cleaner forms of energy are going to be increasingly important, because even if folks are still skeptical in some cases about climate change in our politics and in Congress, the world is not skeptical about it.  If we're going to be after some of these big markets, they're going to be looking to see, is the United States the one that's developing clean coal technology?  Is the United States developing our natural gas resources in the most effective way?  Is the United States the one that is going to lead in electric cars?  Because if we're not leading, those other countries are going to be leading.

So what I want to do is work with West Virginia to figure out how we can seize that future.  But to do that, that means there's going to have to be some transition.  We can't operate the coal industry in the United States as if we're still in the 1920s or the 1930s or the 1950s.  We've got to be thinking what does that industry look like in the next hundred years.  And it's going to be different.  And that means there's going to be some transition.  And that's where I think a well-thought-through policy of incentivizing the new while recognizing that there's going to be a transition process -- and we're not just suddenly putting the old out of business right away -- that has to be something that both Republicans and Democrats should be able to embrace.

CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  Jason Chaffetz, Utah.

CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ:  Thank you, Mr. President.  It's truly an honor.

THE PRESIDENT:  Great to be here.

     CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ:  And I appreciate you being here.

I'm one of 22 House freshmen.  We didn't create this mess, but we are here to help clean it up.  You talked a lot about this deficit of trust.  There's some things that have happened that I would appreciate your perspective on, because I can look you in the eye and tell you we have not been obstructionists.  Democrats have the House and Senate and the presidency.  And when you stood up before the American people multiple times and said you would broadcast the health care debates on C-SPAN, you didn't.  And I was disappointed, and I think a lot of Americans were disappointed.

     You said you weren't going to allow lobbyists in the senior-most positions within your administration, and yet you did.  I applauded you when you said it -- and disappointed when you didn't.

     You said you'd go line by line through the health care debate -- or through the health care bill.  And there were six of us, including Dr. Phil Roe, who sent you a letter and said, "We would like to take you up on the offer; we'd like to come."  We never heard a letter, we never got a call.  We were never involved in any of those discussions.

     And when you said in the House of Representatives that you were going to tackle earmarks -- in fact, you didn't want to have any earmarks in any of your bills -- I jumped up out of my seat and applauded you.  But it didn't happen.

     More importantly, I want to talk about moving forward, but if we could address --

     THE PRESIDENT:  Well, how about --

     CONGRESSMAN CHAFFETZ:  -- I would certainly appreciate it.

     THE PRESIDENT:  That was a long list, so -- (laughter) -- let me respond.

     Look, the truth of the matter is that if you look at the health care process -- just over the course of the year -- overwhelmingly the majority of it actually was on C-SPAN, because it was taking place in congressional hearings in which you guys were participating.  I mean, how many committees were there that helped to shape this bill?  Countless hearings took place.

     Now, I kicked it off, by the way, with a meeting with many of you, including your key leadership.  What is true, there's no doubt about it, is that once it got through the committee process and there were now a series of meetings taking place all over the Capitol trying to figure out how to get the thing together -- that was a messy process.  And I take responsibility for not having structured it in a way where it was all taking place in one place that could be filmed.  How to do that logistically would not have been as easy as it sounds, because you're shuttling back and forth between the House, the Senate, different offices, et cetera, different legislators.  But I think it's a legitimate criticism.  So on that one, I take responsibility.

     With respect to earmarks, we didn't have earmarks in the Recovery Act.  We didn't get a lot of credit for it, but there were no earmarks in that.  I was confronted at the beginning of my term with an omnibus package that did have a lot of earmarks from Republicans and Democrats, and a lot of people in this chamber.  And the question was whether I was going to have a big budget fight, at a time when I was still trying to figure out whether or not the financial system was melting down and we had to make a whole bunch of emergency decisions about the economy.  So what I said was let's keep them to a minimum, but I couldn't excise them all.

     Now, the challenge I guess I would have for you as a freshman, is what are you doing inside your caucus to make sure that I'm not the only guy who is responsible for this stuff, so that we're working together, because this is going to be a process?

     When we talk about earmarks, I think all of us are willing to acknowledge that some of them are perfectly defensible, good projects; it's just they haven't gone through the regular appropriations process in the full light of day.  So one place to start is to make sure that they are at least transparent, that everybody knows what's there before we move forward.

     In terms of lobbyists, I can stand here unequivocally and say that there has not been an administration who was tougher on making sure that lobbyists weren't participating in the administration than any administration that's come before us.

     Now, what we did was, if there were lobbyists who were on boards and commissions that were carryovers and their term hadn't been completed, we didn't kick them off.  We simply said that moving forward any time a new slot opens, they're being replaced.

     So we've actually been very consistent in making sure that we are eliminating the impact of lobbyists, day in, day out, on how this administration operates.  There have been a handful of waivers where somebody is highly skilled -- for example, a doctor who ran Tobacco-Free Kids technically is a registered lobbyist; on the other end, has more experience than anybody in figuring out how kids don't get hooked on cigarettes.

     So there have been a couple of instances like that, but generally we've been very consistent on that front.

     CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee.

     CONGRESSMAN BLACKBURN:  Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you for acknowledging that we have ideas on health care because, indeed, we do have ideas, we have plans, we have over 50 bills, we have lots of amendments that would bring health care ideas to the forefront.  We would -- we've got plans to lower cost, to change purchasing models, address medical liability, insurance accountability, chronic and preexisting conditions, and access to affordable care for those with those conditions, insurance portability, expanded access -- but not doing it with creating more government, more bureaucracy, and more cost for the American taxpayer.

And we look forward to sharing those ideas with you.  We want to work with you on health reform and making certain that we do it in an affordable, cost-effective way that is going to reduce bureaucracy, reduce government interference, and reduce costs to individuals and to taxpayers.  And if those good ideas aren't making it to you, maybe it's the House Democrat leadership that is an impediment instead of a conduit.

     But we're concerned also that there are some lessons learned from public option health care plans that maybe are not being heeded.  And certainly in my state of Tennessee, we were the test case for public option health care in 1994, and our Democrat government has even cautioned that maybe our experiences there would provide some lessons learned that should be heeded, and would provide guidance for us to go forward.  And as you said, what we should be doing is tossing old ideas out, bad ideas out, and moving forward in refining good ideas.  And certainly we would welcome that opportunity.

So my question to you is, when will we look forward to starting anew and sitting down with you to put all of these ideas on the table, to look at these lessons learned, to benefit from that experience, and to produce a product that is going to reduce government interference, reduce cost, and be fair to the American taxpayer?  (Applause.)

     THE PRESIDENT:  Actually, I've gotten many of your ideas.  I've taken a look at them, even before I was handed this.  Some of the ideas we have embraced in our package.  Some of them are embraced with caveats.  So let me give you an example.

     I think one of the proposals that has been focused on by the Republicans as a way to reduce costs is allowing insurance companies to sell across state lines.  We actually include that as part of our approach.  But the caveat is, we've got to do so with some minimum standards, because otherwise what happens is that you could have insurance companies circumvent a whole bunch of state regulations about basic benefits or what have you, making sure that a woman is able to get mammograms as part of preventive care, for example.  Part of what could happen is insurance companies could go into states and cherry-pick and just get those who are healthiest and leave behind those who are least healthy, which would raise everybody's premiums who weren't healthy, right?

     So it's not that many of these ideas aren't workable, but we have to refine them to make sure that they don't just end up worsening the situation for folks rather than making it better.

     Now, what I said at the State of the Union is what I still believe:  If you can show me -- and if I get confirmation from health care experts, people who know the system and how it works, including doctors and nurses -- ways of reducing people's premiums; covering those who do not have insurance; making it more affordable for small businesses; having insurance reforms that ensure people have insurance even when they've got preexisting conditions, that their coverage is not dropped just because they're sick, that young people right out of college or as they're entering in the workforce can still get health insurance -- if those component parts are things that you care about and want to do, I'm game.  And I've got -- and I've got a lot of these ideas.

     The last thing I will say, though -- let me say this about health care and the health care debate, because I think it also bears on a whole lot of other issues.  If you look at the package that we've presented -- and there's some stray cats and dogs that got in there that we were eliminating, we were in the process of eliminating.  For example, we said from the start that it was going to be important for us to be consistent in saying to people if you can have your -- if you want to keep the health insurance you got, you can keep it, that you're not going to have anybody getting in between you and your doctor in your decision making.  And I think that some of the provisions that got snuck in might have violated that pledge.

     And so we were in the process of scrubbing this and making sure that it's tight.  But at its core, if you look at the basic proposal that we've put forward:  it has an exchange so that businesses and the self-employed can buy into a pool and can get bargaining power the same way big companies do; the insurance reforms that I've already discussed, making sure that there's choice and competition for those who don't have health insurance.  The component parts of this thing are pretty similar to what Howard Baker, Bob Dole, and Tom Daschle proposed at the beginning of this debate last year.

     Now, you may not agree with Bob Dole and Howard Baker, and, certainly you don't agree with Tom Daschle on much, but that's not a radical bunch.  But if you were to listen to the debate and, frankly, how some of you went after this bill, you'd think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot.  No, I mean, that's how you guys -- (applause) -- that's how you guys presented it.

     And so I'm thinking to myself, well, how is it that a plan that is pretty centrist -- no, look, I mean, I'm just saying, I know you guys disagree, but if you look at the facts of this bill, most independent observers would say this is actually what many Republicans -- is similar to what many Republicans proposed to Bill Clinton when he was doing his debate on health care.

     So all I'm saying is, we've got to close the gap a little bit between the rhetoric and the reality.  I'm not suggesting that we're going to agree on everything, whether it's on health care or energy or what have you, but if the way these issues are being presented by the Republicans is that this is some wild-eyed plot to impose huge government in every aspect of our lives, what happens is you guys then don't have a lot of room to negotiate with me.

     I mean, the fact of the matter is, is that many of you, if you voted with the administration on something, are politically vulnerable in your own base, in your own party.  You've given yourselves very little room to work in a bipartisan fashion because what you've been telling your constituents is, this guy is doing all kinds of crazy stuff that's going to destroy America.

     And I would just say that we have to think about tone.  It's not just on your side, by the way -- it's on our side, as well.  This is part of what's happened in our politics, where we demonize the other side so much that when it comes to actually getting things done, it becomes tough to do.

     Mike.

     CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  Dr. Tom Price from Georgia, and then we'll have one more after that if your time permits, Mr. President.

     THE PRESIDENT:  You know, I'm having fun.  (Laughter.)

     CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  Okay.

     THE PRESIDENT:  This is great.  (Applause.)

     CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  So are we.

     CONGRESSMAN PRICE:  Mr. President, thank you.  I want to stick on the general topic of health care, but ask a very specific question.  You have repeatedly said, most recently at the State of the Union, that Republicans have offered no ideas and no solutions.  In spite of the fact --

     THE PRESIDENT:  I don't think I said that.  What I said was, within the context of health care -- I remember that speech pretty well, it was only two days ago -- (laughter) -- I said I welcome ideas that you might provide.  I didn't say that you haven't provided ideas.  I said I welcome those ideas that you'll provide.

     CONGRESSMAN PRICE:  Mr. President, multiple times, from your administration, there have come statements that Republicans have no ideas and no solutions.  In spite of the fact that we've offered, as demonstrated today, positive solutions to all of the challenges we face, including energy and the economy and health care, specifically in the area of health care -- this bill, H.R.3400, that has more co-sponsors than any health care bill in the House, is a bill that would provide health coverage for all Americans; would correct the significant insurance challenges of affordability and preexisting; would solve the lawsuit abuse issue, which isn't addressed significantly in the other proposals that went through the House and the Senate; would write into law that medical decisions are made between patients and families and doctors; and does all of that without raising taxes by a penny.

But my specific question is, what should we tell our constituents who know that Republicans have offered positive solutions to the challenges that Americans face and yet continue to hear out of the administration that we've offered nothing?

     THE PRESIDENT:  Tom, look, I have to say that on the -- let's just take the health care debate.  And it's probably not constructive for us to try to debate a particular bill -- this isn't the venue to do it.  But if you say, "We can offer coverage for all Americans, and it won't cost a penny," that's just not true.  You can't structure a bill where suddenly 30 million people have coverage, and it costs nothing.  If --

     CONGRESSMAN PRICE:  Mr. President, can I -- and I understand that we're not interested in debating this bill, but what should we tell our constituents who know that we've offered these solutions and yet hear from the administration that we have offered nothing.

     THE PRESIDENT:  Let me -- I'm using this as a specific example, so let me answer your question.  You asked a question; I want to answer it.

     It's not enough if you say, for example, that we've offered a health care plan and I look up -- this is just under the section that you've just provided me, or the book that you just provided me -- summary of GOP health care reform bill:  The GOP plan will lower health care premiums for American families and small businesses, addressing America's number-one priority for health reform.  I mean, that's an idea that we all embrace.  But specifically it's got to work.  I mean, there's got to be a mechanism in these plans that I can go to an independent health care expert and say, is this something that will actually work, or is it boilerplate?

If I'm told, for example, that the solution to dealing with health care costs is tort reform, something that I've said I am willing to work with you on, but the CBO or other experts say to me, at best, this could reduce health care costs relative to where they're growing by a couple of percentage points, or save $5 billion a year, that's what we can score it at, and it will not bend the cost curve long term or reduce premiums significantly -- then you can't make the claim that that's the only thing that we have to do.  If we're going to do multi-state insurance so that people can go across state lines, I've got to be able to go to an independent health care expert, Republican or Democrat, who can tell me that this won't result in cherry-picking of the healthiest going to some and the least healthy being worse off.

So I am absolutely committed to working with you on these issues, but it can't just be political assertions that aren't substantiated when it comes to the actual details of policy.  Because otherwise, we're going to be selling the American people a bill of goods.  I mean, the easiest thing for me to do on the health care debate would have been to tell people that what you're going to get is guaranteed health insurance, lower your costs, all the insurance reforms; we're going to lower the costs of Medicare and Medicaid and it won't cost anybody anything.  That's great politics, it's just not true.

So there's got to be some test of realism in any of these proposals, mine included.  I've got to hold myself accountable, and guaranteed the American people will hold themselves -- will hold me accountable if what I'm selling doesn't actually deliver.

     CONGRESSMAN PRICE:  Mr. President, a point of clarification, what's in the Better Solutions book are all the legislative proposals that were offered --

     THE PRESIDENT:  I understand that.  I've actually read your bills.

     CONGRESSMAN PRICE:  -- throughout 2009.

     THE PRESIDENT:  I understand.

     CONGRESSMAN PRICE:  And so, rest assured the summary document you received is backed up by precisely the kind of detailed legislation that Speaker Pelosi and your administration have been busy ignoring for 12 months.

     THE PRESIDENT:  Well, Mike -- well, hold on, hold on a second.  No, no, no, no.  Hold on a second, guys.  (Applause.)

     You know, Mike, I've read your legislation.  I mean, I take a look at this stuff -- and the good ideas we take.  But here's -- here's the thing -- here's the thing that I guess all of us have to be mindful of, it can't be all or nothing, one way or the other.  And what I mean by that is this:  If we put together a stimulus package in which a third of it are tax cuts that normally you guys would support, and support for states and the unemployed, and helping people stay on COBRA that your governors certainly would support -- Democrat or a Republican; and then you've got some infrastructure, and maybe there's some things in there that you don’t like in terms of infrastructure, or you think the bill should have been $500 billion instead of $700 billion or there's this provision or that provision that you don't like.  If there's uniform opposition because the Republican caucus doesn't get 100 percent or 80 percent of what you want, then it's going to be hard to get a deal done.  That's because that's not how democracy works.

     So my hope would be that we can look at some of these component parts of what we're doing and maybe we break some of them up on different policy issues.  So if the good congressman from Utah has a particular issue on lobbying reform that he wants to work with us on, we may not able to agree on a comprehensive package on everything but there may be some component parts that we can work on.

     You may not support our overall jobs package, but if you look at the tax credit that we're proposing for small businesses right now, it is consistent with a lot of what you guys have said in the past.  And just the fact that it's my administration that's proposing it shouldn't prevent you from supporting it.  That's my point.

     CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Peter Roskam from the great state of Illinois.

     THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, Peter is an old friend of mine.

     CONGRESSMAN ROSKAM:  Hey, Mr. President.

     THE PRESIDENT:  Peter and I have had many debates.

     CONGRESMAN ROSKAM:  Well, this won't be one.  Mr. President, I heard echoes today of the state senator that I served with in Springfield and there was an attribute and a characteristic that you had that I think served you well there.  You took on some very controversial subjects -- death penalty reform -- you and I --

     THE PRESIDENT:  Sure.  We worked on it together.

     CONGRESSMAN ROSKAM:  -- negotiated on.  You took on ethics reform.  You took on some big things.  One of the keys was you rolled your sleeves up, you worked with the other party, and ultimately you were able to make the deal.  Now, here's an observation.

Over the past year, in my view, that attribute hasn't been in full bloom.  And by that I mean, you've gotten this subtext of House Republicans that sincerely want to come and be a part of this national conversation toward solutions, but they've really been stiff-armed by Speaker Pelosi.  Now, I know you're not in charge of that chamber, but there really is this dynamic of, frankly, being shut out.  When John Boehner and Eric Cantor presented last February to you some substantive job creation, our stimulus alternative, the attack machine began to marginalize Eric -- and we can all look at the articles -- as "Mr. No," and there was this pretty dark story, ultimately, that wasn't productive and wasn't within this sort of framework that you're articulating today.

     So here's the question.  Moving forward, I think all of us want to hit the reset button on 2009.  How do we move forward?  And on the job creation piece in particular, you mentioned Colombia, you mentioned Panama, you mentioned South Korea.  Are you willing to work with us, for example, to make sure those FTAs get called, that's no-cost job creation?  And ultimately, as you're interacting with world leaders, that's got to put more arrows in your quiver, and that's a very, very powerful tool for us.  But the obstacle is, frankly, the politics within the Democratic caucus?

     THE PRESIDENT:  Well, first of all, Peter and I did work together effectively on a whole host of issues.  One of our former colleagues is right now running for governor, on the Republican side, in Illinois.  In the Republican primary, of course, they're running ads of him saying nice things about me.  Poor guy.  (Laughter.)

Although that's one of the points that I made earlier.  I mean, we've got to be careful about what we say about each other sometimes, because it boxes us in in ways that makes it difficult for us to work together, because our constituents start believing us.  They don't know sometimes this is just politics what you guys -- or folks on my side do sometimes. 

     So just a tone of civility instead of slash and burn would be helpful.  The problem we have sometimes is a media that responds only to slash-and-burn-style politics.  You don't get a lot of credit if I say, "You know, I think Paul Ryan is a pretty sincere guy and has a beautiful family."  Nobody is going to run that in the newspapers.

     Q    (Inaudible.)  (Laughter.)

     THE PRESIDENT:  And by the way, in case he's going to get a Republican challenge, I didn't mean it.  (Laughter.)  Don't want to hurt you, man.  (Laughter.)

     But on the specifics, I think both sides can take some blame for a sour climate on Capitol Hill.  What I can do maybe to help is to try to bring Republican and Democratic leadership together on a more regular basis with me.  That's, I think, a failure on my part, is to try to foster better communications even if there's disagreement.  And I will try to see if we can do more of that this year.  That's on the sort of the general issue.

     On the specific issue of trade, you're right, there are conflicts within and fissures within the Democratic Party.  I suspect there are probably going to be some fissures within the Republican Party, as well.  I mean, you know, if you went to some of your constituencies, they'd be pretty suspicious about it, new trade agreements, because the suspicion is somehow they're all one way.

So part of what we've been trying to do is to make sure that we're getting the enforcement side of this tight, make sure that if we've got a trade agreement with China or other countries, that they are abiding with it -- they're not stealing our intellectual property or making sure that their non-tariff barriers are lowered even as ours are opened up.  And my hope is, is that we can move forward with some of these trade agreements having built some confidence -- not just among particular constituency groups, but among the American people -- that trade is going to be reciprocal; that it's not just going to be a one-way street.

     You are absolutely right though, Peter, when you say, for example, South Korea is a great ally of ours.  I mean, when I visited there, there is no country that is more committed to friendship on a whole range of fronts than South Korea.  What is also true is that the European Union is about to sign a trade agreement with South Korea, which means right at the moment when they start opening up their markets, the Europeans might get in there before we do.

So we've got to make sure that we seize these opportunities.  I will be talking more about trade this year.  It's going to have to be trade that combines opening their markets with an enforcement mechanism, as well as just opening up our markets.  I think that's something that all of us would agree on.  Let's see if we can execute it over the next several years.  All right, is that it?

     CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  Jeb Hensarling, Texas.  And that will be it, Mr. President.

     THE PRESIDENT:  Jim [sic] is going to wrap things up?

     CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  Yes, sir.

     THE PRESIDENT:  All right.

     CONGRESSMAN HENSARLING:  Jeb, Mr. President. 

     THE PRESIDENT:  How are you?

     CONGRESSMAN HENSARLING:  I'm doing well.  Mr. President, a year ago I had an opportunity to speak to you about the national debt.  And something that you and I have in common is we both have small children.

     THE PRESIDENT:  Absolutely.

     CONGRESSMAN HENSARLING:  And I left that conversation really feeling your sincere commitment to ensuring that our children, our nation's children, do not inherit an unconscionable debt.  We know that under current law, that government -- the cost of government is due to grow from 20 percent of our economy to 40 percent of our economy, right about the time our children are leaving college and getting that first job.

     Mr. President, shortly after that conversation a year ago, the Republicans proposed a budget that ensured that government did not grow beyond the historical standard of 20 percent of GDP.  It was a budget that actually froze immediately non-defense discretionary spending.  It spent $5 trillion less than ultimately what was enacted into law, and unfortunately, I believe that budget was ignored.  And since that budget was ignored, what were the old annual deficits under Republicans have now become the monthly deficits under Democrats.  The national debt has increased 30 percent.

     Now, Mr. President, I know you believe -- and I understand the argument, and I respect the view that the spending is necessary due to the recession; many of us believe, frankly, it's part of the problem, not part of the solution.  But I understand and I respect your view.  But this is what I don't understand, Mr. President.  After that discussion, your administration proposed a budget that would triple the national debt over the next 10 years -- surely you don't believe 10 years from now we will still be mired in this recession -- and propose new entitlement spending and move the cost of government to almost 24.5 percent of the economy.

Now, very soon, Mr. President, you're due to submit a new budget.  And my question is --

THE PRESIDENT:  Jeb, I know there's a question in there somewhere, because you're making a whole bunch of assertions, half of which I disagree with, and I'm having to sit here listening to them.  At some point I know you're going to let me answer.  All right.

CONGRESSMAN HENSARLING:  That's the question.  You are soon to submit a new budget, Mr. President.  Will that new budget, like your old budget, triple the national debt and continue to take us down the path of increasing the cost of government to almost 25 percent of our economy?  That's the question, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT:  Jeb, with all due respect, I've just got to take this last question as an example of how it's very hard to have the kind of bipartisan work that we're going to do, because the whole question was structured as a talking point for running a campaign.

          Now, look, let's talk about the budget once again, because I'll go through it with you line by line.  The fact of the matter is, is that when we came into office, the deficit was $1.3 trillion.  -- $1.3 [trillion.]  So when you say that suddenly I've got a monthly budget that is higher than the -- a monthly deficit that's higher than the annual deficit left by the Republicans, that's factually just not true, and you know it's not true.

     And what is true is that we came in already with a $1.3 trillion deficit before I had passed any law.  What is true is we came in with $8 trillion worth of debt over the next decade -- had nothing to do with anything that we had done.  It had to do with the fact that in 2000 when there was a budget surplus of $200 billion, you had a Republican administration and a Republican Congress, and we had two tax cuts that weren't paid for.

     You had a prescription drug plan -- the biggest entitlement plan, by the way, in several decades -- that was passed without it being paid for.  You had two wars that were done through supplementals.  And then you had $3 trillion projected because of the lost revenue of this recession.  That's $8 trillion.

     Now, we increased it by a trillion dollars because of the spending that we had to make on the stimulus.  I am happy to have any independent fact-checker out there take a look at your presentation versus mine in terms of the accuracy of what I just said.

Now, going forward, here's the deal.  I think, Paul, for example, head of the budget committee, has looked at the budget and has made a serious proposal.  I've read it.  I can tell you what's in it.  And there are some ideas in there that I would agree with, but there are some ideas that we should have a healthy debate about because I don't agree with them.

The major driver of our long-term liabilities, everybody here knows, is Medicare and Medicaid and our health care spending.  Nothing comes close.  Social Security we could probably fix the same way Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan sat down together and they could figure something out.  That is manageable.  Medicare and Medicaid -- massive problem down the road.  That's where -- that's going to be what our children have to worry about.

     Now, Paul's approach -- and I want to be careful not simplifying this, because I know you've got a lot of detail in your plan -- but if I understand it correctly, would say we're going to provide vouchers of some sort for current Medicare recipients at the current level --

     CONGRESSMAN RYAN:  No.

     THE PRESIDENT:  No?

     CONGRESSMAN RYAN:  People 55 and above --

     THE PRESIDENT:  Fifty-five and -- well, no, I understand.  I mean, there's a grandfathering in, but just for future beneficiaries, right?  That's why I said I didn't want to -- I want to make sure that I'm not being unfair to your proposal, but I just want to point out that I've read it.  And the basic idea would be that at some point we hold Medicare cost per recipient constant as a way of making sure that that doesn't go way out of whack, and I'm sure there are some details that --

     CONGRESSMAN RYAN:  We drew it as a blend of inflation and health inflation, the point of our plan is -- because Medicare, as you know, is a $38 trillion unfunded liability -- it has to be reform for younger generations because it won't exist because it's going bankrupt.  And the premise of our idea is, look, why not give people the same kind of health care plan we here have in Congress?  That's the kind of reform we're proposing for Medicare.  (Applause.)

     THE PRESIDENT:  No, I understand.  Right, right.  Well, look, as I said before, this is an entirely legitimate proposal.  The problem is twofold:  One is that depending on how it's structured, if recipients are suddenly getting a plan that has their reimbursement rates going like this, but health care costs are still going up like that, then over time the way we're saving money is essentially by capping what they're getting relative to their costs.

     Now, I just want to point out -- and this brings me to the second problem -- when we made a very modest proposal as part of our package, our health care reform package, to eliminate the subsidies going to insurance companies for Medicare Advantage, we were attacked across the board, by many on your aisle, for slashing Medicare.  You remember?  We're going to start cutting benefits for seniors.  That was the story that was perpetrated out there -- scared the dickens out of a lot of seniors.

     No, no, but here's my point.  If the main question is going to be what do we do about Medicare costs, any proposal that Paul makes will be painted, factually, from the perspective of those who disagree with it, as cutting benefits over the long term.  Paul, I don't think you disagree with that, that there is a political vulnerability to doing anything that tinkers with Medicare.  And that's probably the biggest savings that are obtained through Paul's plan.

     And I raise that not because we shouldn't have a series discussion about it.  I raise that because we're not going to be able to do anything about any of these entitlements if what we do is characterized, whatever proposals are put out there, as, well, you know, that's -- the other party is being irresponsible; the other party is trying to hurt our senior citizens; that the other party is doing X, Y, Z. 

     That's why I say if we're going to frame these debates in ways that allow us to solve them, then we can't start off by figuring out, A, who's to blame; B, how can we make the American people afraid of the other side.  And unfortunately, that's how our politics works right now.  And that's how a lot of our discussion works.  That's how we start off -- every time somebody speaks in Congress, the first thing they do, they stand up and all the talking points -- I see Frank Luntz up here sitting in the front.  He's already polled it, and he said, you know, the way you're really going to -- I've done a focus group and the way we're going to really box in Obama on this one or make Pelosi look bad on that one -- I know, I like Frank, we've had conversations between Frank and I.  But that's how we operate.  It's all tactics, and it's not solving problems.

     And so the question is, at what point can we have a serious conversation about Medicare and its long-term liability, or a serious question about -- a serious conversation about Social Security, or a serious conversation about budget and debt in which we're not simply trying to position ourselves politically.  That's what I'm committed to doing.  We won't agree all the time in getting it done, but I'm committed to doing it.

     CONGRESSMAN PENCE:  Take one more?

     THE PRESIDENT:  You know, I've already gone over time.  But I'll be happy to take your question, Congressman, offline.  You can give me a call.  All right, thank you, everybody.  God bless you.  God bless the United States of America.  Thank you, everybody.  (Applause.)

                                      END                           1:32 P.M. EST
 

Remarks by the President and the Vice President at Town Hall Meeting in Tampa, Florida

University of Tampa Bob Martinez Sports Center, Tampa, Florida

1:14 P.M. EST

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Thank you all very, very much.  Thank you all very much.  It's amazing the crowds I draw.  (Laughter.)  It's great to be with you all today.  And I really hope you all got to hear the President's speech last night.  (Applause.)  Wasn't it good?  I think the President laid out with clarity and power what we've done, what we're going to do, and how we're committed to getting it done.  (Applause.)

He laid out a clear and ambitious plan -- a plan that flows from our core principles, the principles we ran on, our core mission that we said we were going to attend to when we took office a year ago.  And that was very simple:  to restore the middle class in America.  (Applause.)

Look, because of the President's bold leadership, we weathered the most ferocious economic storm this nation has seen since the Great Depression, keeping us from sliding into a depression, as some leading economists suggested.  The President from the outset has understood that it's all about jobs, but there's a lot of business to attend to just to keep us from sliding off the edge. 

Well, ladies and gentlemen, the President knows one other thing.  In a sense, it's more than about jobs.  A job is more than a paycheck.  It's about dignity and it's about respect.  And too many people have lost it.  (Applause.) 

Ladies and gentlemen, President Obama understands that the longest walk a mother or father can make is a trip up a short flight of stairs to their child's bedroom to say, "Honey, I'm sorry, you're not going to be able to stay at Stewart Middle School next year, or you can't play on West Tampa's Little League team next year, honey.  We're going to have to move because daddy or mommy lost their job, or because the bank said we can't keep our house." 

My dad made that walk when I was a kid in our home in Scranton, Pennsylvania.  I remember vividly my father walking up the stairs and I sitting on the end of the bed with my sister, Valerie, the only one old enough to understand what he was talking about.  He said, "I'm sorry, honey, but I'm going to have to move."

The first thought I had was, God, they're getting divorced -- literally.  That's what worried me.  He said, "I've got to move, honey.  You and Val are going to stay here with Mom and Jimmy and you're going to stay here with Grandpa, because Dad has to move to Delaware.  I'll be back.  It will take about a year, but I'll come back and forth.  But we're going to be okay."

Wasn't until I got older I realized how hard that must have been for my father to make that walk; how hard it must have been for him to go into the kitchen before that walk and say to his father-in-law, "Ambrose, can you do me a favor?  Can you keep my family?  Can Jean and the kids stay here with you?  I'll try to do it as quick as I can.  But there's no jobs."

Ladies and gentlemen, too many Floridians have had to make that walk over the last two years.  And the President and I understand.  We understand.  And we're determined to make sure that every hardworking Floridian, every hardworking American, is able to walk into his child's room and say, "Honey, it's going to be okay."  (Applause.)  That's what this is all about.  That's what this is all about.

As you heard last night, that's why we're putting in place the policies that will enable us to reduce the debt we inherited and deal with the spending required to keep us from falling off the cliff this year.  And during the process, you heard him say how we are reordering our country's priorities.  We're investing in health care, education, energy information, technology, health technology -- (applause) -- electric vehicles and batteries, investments that will help us build a new economy for the 21st century -- investments that will allow us to lead in the 21st century as we did in the 20th.

Ladies and gentlemen, we're determined to restore America to its rightful place at the leading edge of innovation, with bold ideas that will create jobs immediately and serve as the foundation, a new platform -- (applause) -- a new platform to build this economy on that will serve not just our immediate needs but future generations; ideas like wind power, solar energy, a smart grid, broadband -- (applause) -- and high-speed rail.  And that's why we're here today.  (Applause.)

Having made over 7,900 round trips, literally, on Amtrak, 250 miles a day, I am very familiar with rail.  (Laughter.)  And today you have no idea how pleased I am to talk about the announcement that we made yesterday awarding -- in total, nationwide -- nearly $8 billion from the Recovery Act, funding to move us in the direction of developing a high-speed rail service in 13 travel corridors covering 31 states all across this country.  (Applause.)

Ladies and gentlemen, these investments -- these investments have several goals:  first, to improve existing rail lines to make train service faster, more reliable; two, to pull cars off the road, reducing congestion, cutting pollution, and increasing productivity; and three, to begin to develop new corridors for high-speed trains that will go from 169 to 230 miles an hour.  (Applause.)

Ladies and gentlemen, like a corridor, right here from Tampa to Orlando -- (applause) -- so you'll be able to get on a train here to Orlando in less than an hour, without battling traffic and congestion, arrive at your destination.  Ladies and gentlemen, this single investment is not going to solve all our transportation issues overnight.  Instead, with more than $55 billion of proposals from 50 states all across the country, we're providing $8 billion in seed money.  And today's awards provide only initial funding for the rail system.  Like Tampa and Orlando route, more funding is going to come in the future as progress is made.

We have committed to another $5 billion in funding over the next five years.  It's a down payment on a truly national program that's going to reshape the way we travel.  It will change the way which we go from place to place, change the ways we work and live, and will connect communities to each other in a way that in the past was impossible.  Just like the Interstate Highway structure did back in the mid-'50s, it will have far-reaching consequences.

Let me ask you a question:  How can we, the leading nation in the world, be in a position where China, Spain, France -- and name all the other countries who have rail systems that are far superior to ours?

Ladies and gentlemen, it's about time we move.  But this time -- but this time, we're not only going to be providing a better way to transport; we're going to be taking cars off of congested highways, reducing carbon emissions, and saving billions of dollars in human productivity lost just sitting in traffic jams, as studies point out.

Most important, we're creating jobs -- good jobs.  (Applause.)  Construction jobs.  Manufacturing jobs.  And we're going to be creating them right now.  We're going to spur economic development in the future and we're making our communities more livable all in the process. 

And ladies and gentlemen, it's now my pleasure to introduce the man who's leading us in this new era of adventure, the President of the United States of America.  (Applause.)  President Barack Obama.  (Applause.) 

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, everybody.  Hello, Tampa!  (Applause.)  Thank you so much.  Thank you, everybody.  It's great to see you.  All right, everybody just make yourselves comfortable.  We're going to be here for a little bit.  (Applause.)  Thank you.  Thank you.

We've got -- we've got some special guests that I want to make sure we acknowledge.  Florida CFO Alex Sink is in the house.  (Applause.)  Representative Kathy Castor, your representative.  (Applause.)  Representative Alan Grayson.  (Applause.)  Representative Kendrick Meek.  (Applause.)  Representative Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.  (Applause.)  Your own mayor, Pam Iorio.  (Applause.)  The mayor of Orlando, Buddy Dyer.  (Applause.)  The president of University of Tampa, Ronald Vaughn.  (Applause.) 

And two very special -- two very special guests, Brian C. Smithey and Roger J. Picard.  I want you guys to know who these folks are.  They are members of the FEMA Florida Task Force Team 2 Canine Search Specialists.  They went down to Haiti and worked 26-hour-long shifts, staying with victims until they were rescued.  The Florida Task Force Team saved seven lives.  Brian worked at a school where his dog, Powder, found a young adult female buried in the rubble three to four days.  So these are the kinds of heroes that make America proud, and I want everybody to give them a big round of applause.  Stand up.  Stand up.  (Applause.)  Thank you.

And I haven't spotted him in the crowd yet, but I've got to do this -- even though I know you all are upset that he took all that success to the Colts -- (applause) -- he made his name here in Tampa.  (Applause.)  And he's not just a great coach, but he's just a model individual and leader, we're very proud to have him in the house, Coach Tony Dungy.  (Applause.)

Any of you want some analysis about the upcoming Super Bowl, Coach is free to give -- no, I'm just -- it's good to see you, Coach.

All right.  Now, first of all let me say it's good to be back in the Sunshine State.  (Applause.)  It is especially good to be back in January.  (Laughter.)  And it's always nice to get out of Washington -- it is -- and spend a little time with the people who sent me to Washington.  (Applause.)

Now, last night I spoke with you about where we've been over the past year and where I believe we need to go.  And I said what all of you know from your own lives:  These are difficult times; these are challenging times for our country.

In the last two years, we've gone through the deepest recession since the Great Depression.  Think about that.  A big chunk of the people here -- certainly the younger people here -- have never even seen a recession; they don't even -- it doesn't register on their minds.  This is by far the toughest thing that the country has gone through economically since the 1930s.

And Tampa, like so many communities across our country, has felt the lash of shuttered businesses and lost jobs and home foreclosures and vanished or dwindling savings.  And this storm came at the end of what some call a lost decade -- because what happened between 2000 and now, it was a decade in which paychecks shrank and jobs barely grew, and the costs of everything from health care to college education went up.  Irresponsibility from Wall Street to Washington left good, responsible Americans who did everything right still struggling in ways they never imagined.

Joe and I took office in the middle of this raging storm.  We ran for office, the highest office, because we had been hearing stories like this day in, day out, for years, even before the financial crisis hit.  So we're not going to rest until we rebuild an economy in which hard work and responsibility are rewarded, and businesses are hiring again, and wages are growing again, and the middle class can get its legs underneath it again.  (Applause.)  We will not rest until we build an economy that's ready for America's future.

Now, to do that, the first thing we had to do was break the back of this recession.  And that required some tough, in some cases unpopular but unnecessary -- all which were necessary steps.  I mean -- I mentioned this last night -- none of us wanted to have to stabilize the banking sector, particularly since they helped create this mess.  (Applause.)  But, as I explained last night, if we hadn't, the financial system literally could have melted down and that would have taken our entire economy and millions more families and businesses with it.

But because of the steps we've taken, now the markets have stabilized.  The economy is growing again.  (Applause.)  The worst of the storm has passed.  But I think all of you understand the devastation remains.  One in 10 Americans still can't find work.  That's why creating jobs has to be our number one priority in 2010.  (Applause.) 

The true engines of job creation here in America are America's businesses.  And there are several steps we can take to help them expand and hire new workers.  Last night I proposed taking $30 billion of the money that went to Wall Street banks but have now been repaid and use it to help community banks give small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat.  (Applause.)  That will help.  I also proposed a new tax credit for more than 1 million small businesses that hire new workers or raise wages.  And while we're at it, I believe that we should eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment, and provide a tax incentive for all businesses to invest in new plants and equipment.  (Applause.)

As Joe mentioned, we're going to put more Americans to work rebuilding our infrastructure, and building our infrastructure of the future.  I mean, it's important to repave our roads; it's important to repair our bridges so that they're safe.  But we want to start looking deep into the 21st century -- (applause) -- and we want to say to ourselves, there is no reason why other countries can build high-speed rail lines and we can't.  (Applause.)  And that's what's about to happen right here in Tampa -- we are going to start building a new high-speed rail line -- (applause) -- right here in Tampa, building for the future, putting people to work.  (Applause.)

I'm excited.  I'm going to come back down here and ride it.  (Laughter and applause.)  Joe and I -- you all have a date.  When that thing is all set up, we'll come down here and check it out.  (Laughter.) 

And by the way, this high-speed rail line is being funded by the Recovery Act.  (Applause.)  And one other thing we can start doing for jobs here in America that I mentioned last night -- I talked about this all through the campaign.  We put this proposal in our budget, we keep on getting resistance, but we are going to keep on pushing to end tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas and give those tax breaks to companies that create jobs right here in the United States of America.  (Applause.)  It's the right thing to do.  It's the right thing to do.  It's the right thing to do.  (Applause.)

Now, I have to say this:  The steps that I just mentioned will help accelerate job growth in an economy that is already beginning to grow, but the steps we take alone won't make up for the 7 million jobs we lost over the last two years.  I mean, keep in mind, when we were sworn into office, that December we had lost 650,000 jobs.  January, as we were being sworn in, we lost 700,000 jobs; February, 650,000 jobs.  So before we could even put in place the Recovery Act, you had already seen millions of jobs lost.  That's a deep hole that we're going to have to fill.  And the only way to do that is to lay a new foundation for long-term economic growth and finally address the struggles that middle-class families have been grappling with for years.

Now, Florida, that's why Joe and I asked for the chance to serve as your President and Vice President.  (Applause.)  Look, we didn't seek this office to push our problems off or take the easy road through the next election.  We ran to solve problems -- problems that had been nagging at America for decades.  We want to solve them for the next generation.  We ran to get the tough stuff done.  (Applause.)  So as I mentioned last night, I make no apology for trying to fix stuff that's hard, because -- (applause) -- I'll be honest with you -- I'll be honest with you, Joe and I are both pretty smart politicians, we've been at this a while.  (Laughter.)  The easiest way to keep your poll numbers high is to say nothing and to do nothing that offends anybody.  (Applause.)  That's true.  No, no, no, you just wave, smile and -- (laughter.)  That's how you do it.

The minute you actually start doing something, somebody is going to disagree with you.  (Applause.)  But that's what I promised.  Some of you remember the campaign.  I said I wasn't just going to tell you what you want to hear, I was going to tell you what you need to hear.  (Applause.)  So none of this is new.  There's nothing that we have talked about since we entered the White House that we didn't talk about during the campaign.  And so long as we have the privilege of serving you, we will not stop fighting for your future, no matter how many lumps we've got to take to get it done.  (Applause.)

I do also have to just mention -- I'm going to mention -- you know I love you in the media, but I will mention this little aspect of our media.  Our friends with the pads and the pencils -- last week I went to Ohio and I started saying what I'm saying now, which is, I'm going to fight for your future.  And they got all worked up.  They got worked up last week.  They said, is he trying to change his message; is he trying to get more populist; is this a strategy that he's pursuing to boost this, that and the other; is this something new?

I just had to do a little rewind here of how we ran our grassroots campaign -- (applause) -- because I've got some news.  I've got some news of my own here.  I've been fighting for working folks my entire adult life.  (Applause.)  That's why I entered public service -- to fight for folks in Chicago.  That's why I ran for the state Senate.  That's why I ran for the U.S. Senate.  That's why I ran for President -- to fight for people here in Tampa, and people here in Florida, and to fight for people all across the United States of America.  (Applause.)

I seem to remember coming to Tampa two weeks before the election -- (applause) -- and you know what I said?  This is a quote, people can check -- I'm sure it was reported in the newspapers.  I said, "Change never comes without a fight."  (Applause.)  That was true then.  It's true now.  Change never comes without a fight, Florida.  So I won't stop fighting; I know you won't, either. 

We're not going to stop fighting to give our kids a world-class education, to make college more affordable, to make sure that by 2020 we have the highest rate of college attendance of any country in the world.  (Applause.)  So we proposed that graduates should only pay 10 percent of their income to pay back their student loans.  (Applause.)  Students like that.  (Applause.)  And what I've said is we'll forgive student loan debt after 20 years -- but after 10 if you choose a career in public service.  Because if you decide you want to be a teacher -- (applause) -- if you decide you want to be a cop, if you're not making huge amounts of money we don't want to discourage you from that because of the cost of college.  And by the way, I've been there and Michelle has been there -- it took us 10 full years to pay off Michelle's student loans, 15 to pay mine off.  (Laughter.)  So I've been there.  And our belief, and I think your belief, is in the United States of America nobody should go broke because they chose to go to college.  We want everybody to go to college, and we don't want them going broke doing it.  (Applause.)

We won't stop fighting to spark innovation and ignite a clean energy economy where America's workers are building solar panels and wind towers and cutting-edge batteries for automobiles -- because the nation that leads the clean energy revolution will be the nation that leads the global economy.  (Applause.)  And, as I said last night, other countries aren't waiting.  They want those jobs.  China wants those jobs.  Germany wants those jobs.  They are going after them hard, making the investments required.

We're not going to stop fighting to give every American a fair shake.  The first bill I signed into law was making sure that there was equal pay for equal work for women -- the Lilly Ledbetter Act -- (applause) -- because I think you should be paid the same for doing the same work.  That's just fair.  (Applause.)  And by the way, men, you should have been standing up clapping for that because -- (laughter) -- because most families today are depending on two paychecks, not one, to get by.  (Applause.)

We're not going to stop fighting to protect the American consumer.  That's why I signed a Credit Card Bill of Rights into law to protect you from surprise charges and retroactive rate hikes and other unfair rules.  That's why I'm fighting for a tough consumer financial protection agency to protect you against things like hidden fees that can make an ATM withdrawal cost 30 bucks.  (Applause.) 

I just want to be clear here, for the benefit of my friends in the back.  (Laughter.)  We need a strong financial sector.  Without it, businesses can't get capital to grow and create jobs.  Families can't finance a home loan or education.  So we want a healthy financial sector.  And there are folks all across the country working in banks who are doing great service to their community.  But we also need some rules of the road for Wall Street, so that reckless decisions made by a few don't take our economy over the side.  (Applause.)  That's common sense.  There's nothing radical about that.  In fact, the banks should want it because it would create greater stability in the system.

And, yes, we will not stop fighting for a health care system that works for the American people, not just for the insurance industry.  (Applause.)  We won't stop.  We want a system where you can't be denied care if you have a preexisting condition.  (Applause.)  You can't get thrown off your insurance right at the time when you get seriously ill.  We want a system where small businesses can get insurance at a price they can afford.  (Applause.)

Nobody pays more than small businesses and individuals who are self-employed in the insurance market, because they've got no leverage.  We want to change that by allowing them to be able to set up a pool.  We want to make sure that people who don't have coverage can find an affordable choice in a competitive marketplace.  (Applause.)  We want a system in which seniors don't have these huge gaps in their Medicare prescription drug coverage -- (applause) -- and where Medicare itself is on a sounder financial footing.  Those are the things that we're fighting for.

And I'm not going to stop on that, because it's the right thing to do, and by the way, if you are serious about reducing our deficit and debt you cannot accomplish it without reforming our health care system, because that's what's gobbling up more federal dollars than anything else.  (Applause.)  I don't understand folks who say they don't want to see government spending out of control, and then are fighting reforms that the Congressional Budget Office says would cut a trillion dollars off our deficit over the next two decades.  (Applause.)  Those aren't my numbers. 

Now, we're never going to stop fighting to cut waste and abuse in Washington.  We do have to rein in deficits that have been accumulating for too long.  Families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions.  It's time for the federal government to do the same.  And that's why I proposed specific steps last night to bring the deficit down.  And I'm grateful that the Senate just passed, as we were flying down here to Florida, a rule called pay-as-you-go, or PAYGO, that was a big reason we had record surpluses in the 1990s instead of the record deficits that were handed to me when I ran -- walked into office.

Look, it's a very simply concept, this PAYGO.  It basically just says you got to pay as you go.  (Laughter.)  It's sort of how you live.  At least after you cut up those credit cards.  (Laughter.)  Basically, you want to start a new program?  Start a new program.  But you've got to end an old one that pays for it.  If you want to cut taxes, great, cut taxes.  But you've got to figure out how to fill the revenue that results when you lose that tax revenue.  So the idea is just honest accounting.  That's what's needed.

Let me say one more word about health care.  I just got to  -- I'm gnawing on this bone a little bit.  (Laughter.)  I know that the longer the process worked through on a complicated issue like this, the uglier it looked.  You know, there's -- and it doesn't help when you've got the insurance industry spending several hundred million dollars advertising against it, but -- but after a while, people didn't know what to think.  And you started asking yourselves, what's in it for me? 

And as I said last night, I take my share of the blame for not explaining our approach more clearly.  But this problem is not going to go away.  The tough stories I read in letters at night, they're not stopping.  I'm not going to walk away from these efforts.  And I won't walk away from you.  (Applause.)  And I don't think Congress should walk away, either.  We are going to keep working to get this done.  And I hope we can get some Republicans to join Democrats in understanding the urgency of the problem.  (Applause.)

On every one of these issues my door remains open to good ideas from both parties.  I want the Republicans off the sidelines.  I want them working with us to solve problems facing working families -- not to score points.  I want a partnership.  What we can't do, though -- here's what I'm not open to.  I don't want gridlock on issue after issue after issue when there's so many urgent problems to solve.  (Applause.)  And I don't want an attitude, "If Obama loses, then we win."  I mean, that can't be a platform.  (Applause.)  Even if you disagree with me on some specific issues, all of us should be rooting for each other.  (Applause.)  All of us should be working for America moving forward and solving problems. 

So that, you know, "you lose, I win" mentality, that mindset may be good for short-term politics, but it's not a mindset that's equal to these times.  (Applause.)  It's not worthy of you.  What you deserve is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences, overcome our politics, do what is hard, do what is necessary to advance the American Dream and keep it alive for our time and for all time.  (Applause.)

We have come through a tough year, and a tough decade.  But a new year is here and a new decade is stretching before us.  Opportunities are there for the taking:  every business owner working on the innovation of tomorrow; every student reaching for a better future; every ready -- everyone ready to roll up their sleeves and play their part in rebuilding America. 

Yes, we can.  (Applause.)  We don't back down.  We don't quit.  We are Americans.  And today, here with all of you, I have never been more hopeful about our future than I am right now.  I am confident that we can make this happen and move this country forward. 

Thank you very much, Tampa.  I love you guys.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  (Applause.)

All right, I've got -- everybody relax again.  Everybody relax.  (Laughter.)  I've got time for a few questions.  I'm going to take off my jacket here, just because -- (applause.)  Joe, are you going to hold my coat? 

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  You answer all the tough questions.  I'll hold the coat.  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  I know there may be some tough questions here, so -- all right, here are the only rules to this.  I'm going to try to get in about five, six questions.  I will -- so I'm not going to be able to get to everybody.  I apologize in advance.  To make sure that it's fair, we're going to go girl, boy, girl, boy.  (Laughter.)  All right?  So I'm going to call on a young lady first, and then I'm going to call on a gentleman, and we're just going to keep on going down the line, and we'll get through as many as we can.

All right, everybody is pointing in this -- this young woman in the red here, so we'll start with you.  And if you don't mind, introduce yourself.  Wait for the microphone.  A microphone will be coming up and -- all right.

Q    Hello, Mr. President.  My name is Layla (phonetic), I'm a student at the University of South Florida.  (Applause.)

AUDIENCE:  Booo!

THE PRESIDENT:  Hey, Layla.  Uh-oh.  Uh-oh.  Come on, we can all get along here.  (Laughter.)  Tampa, behave yourselves. 

Q    First of all, I'd like to say that I did work on your campaign.  I think it's great what you did for the community because you involved us as the youth to understand the grassroots movement and what impact it can make.

THE PRESIDENT:  That's great.  Thank you.

Q    My question is, last night in your State of the Union address you spoke of America's support for human rights.  Then why have we not condemned Israel and Egypt's human rights violations against the occupied Palestinian people and yet we continue to support financially with billions of dollars coming from our tax dollars?

AUDIENCE:  Booo!

THE PRESIDENT:  Okay, now, everybody has got to be courteous, everybody is answering the question.

Let me just talk about the Middle East generally.  Look -- all right, everybody, come on, come on, hold on.  Hold on one second, I've got to answer my question first, sir.  Okay.  I know you got -- what, you got some beads on -- are those New Orleans beads?  Okay.

Look, look, look, the Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries.  And it's an issue that elicits a lot of passions, as you heard.

Here's my view.  Israel is one of our strongest allies.  It has -- (applause.)  Let me just play this out.  It is a vibrant democracy.  It shares links with us in all sorts of ways.  It is critical for us and I will never waver from ensuring Israel's security and helping them secure themselves in what is a very hostile region.  (Applause.)  So I make no apologies for that.

What is also true is that the plight of the Palestinians is something that we have to pay attention to, because it is not good for our security and it is not good for Israel's security if you've got millions of individuals who feel hopeless, who don't have an opportunity to get an education or get a job or what have you.

Now, the history of there is long and I don't have time to go through the grievances of both sides in the issue.  What I have said and what we did from the beginning when I came into office is to say we are seeking a two-state solution in which Israel and the Palestinians can live side by side in peace and security.  (Applause.)  In order to do that both sides are going to have to make compromises.  (Applause.)

As a first step, the Palestinians have to unequivocally renounce violence and recognize Israel.  (Applause.)  And Israel has to acknowledge legitimate grievances and interests of the Palestinians.  We know what a solution could look like in the region, but here's the problem that we're confronting right now, is that both in Israel and within the Palestinian Territories, the politics are difficult; they're divided.  The Israel government came in based on the support of a lot of folks who don't want to make a lot of concessions.  I think Prime Minister Netanyahu is actually making some effort to try to move a little bit further than his coalition wants him to go.  On the other hand, President Abbas of the Palestinian Authority, who I think genuinely wants peace, has to deal with Hamas, an organization that has not recognized Israel and has not disavowed violence.

And so we are working to try to strengthen the ability of both parties to sit down across the table and to begin serious negotiations.  And I think that it's important when we're talking about this issue to make sure that we don't just knee-jerk, use language that is inflammatory or in some fashion discourages the possibility of negotiation.  We've got to recognize that both the Palestinian people and Israelis have legitimate aspirations and they can be best served if the United States is helping them understand each other, as opposed to demonizing each other.

All right.  (Applause.)  Okay.  All right.  It's a gentleman's turn.  It's a gentleman's turn.  This gentleman here -- I'm going to go on the other side of the room.  The gentleman in the yellow tie.

Q    Bill Segal, Orange County Commissioner.  Welcome, Mr. President.  What's the decision matrix going to look like for high-speed rail?  How are we going to decide who gets what?  And when is the announcement going to be made?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I probably should have Mr. Biden talk about this because he has been working diligently overseeing the Recovery Act.  Let me make a general point about high-speed rail as well as the way the infrastructure is being moved through the Recovery Act.

General point number one is that making an investment in infrastructure is a two-fer, because it creates jobs immediately and it lays the foundation for a vibrant economy in the future.  So it's one of our best investments.  But it's expensive.  We've got a couple of trillion dollars' worth of infrastructure repairs just on our old infrastructure, our existing infrastructure -- our roads, our bridges.  People remember what happened to the bridge up in Minneapolis that just buckled and collapsed.  Well, unfortunately, we've got a lot of aging infrastructure.  Some of it is not as visible as bridges, some of it is water systems, pipes underground that essentially were built back in the 1930s -- in some cases even older than that.  So we're going to have to make a commitment to our long-term infrastructure.

And one of the things that we're hoping to do is as we make more investments in infrastructure under my administration that we start figuring out ways that we can take some of the politics out of infrastructure -- and what I mean by that is right now a lot of decisions are made about projects based on who's got the most powerful congressman or senator.  And what we're hoping to do is at least some of the decision-making based a little bit more on what are the engineering plans that determine this is the best project to go forward.

And one way of doing that is to create what's called an infrastructure bank where at least a certain amount of infrastructure money, particularly for new projects, would be guided by some clear criteria, a lot of transparency, engineers and urban planners and city planners involved in the process so that we can also get some regional planning.  Because part of what happens when politics is involved in transportation is that the commissioner over here may not have the same ideas, the mayor over here may not have the same idea as the senator over there -- except they all represent a similar region.  And so you get a whole bunch of traffic systems that don't work and aren't efficient and don't serve commuters very well at all.  So that's the kind of general direction that we'd like to move to.

The second point I would make is that if we're going to be making investments in infrastructure anyway, we can't just look backwards, we've got to look forward.  I mean, how many people here have been on one of these high-speed trains?  When you were traveling outside the country, unfortunately, for the most part.  I mean, those things are fast, they are smooth.  You don't have to take off your shoes.  (Laughter.)  Right?  Check to see if you're wearing the socks with no holes in them.

Why is it we don't have those?  Now, part of it is we're a very big country, we're not as densely populated as some countries in Europe and Asia -- and let's face it, we just love our cars.  We love our cars.  We don't love gas prices, but we love our cars.

Q    What about gas prices?

THE PRESIDENT:  But -- well, what about gas prices, right?  (Laughter.)  I'll talk about that in a second, but -- no, you know what?  I'll talk about it now.

Even if -- and I mentioned last night we have to increase production on oil, we have to increase production on natural gas, because we're not going to be able to get all our clean energy up and running quickly enough to meet all of our economic growth needs.  But even if we are increasing production we've got to get started now decreasing our use and making our economy more efficient.  (Applause.)

And so that's why we need to invest in infrastructure like high-speed rail that will allow us to choose the option of taking the train.  (Applause.)  And if more and more facilities like that are available that's going to be good, as I said, for the economy of the region and it's going to be good for individual lifestyles because people aren't going to be stuck in traffic for two hours.  It'll increase productivity.  People will get to work on time a lot faster.  They'll be less aggravated.  Right?

Now, Joe, in terms of the high-speed rail here, do you have something specific to say?

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  I'll make it real simple.  Think of the Interstate Highway System in the '50s.  What you did is you pick the portions where you could begin to build where there was the most likely to have the heaviest traffic, so that people would use it the most, and then just build that out.

What we did is we picked -- the Department of Transportation picked the Orlando-Tampa route, Tampa-Orlando, because you were most ready, your plans were the most advanced -- (applause) -- and the objective is it's not just going to be here, it's all the way -- going to come around all the way heading up going down to Miami as well.  (Applause.)  That's why we picked California.  California, Mr. President, there's over a $2 billion investment because they had plans, they're ready to go.

And I might add, they're both Republican governors -- so we didn't pick this based on politics.  I mean this sincerely.  (Applause.)  So we're picking the places that make the most sense, have the highest density, are ready to go.  And there's been $55 billion worth of requests coming from the states.  The good news about that, Mr. President, is we're also funding, with some of the money, planning efforts, because some of the plans aren't complete enough.

And lastly, Mr. President, we are making a big difference with a portion of this money -- over a billion dollars of the $8 billion -- on taking railroads, for example, from Richmond to Washington, that go 65 miles an hour.  By getting that up to 110 miles an hour you take a whole lot of cars off the highway, it becomes economically reasonable to do it.  So we're taking corridors that in fact exist where we can increase the mileage enough that it can make a difference on congestion.

And I'll point out one thing:  I-95 -- and you all know I-95 on the other side of the state -- I-95 going all the way up at Marway (phonetic) in the congested areas cost $22 million per lane to build per mile.  You can build this railroad for less than $2 million in that.  (Applause.)  So it makes sense.  It's where it works.  And we're going to have to build it out.  (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Good.  Let me just say -- let me just say, by the way, give a compliment to Vice President Biden.  He and his team have overseen the Recovery Act.  You have not seen scandal break out on a huge endeavor.  You know, people complain a lot about how government works and wastes money, et cetera.  The truth is, is that if you look at how the recovery dollars have been spent, they have been spent the way they were promised.  And there's complete transparency, so you guys can go on the White House Web site and look at every single project that has been awarded a Recovery Act grant, every single one, and scrutinize them.  You know who the contractors are, you know who's doing the work, you know when it's supposed to be finished.  So you can check out all this stuff and you will be able to monitor how the high-speed rail project here is operating just by going to our Web site.

All right, it's a young lady's turn.  All right.  Let me -- it's a woman's turn, so -- all right, how about -- she's jumping up and down right here.  There we go.

Q    Wow.

THE PRESIDENT:  All right, but you can't blow your whistle, though.  All right.  (Laughter.)

Q    President Obama, my name is Rashonda Williams (phonetic).  I'm from Kissimmee, Florida.  I don't know if Ms. Tchen has given you the poem that I wrote you.

THE PRESIDENT:  Not yet.

Q    Ask Ms. Tchen.  She came to the Center for Drug-Free Living over in Orlando.

THE PRESIDENT:  Okay. 

Q    And I wrote a poem for you winning the presidency; I printed it up and put it on a nice background.  But my question is -- and I told her to give it to you.

THE PRESIDENT:  Okay, I'll be looking for it.

Q    So you ask Miss Tina for that.  My question is, my brothers are in and out of jail, with the drugs, the selling of the drugs.  And a lot of them can't get jobs coming out.  So the only thing they know is to go back to what they -- what they're used to, because of their felonies.  My brother is 27; he has 33 felonies -- drug felonies, mind you.  So what I'm saying is, is there anything that could be put into motion that can get these guys, coming from prison, get in a system where they can get hired and get their self-esteem built back up so that they don't have to go back out to the street to sell drugs?  (Applause.)  Because if they don't hire them, all they're going to do is continue to sell the drugs.  So we need some kind of company that can teach these gentlemen coming out some kind of trade that will keep them from going back out and selling these drugs.

THE PRESIDENT:  Okay, well, first of all, I look forward to reading your poem. 

Look, we've got a great challenge in particularly our inner-city communities.  But, actually, if you go to rural communities in the Midwest right now, they may be selling different drugs but you're seeing some of the same patterns. 

Joe and I were campaigning in Iowa, and you'd go into small towns where you wouldn't think there would ever be a problem with the drug trade, and the methamphetamine trade was identical to the crack trade in the big cities -- same patterns of young people getting drawn in.

So a couple of things have to happen to deal with this problem.  Number one, the single most important thing we can do is to make sure that our very young children are getting a healthy start in life and that their parents, or parent, or caregiver, have the support that's necessary so that they can stay on a straight path of success in school, because if young people -- if their minds are active and they're doing well in school, they are less likely to fall prey to either using drugs or deciding to deal in drugs.  (Applause.)

And that's why I mentioned yesterday -- I mentioned yesterday the single best anti-poverty program around is a world-class education.  (Applause.)  That's why we're going to invest in early childhood education.  That's why we are reforming and pushing states and communities to reform how education works. 

And by the way, we've gotten into trouble sometimes not just from conservatives but sometimes from liberals because we're trying to shake up low-performing schools.  People say, well, why don't you just give them more money?  And my attitude is, you know what?  We can give more money to schools -- that's important -- small class sizes, better classrooms, all those things I care deeply about.  But that money will not make a dime's bit of difference if we're not also reforming how kids are learning -- (applause) -- making sure that our teachers know their subject matter, and that they know the best ways to teach; making sure that parents are staying on top of kids and instilling a sense of excellence and performance in those youth.

So that -- I want to make that point first, because, frankly, it would be so much easier to work with your brother, if he hadn't gone to jail in the first place, to get a job.  Thirty-three felonies is a lot.  I mean, that's a long rap sheet, which means that it's very -- I'm just being realistic.  If I'm a business owner, and I'm saying to myself, right now the unemployment rate is 10 percent, so there are a whole lot of folks who have never been to jail who are looking for a job -- it's hard for me to say, I'll choose the guy who went to jail instead of the person who never went to jail and has been laid off.

Now, having said that, what is also true -- what you say is exactly right, that if we can't break the cycle, then all we're doing is just churning folks in a revolving door -- through the jail system, back on the streets, back to dealing drugs, back to -- and this is part of my faith, my religious faith, but you don't have to be religious to, I think, believe in the idea of redemption, that people can get a second chance, that people can change.  (Applause.)

So one of the things that we've done is, actually Vice President Biden, myself, some Republicans -- Sam Brownback, for example, of Kansas -- have worked together to promote what we call the Second Chance Act, which links ex-offenders with programs that can provide them with skills, that can provide them with opportunities to get some work experience, and then can essentially certify that they are ready for the workplace; and then trying to encourage private sector companies to hire some of these ex-offenders.

The program is not as well funded as I would like.  We'd like to see if we can do more with it.  It has to be done in a partnership with state and local communities.  But I do think it's something that ends up being actually wise for taxpayers because every prisoner is costing us about $16,000, $18,000, $20,000, and every one of us are paying for it.  So if we can find programs that work, breaking that cycle, ultimately that can be a good investment for taxpayers all across the country.  (Applause.)

All right.  All right, it's a man's turn.  I'm going to call on that big guy right there with a little hair.  (Laughter.)  Since the microphone is right next to him. 

Q    Thank you.  My name is Steve Gordon.  I'm from Clearwater.  And I manufacture -- I own a small company, environmental company.  I manufacture the Instant-Off water-saving device that fits on any faucet worldwide.  I'm frustrated because I can create 500 jobs; I've gone to the banks, I can't get a loan.  And I speak for all businesses in the United States.  (Applause.)  We are tired of dealing with banks.  And I don't understand -- and this is my question for you, is that I know you care, I know you're trying.  And I appreciate the pledge of $30 billion to small businesses.  But lending it to the banks to lend to us is not the answer.  It's just not.

What I suggest, and the question is, why can't you use the SBA just like you lent directly to Wall Street, you lent directly to the automakers, you lent directly to the banks -- why can't the government make small businesses available directly to us?  (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, this is a good question.  Look, first of all, you should be aware that we have increased SBA loans during the course of this year by 70 percent in some cases.  So some of the key programs for businesses like yours we have massively increased their lending.  And by the way, we've waived some of the fees and red tape that are associated with you getting a loan from the SBA.

Now, it's not enough.  Just -- I know you're shaking your head here.  I understand it's not enough because you still want a loan.  So -- but you need to -- I just want you to know, it's not like we haven't thought of why don't we use the SBA.  We have.  The challenge that we've got is, is that even SBA loans are generally run not by the SBA; the SBA essentially works with local banks, community banks, neighborhood banks, to process the loan.  And essentially the SBA underwrites the loan. 

And so the SBA does not have the infrastructure to go all across the country in every region and process loans to small businesses directly because they don't have enough people.  Somebody yelled, "Why not?"  The SBA doesn't have the staff to do it. 

Keep in mind, a small business loan of any sort, or a large business loan of any sort requires some sense of, all right, what's the business plan, what are your projected earnings, et cetera, et cetera.  And somebody has got to do that.  Now, if the SBA were to suddenly take over that entire function we'd have to stand up a massive bureaucracy -- a huge one.  And we'd have to train all those people and it would take too long, and you'd be frustrated -- why is it that this big government agency can't seem to run anything?

So what we've decided to do instead is to take $30 billion that was repaid by the banks and make that available under criteria that will encourage small banks to give those loans to you.  And if we do that effectively, we can potentially get that money out the door more quickly.

But I am absolutely sympathetic to what you're saying because I'm hearing it everywhere I go.  And I -- that's why I mentioned it last night in my speech.  You've got a lot of small business owners who are ready to grow, ready to hire, but they just can't get financing.  So we're going to use the SBA as one tool; this $30 billion is going to help.  Ultimately, though, the vast majority of small businesses, their loans are going to come from the private sector.  And we've got to get the private sector to think differently.

What happened here was that everybody was making loans without thinking of the risk at all.  They were just sending out money out the door; that's how a lot of overdevelopment happened here in Florida, it happened in Nevada, it happened in California -- because people were just saying, you know what, we're making money, we're not going to ask a lot of questions.  Suddenly the bottom falls out.  And the pendulum has shifted too far in the other direction so that even if you've got a good business plan, you've got a good model and you're making profits and a good product, now banks are reluctant to lend at all.

And what we're trying to do is to encourage them to get that happy medium where they're not taking such exorbitant risks that they threaten the entire system, but they're also open to enough risk that America's dynamic free enterprise system is actually able to work.

One role -- one aspect of this is also getting regulators who oversee the banks -- which aren't under my supervision; these are independent bank regulators -- getting them to at least take a closer look at their policies, because a lot of bankers will tell you they want to loan you the money but they're worried about -- they suffered all these losses because of some of the mortgage stuff going belly up.  So what they'll tell you is, I've got a bank regulator breathing down my neck making sure that I'm keeping my capital levels high enough.  And we're going to have to make some adjustments there.  But that's not something the administration can do directly.  We can just encourage these independent regulators to take a closer look at it.

I'm confident you're going to succeed, though.  And you can give maybe Reggie Love here your business card so we can find out about your terrific business.  (Applause.)

All right, I've got time only for -- I've only got time -- I've only got time for two more questions.  This young lady right here, she's been standing here a very long time.

Q    First, my 15-year-old son, Zach Cartwright (phonetic), wanted me to tell you that he is a big supporter of yours.

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, tell Zach thank you so much. 

Q    Many families are having to withdraw money from their 401(k)s.  Once this occurs, in addition to taxes there's a 10 percent penalty assessed.  Since the withdrawals are taking place due to hardship, families don't always have the money to pay the 10 percent and the penalties.  The interest then accrues until the day full payment is made.  The IRS recently made headlines after giving tax breaks to Citigroup.  Several months ago people with offshore accounts were given amnesty.  My question is, why is the IRS coming after the middle class, creating more stress for us?  (Applause.)  And what is your plan to help resolve this?  And if Congress is unable to deal with the issue directly impacting the middle class, I'm happy to contribute my ideas.  (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, this is something that actually I personally experienced -- this was several years ago.  Michelle and I had some family emergencies -- this was when I was still working in a law firm.  I had a small retirement account set up and I ended up having to withdraw it and pay that 10 percent penalty, and it was no fun.  But it was what we had to do.  And fortunately we were young enough where we could absorb that hit.  A lot of families aren't in that position, if they've got a nest egg, to suddenly have to -- it's bad enough having to draw it down, but then also to have to pay taxes on top of it is really tough.

Now, the reason that policy is in place, obviously, is because you're getting that money tax-free, the idea being that you're going to actually use it for retirement.  And then if you're spending it early, before retirement, then you can imagine that a lot of people could potentially game the system by using these accounts to avoid taxes.  So I just want to show a little sympathy here for those who are trying to enforce the law -- they're not mean-spirited, they're just trying to -- they're working with the system that was set up.

I think you are raising a legitimate point, though.  And if I'm not mistaken we actually started looking at this, Joe, in our administration -- was to take a look at are there circumstances -- and the specific thing that we were thinking about was medical emergencies -- where people should not be penalized for it.  And I think that issuing blanket amnesties in all circumstances may not be possible.  But taking a look at certain narrow categories of emergencies in which these penalties could be waived is something that we have discussed and I think we could explore.  All right?  (Applause.)

Okay.  All right.  I got one more -- okay, everybody is pointing at this young man, so I'm going to call on this guy right here.  I think that's all his sisters were all pointing at him.  They're like, "Oh, call on my brother."  (Laughter.)

Q    All right, I'm Hector and I'm a student at UT.  (Applause.)  And my question is, last night you talked about repealing "don't ask, don't tell," and my question is what are you doing now to put in motion so that same-sex couples and homosexuals are treated as equal citizens of the United States, i.e., same-sex marriages and the thousand-plus benefits that heterosexual couples enjoy after marriage?  (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Look, as I said last night, my belief is, is that a basic principle in our Constitution is that if you're obeying the law, if you're following the rules, that you should be treated the same, regardless of who you are.  (Applause.)  I think that principle applies to gay and lesbian couples.  So at the federal level, one of the things that we're trying to do is to make sure that partnerships are recognized for purposes of benefits so that hospital visitation, for example, is something that is permitted; that Social Security benefits or pension benefits or others, that same-sex couples are recognized in all those circumstances.

I think that we've got to -- we actually have an opportunity of passing a law that's been introduced in Congress right now, and my hope is this year we can get it done, just for federal employees and federal workers.  A lot of companies, on their own, some of the best-run companies have adopted these same practices. I think it's the right thing to do and it makes sense for us to take a leadership role in ensuring that people are treated the same.  (Applause.) 

Look, if you are -- regardless of your personal opinions, the notion that somebody who's working really hard for 30 years can't take their death benefits and transfer them to the person that they love the most in the world and who has supported them all their lives, that just doesn't seem fair.  It doesn't seem right.  (Applause.)  And I think it's the right thing to do.

Okay, look, guys -- listen, everybody.  I've got to take off. 

AUDIENCE:  No!

THE PRESIDENT:  Wait, wait.  But I warned you guys I couldn't answer every question.  Let me just say in closing -- let me just say this in closing.  (Applause.)  Let me say this in closing -- hold on a second, hold on a second, hold on, hold on a second.

I want to say this.  Look, we've gone through a very difficult year.  But I have great optimism that we have begun to dig ourselves out of this hole.  In order for us to do it successfully, we're going to have to work together, we're going to have to listen to each other, we're going to have to be respectful of each other. 

So I want to end on mentioning something that I talked about last night.  You know, our political dialogue in this country has always been noisy and messy because we come from different places, we've got different ideas, different beliefs.  I understand all that.  But we're all Americans.  We all should anticipate that the other person, even if they disagree with us, has the best of intentions.  We don't have to call them names.  We don't have to demonize them.  And that's true whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, whether you are a conservative or a liberal, or an independent -- being respectful and listening to other people's point of views, and understanding that most of these issues are complicated. 

Look, let me take the example of health care.  Part of the reason why it's so easy to scare people about health care, even if they don't like it the way it is now, is because you've got doctors, you've got nurses, you've got hospitals, you've got insurance systems, you've got Medicaid, you've got Medicare, you've got the VA system -- all these systems constitute several trillion dollars, one-sixth of our economy.  Even if you come up with a great plan that lowers premiums and creates greater competition and ensures freedom for you to choose your doctor and is bringing down the deficit -- all the things that I've claimed -- and prevents insurance companies from abusing customers -- even if we do all that, there's going to be somebody out there in a $2 trillion system who's unhappy with something.  Right?

So they'll complain, well, you know, I'm a medical device manufacturer and if you reform the system that might force me to change how I sell my products; or there's going to be a doctor who says, well, you know what, right now I get charged this way and if you change how Medicare reimburses, then I might have to change my billing system and that's going to cost me a few thousand dollars and I don't like that. 

The reason I'm pointing this out is if we're going to do big things on energy, or health care, or infrastructure, then we're going to have some differences.  We've got to work them through.  Nothing that human beings do will be perfect.  But we shouldn't sort of assume that the other side is either heartless and doesn't care about sick people, or is some socialist communist who's trying to take over the health care system, or -- you know, we start getting into these caricatures of each other.  They're so damaging.  And, frankly, the political parties and the media haven't been helping.  They've been making it worse.  (Applause.)

I want to dial some of that back.  Let's start thinking of each other as Americans first, figuring out how we can help one another, figuring out how we can move this country forward.  I'm confident we'll do great.

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

END
2:36 P.M. EST

Remarks by the President in State of the Union Address

U.S. Capitol

9:11 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:  Madam Speaker, Vice President Biden, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:

Our Constitution declares that from time to time, the President shall give to Congress information about the state of our union.  For 220 years, our leaders have fulfilled this duty. They've done so during periods of prosperity and tranquility.  And they've done so in the midst of war and depression; at moments of great strife and great struggle.

It's tempting to look back on these moments and assume that our progress was inevitable -– that America was always destined to succeed.  But when the Union was turned back at Bull Run, and the Allies first landed at Omaha Beach, victory was very much in doubt.  When the market crashed on Black Tuesday, and civil rights marchers were beaten on Bloody Sunday, the future was anything but certain.  These were the times that tested the courage of our convictions, and the strength of our union.  And despite all our divisions and disagreements, our hesitations and our fears, America prevailed because we chose to move forward as one nation, as one people. 

Again, we are tested.  And again, we must answer history's call.

One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by a severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a government deeply in debt.  Experts from across the political spectrum warned that if we did not act, we might face a second depression.  So we acted -– immediately and aggressively.  And one year later, the worst of the storm has passed.

But the devastation remains.  One in 10 Americans still cannot find work.  Many businesses have shuttered.  Home values have declined.  Small towns and rural communities have been hit especially hard.  And for those who'd already known poverty, life has become that much harder.

This recession has also compounded the burdens that America's families have been dealing with for decades –- the burden of working harder and longer for less; of being unable to save enough to retire or help kids with college. 

So I know the anxieties that are out there right now.  They're not new.  These struggles are the reason I ran for President.  These struggles are what I've witnessed for years in places like Elkhart, Indiana; Galesburg, Illinois.  I hear about them in the letters that I read each night.  The toughest to read are those written by children -– asking why they have to move from their home, asking when their mom or dad will be able to go back to work.

For these Americans and so many others, change has not come fast enough.  Some are frustrated; some are angry.  They don't understand why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded, but hard work on Main Street isn't; or why Washington has been unable or unwilling to solve any of our problems.  They're tired of the partisanship and the shouting and the pettiness.  They know we can't afford it.  Not now.  

So we face big and difficult challenges.  And what the American people hope -– what they deserve -– is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences; to overcome the numbing weight of our politics.  For while the people who sent us here have different backgrounds, different stories, different beliefs, the anxieties they face are the same. The aspirations they hold are shared:  a job that pays the bills; a chance to get ahead; most of all, the ability to give their children a better life. 

You know what else they share?  They share a stubborn resilience in the face of adversity.  After one of the most difficult years in our history, they remain busy building cars and teaching kids, starting businesses and going back to school. They're coaching Little League and helping their neighbors.  One woman wrote to me and said, "We are strained but hopeful, struggling but encouraged." 

It's because of this spirit -– this great decency and great strength -– that I have never been more hopeful about America's future than I am tonight.  (Applause.)  Despite our hardships, our union is strong.  We do not give up.  We do not quit.  We do not allow fear or division to break our spirit.  In this new decade, it's time the American people get a government that matches their decency; that embodies their strength.  (Applause.)   
And tonight, tonight I'd like to talk about how together we can deliver on that promise.   

It begins with our economy. 

Our most urgent task upon taking office was to shore up the same banks that helped cause this crisis.  It was not easy to do. And if there's one thing that has unified Democrats and Republicans, and everybody in between, it's that we all hated the bank bailout.  I hated it -- (applause.)  I hated it.  You hated it.  It was about as popular as a root canal.  (Laughter.)  

But when I ran for President, I promised I wouldn't just do what was popular -– I would do what was necessary.  And if we had allowed the meltdown of the financial system, unemployment might be double what it is today.  More businesses would certainly have closed.  More homes would have surely been lost. 

So I supported the last administration's efforts to create the financial rescue program.  And when we took that program over, we made it more transparent and more accountable.  And as a result, the markets are now stabilized, and we've recovered most of the money we spent on the banks.  (Applause.)  Most but not all.

To recover the rest, I've proposed a fee on the biggest banks.  (Applause.)  Now, I know Wall Street isn't keen on this idea.  But if these firms can afford to hand out big bonuses again, they can afford a modest fee to pay back the taxpayers who rescued them in their time of need.  (Applause.)

Now, as we stabilized the financial system, we also took steps to get our economy growing again, save as many jobs as possible, and help Americans who had become unemployed. 

That's why we extended or increased unemployment benefits for more than 18 million Americans; made health insurance 65 percent cheaper for families who get their coverage through COBRA; and passed 25 different tax cuts.

Now, let me repeat:  We cut taxes.  We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families.  (Applause.)  We cut taxes for small businesses.  We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers.  We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children.  We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college.  (Applause.)

I thought I'd get some applause on that one.  (Laughter and applause.)

As a result, millions of Americans had more to spend on gas and food and other necessities, all of which helped businesses keep more workers.  And we haven't raised income taxes by a single dime on a single person.  Not a single dime.  (Applause.)

Because of the steps we took, there are about two million Americans working right now who would otherwise be unemployed.  (Applause.)  Two hundred thousand work in construction and clean energy; 300,000 are teachers and other education workers.  Tens of thousands are cops, firefighters, correctional officers, first responders.  (Applause.)  And we're on track to add another one and a half million jobs to this total by the end of the year.

The plan that has made all of this possible, from the tax cuts to the jobs, is the Recovery Act.  (Applause.)  That's right -– the Recovery Act, also known as the stimulus bill.  (Applause.)  Economists on the left and the right say this bill has helped save jobs and avert disaster.  But you don't have to take their word for it.  Talk to the small business in Phoenix that will triple its workforce because of the Recovery Act.  Talk to the window manufacturer in Philadelphia who said he used to be skeptical about the Recovery Act, until he had to add two more work shifts just because of the business it created.  Talk to the single teacher raising two kids who was told by her principal in the last week of school that because of the Recovery Act, she wouldn't be laid off after all. 

There are stories like this all across America.  And after two years of recession, the economy is growing again.  Retirement funds have started to gain back some of their value.  Businesses are beginning to invest again, and slowly some are starting to hire again.   

But I realize that for every success story, there are other stories, of men and women who wake up with the anguish of not knowing where their next paycheck will come from; who send out resumes week after week and hear nothing in response.  That is why jobs must be our number-one focus in 2010, and that's why I'm calling for a new jobs bill tonight.  (Applause.)  

Now, the true engine of job creation in this country will always be America's businesses.  (Applause.)  But government can create the conditions necessary for businesses to expand and hire more workers. 

We should start where most new jobs do –- in small businesses, companies that begin when -- (applause) -- companies that begin when an entrepreneur -- when an entrepreneur takes a chance on a dream, or a worker decides it's time she became her own boss.  Through sheer grit and determination, these companies have weathered the recession and they're ready to grow.  But when you talk to small businessowners in places like Allentown, Pennsylvania, or Elyria, Ohio, you find out that even though banks on Wall Street are lending again, they're mostly lending to bigger companies.  Financing remains difficult for small businessowners across the country, even those that are making a profit.

So tonight, I'm proposing that we take $30 billion of the money Wall Street banks have repaid and use it to help community banks give small businesses the credit they need to stay afloat. (Applause.)  I'm also proposing a new small business tax credit
-– one that will go to over one million small businesses who hire new workers or raise wages.  (Applause.)  While we're at it, let's also eliminate all capital gains taxes on small business investment, and provide a tax incentive for all large businesses and all small businesses to invest in new plants and equipment.  (Applause.) 

Next, we can put Americans to work today building the infrastructure of tomorrow.  (Applause.)  From the first railroads to the Interstate Highway System, our nation has always been built to compete.  There's no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains, or the new factories that manufacture clean energy products.

Tomorrow, I'll visit Tampa, Florida, where workers will soon break ground on a new high-speed railroad funded by the Recovery Act.  (Applause.)  There are projects like that all across this country that will create jobs and help move our nation's goods, services, and information.  (Applause.) 

We should put more Americans to work building clean energy facilities -- (applause) -- and give rebates to Americans who make their homes more energy-efficient, which supports clean energy jobs.  (Applause.)  And to encourage these and other businesses to stay within our borders, it is time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas, and give those tax breaks to companies that create jobs right here in the United States of America.  (Applause.)

Now, the House has passed a jobs bill that includes some of these steps.  (Applause.)  As the first order of business this year, I urge the Senate to do the same, and I know they will.  (Applause.)  They will.  (Applause.)  People are out of work.  They're hurting.  They need our help.  And I want a jobs bill on my desk without delay.  (Applause.)

But the truth is, these steps won't make up for the seven million jobs that we've lost over the last two years.  The only way to move to full employment is to lay a new foundation for long-term economic growth, and finally address the problems that America's families have confronted for years.  

We can't afford another so-called economic "expansion" like the one from the last decade –- what some call the "lost decade" -– where jobs grew more slowly than during any prior expansion; where the income of the average American household declined while the cost of health care and tuition reached record highs; where prosperity was built on a housing bubble and financial speculation. 

From the day I took office, I've been told that addressing our larger challenges is too ambitious; such an effort would be too contentious.  I've been told that our political system is too gridlocked, and that we should just put things on hold for a while. 

For those who make these claims, I have one simple question: How long should we wait?  How long should America put its future on hold?  (Applause.)

You see, Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse.  Meanwhile, China is not waiting to revamp its economy.  Germany is not waiting.  India is not waiting.  These nations -- they're not standing still.  These nations aren't playing for second place.  They're putting more emphasis on math and science.  They're rebuilding their infrastructure.  They're making serious investments in clean energy because they want those jobs.  Well, I do not accept second place for the United States of America.  (Applause.) 

As hard as it may be, as uncomfortable and contentious as the debates may become, it's time to get serious about fixing the problems that are hampering our growth.

Now, one place to start is serious financial reform.  Look, I am not interested in punishing banks.  I'm interested in protecting our economy.  A strong, healthy financial market makes it possible for businesses to access credit and create new jobs. It channels the savings of families into investments that raise incomes.  But that can only happen if we guard against the same recklessness that nearly brought down our entire economy. 

We need to make sure consumers and middle-class families have the information they need to make financial decisions.  (Applause.)  We can't allow financial institutions, including those that take your deposits, to take risks that threaten the whole economy.  

Now, the House has already passed financial reform with many of these changes.  (Applause.)  And the lobbyists are trying to kill it.  But we cannot let them win this fight.  (Applause.)  And if the bill that ends up on my desk does not meet the test of real reform, I will send it back until we get it right.  We've got to get it right.  (Applause.)

Next, we need to encourage American innovation.  Last year, we made the largest investment in basic research funding in history -– (applause) -- an investment that could lead to the world's cheapest solar cells or treatment that kills cancer cells but leaves healthy ones untouched.  And no area is more ripe for such innovation than energy.  You can see the results of last year's investments in clean energy -– in the North Carolina company that will create 1,200 jobs nationwide helping to make advanced batteries; or in the California business that will put a thousand people to work making solar panels.

But to create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives.  And that means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country.  (Applause.)  It means making tough decisions about opening new offshore areas for oil and gas development.  (Applause.)  It means continued investment in advanced biofuels and clean coal technologies.  (Applause.)  And, yes, it means passing a comprehensive energy and climate bill with incentives that will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy in America.  (Applause.)

I am grateful to the House for passing such a bill last year.  (Applause.)  And this year I'm eager to help advance the bipartisan effort in the Senate.  (Applause.) 

I know there have been questions about whether we can afford such changes in a tough economy.  I know that there are those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change.  But here's the thing -- even if you doubt the evidence, providing incentives for energy-efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future -– because the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy.  And America must be that nation.  (Applause.)

Third, we need to export more of our goods.  (Applause.)  Because the more products we make and sell to other countries, the more jobs we support right here in America.  (Applause.)  So tonight, we set a new goal:  We will double our exports over the next five years, an increase that will support two million jobs in America.  (Applause.)  To help meet this goal, we're launching a National Export Initiative that will help farmers and small businesses increase their exports, and reform export controls consistent with national security.  (Applause.)

We have to seek new markets aggressively, just as our competitors are.  If America sits on the sidelines while other nations sign trade deals, we will lose the chance to create jobs on our shores.  (Applause.)  But realizing those benefits also means enforcing those agreements so our trading partners play by the rules.  (Applause.)  And that's why we'll continue to shape a Doha trade agreement that opens global markets, and why we will strengthen our trade relations in Asia and with key partners like South Korea and Panama and Colombia.  (Applause.)

Fourth, we need to invest in the skills and education of our people.  (Applause.)

Now, this year, we've broken through the stalemate between left and right by launching a national competition to improve our schools.  And the idea here is simple:  Instead of rewarding failure, we only reward success.  Instead of funding the status quo, we only invest in reform -- reform that raises student achievement; inspires students to excel in math and science; and turns around failing schools that steal the future of too many young Americans, from rural communities to the inner city.  In the 21st century, the best anti-poverty program around is a world-class education.  (Applause.)  And in this country, the success of our children cannot depend more on where they live than on their potential. 

When we renew the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, we will work with Congress to expand these reforms to all 50 states.  Still, in this economy, a high school diploma no longer guarantees a good job.  That's why I urge the Senate to follow the House and pass a bill that will revitalize our community colleges, which are a career pathway to the children of so many working families.  (Applause.) 

To make college more affordable, this bill will finally end the unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that go to banks for student loans.  (Applause.)  Instead, let's take that money and give families a $10,000 tax credit for four years of college and increase Pell Grants.  (Applause.)  And let's tell another one million students that when they graduate, they will be required to pay only 10 percent of their income on student loans, and all of their debt will be forgiven after 20 years –- and forgiven after 10 years if they choose a career in public service, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they chose to go to college.  (Applause.) 

And by the way, it's time for colleges and universities to get serious about cutting their own costs -– (applause) -- because they, too, have a responsibility to help solve this problem. 

Now, the price of college tuition is just one of the burdens facing the middle class.  That's why last year I asked Vice President Biden to chair a task force on middle-class families.  That's why we're nearly doubling the child care tax credit, and making it easier to save for retirement by giving access to every worker a retirement account and expanding the tax credit for those who start a nest egg.  That's why we're working to lift the value of a family's single largest investment –- their home.  The steps we took last year to shore up the housing market have allowed millions of Americans to take out new loans and save an average of $1,500 on mortgage payments.     

This year, we will step up refinancing so that homeowners can move into more affordable mortgages.  (Applause.)  And it is precisely to relieve the burden on middle-class families that we still need health insurance reform.  (Applause.)  Yes, we do.  (Applause.)

Now, let's clear a few things up.  (Laughter.)  I didn't choose to tackle this issue to get some legislative victory under my belt.  And by now it should be fairly obvious that I didn't take on health care because it was good politics.  (Laughter.)  I took on health care because of the stories I've heard from Americans with preexisting conditions whose lives depend on getting coverage; patients who've been denied coverage; families –- even those with insurance -– who are just one illness away from financial ruin.

After nearly a century of trying -- Democratic administrations, Republican administrations -- we are closer than ever to bringing more security to the lives of so many Americans.  The approach we've taken would protect every American from the worst practices of the insurance industry.  It would give small businesses and uninsured Americans a chance to choose an affordable health care plan in a competitive market.  It would require every insurance plan to cover preventive care. 

And by the way, I want to acknowledge our First Lady, Michelle Obama, who this year is creating a national movement to tackle the epidemic of childhood obesity and make kids healthier. (Applause.)  Thank you.  She gets embarrassed.  (Laughter.)

Our approach would preserve the right of Americans who have insurance to keep their doctor and their plan.  It would reduce costs and premiums for millions of families and businesses.  And according to the Congressional Budget Office -– the independent organization that both parties have cited as the official scorekeeper for Congress –- our approach would bring down the deficit by as much as $1 trillion over the next two decades.  (Applause.)

Still, this is a complex issue, and the longer it was debated, the more skeptical people became.  I take my share of the blame for not explaining it more clearly to the American people.  And I know that with all the lobbying and horse-trading, the process left most Americans wondering, "What's in it for me?"

But I also know this problem is not going away.  By the time I'm finished speaking tonight, more Americans will have lost their health insurance.  Millions will lose it this year.  Our deficit will grow.  Premiums will go up.  Patients will be denied the care they need.  Small business owners will continue to drop coverage altogether.  I will not walk away from these Americans, and neither should the people in this chamber.  (Applause.)

So, as temperatures cool, I want everyone to take another look at the plan we've proposed.  There's a reason why many doctors, nurses, and health care experts who know our system best consider this approach a vast improvement over the status quo.  But if anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors, and stop insurance company abuses, let me know.  (Applause.)  Let me know.  Let me know.  (Applause.)  I'm eager to see it. 

Here's what I ask Congress, though:  Don't walk away from reform.  Not now.  Not when we are so close.  Let us find a way to come together and finish the job for the American people.  (Applause.)  Let's get it done.  Let's get it done.  (Applause.)

Now, even as health care reform would reduce our deficit, it's not enough to dig us out of a massive fiscal hole in which we find ourselves.  It's a challenge that makes all others that much harder to solve, and one that's been subject to a lot of political posturing.  So let me start the discussion of government spending by setting the record straight. 

At the beginning of the last decade, the year 2000, America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion.  (Applause.)  By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade.  Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program.  On top of that, the effects of the recession put a $3 trillion hole in our budget.  All this was before I walked in the door.  (Laughter and applause.)

Now -- just stating the facts.  Now, if we had taken office in ordinary times, I would have liked nothing more than to start bringing down the deficit.  But we took office amid a crisis.  And our efforts to prevent a second depression have added another $1 trillion to our national debt.  That, too, is a fact.

I'm absolutely convinced that was the right thing to do.  But families across the country are tightening their belts and making tough decisions.  The federal government should do the same.  (Applause.)  So tonight, I'm proposing specific steps to pay for the trillion dollars that it took to rescue the economy last year.

Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years.  (Applause.)  Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected.  But all other discretionary government programs will.  Like any cash-strapped family, we will work within a budget to invest in what we need and sacrifice what we don't.  And if I have to enforce this discipline by veto, I will.  (Applause.)  

We will continue to go through the budget, line by line, page by page, to eliminate programs that we can't afford and don't work.  We've already identified $20 billion in savings for next year.  To help working families, we'll extend our middle-class tax cuts.  But at a time of record deficits, we will not continue tax cuts for oil companies, for investment fund managers, and for those making over $250,000 a year.  We just can't afford it.  (Applause.) 

Now, even after paying for what we spent on my watch, we'll still face the massive deficit we had when I took office.  More importantly, the cost of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will continue to skyrocket.  That's why I've called for a bipartisan fiscal commission, modeled on a proposal by Republican Judd Gregg and Democrat Kent Conrad.  (Applause.)  This can't be one of those Washington gimmicks that lets us pretend we solved a problem.  The commission will have to provide a specific set of solutions by a certain deadline. 

Now, yesterday, the Senate blocked a bill that would have created this commission.  So I'll issue an executive order that will allow us to go forward, because I refuse to pass this problem on to another generation of Americans.  (Applause.)  And when the vote comes tomorrow, the Senate should restore the pay-as-you-go law that was a big reason for why we had record surpluses in the 1990s.  (Applause.) 
 
Now, I know that some in my own party will argue that we can't address the deficit or freeze government spending when so many are still hurting.  And I agree -- which is why this freeze won't take effect until next year -- (laughter) -- when the economy is stronger.  That's how budgeting works.  (Laughter and applause.)  But understand –- understand if we don't take meaningful steps to rein in our debt, it could damage our markets, increase the cost of borrowing, and jeopardize our recovery -– all of which would have an even worse effect on our job growth and family incomes. 

From some on the right, I expect we'll hear a different argument -– that if we just make fewer investments in our people, extend tax cuts including those for the wealthier Americans, eliminate more regulations, maintain the status quo on health care, our deficits will go away.  The problem is that's what we did for eight years.  (Applause.)  That's what helped us into this crisis.  It's what helped lead to these deficits.  We can't do it again.

Rather than fight the same tired battles that have dominated Washington for decades, it's time to try something new.  Let's invest in our people without leaving them a mountain of debt.  Let's meet our responsibility to the citizens who sent us here.  Let's try common sense.  (Laughter.)  A novel concept.

To do that, we have to recognize that we face more than a deficit of dollars right now.  We face a deficit of trust -– deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years.  To close that credibility gap we have to take action on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue -- to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly; to give our people the government they deserve.  (Applause.)

That's what I came to Washington to do.  That's why -– for the first time in history –- my administration posts on our White House visitors online.  That's why we've excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs, or seats on federal boards and commissions.

But we can't stop there.  It's time to require lobbyists to disclose each contact they make on behalf of a client with my administration or with Congress.  It's time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office. 

With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests –- including foreign corporations –- to spend without limit in our elections.  (Applause.)  I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities.  (Applause.)  They should be decided by the American people.  And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.

I'm also calling on Congress to continue down the path of earmark reform.  Applause.)  Democrats and Republicans.  (Applause.)  Democrats and Republicans.  You've trimmed some of this spending, you've embraced some meaningful change.  But restoring the public trust demands more.  For example, some members of Congress post some earmark requests online.  (Applause.)  Tonight, I'm calling on Congress to publish all earmark requests on a single Web site before there's a vote, so that the American people can see how their money is being spent. (Applause.)

Of course, none of these reforms will even happen if we don't also reform how we work with one another.  Now, I'm not naïve.  I never thought that the mere fact of my election would usher in peace and harmony -- (laughter) -- and some post-partisan era.  I knew that both parties have fed divisions that are deeply entrenched.  And on some issues, there are simply philosophical differences that will always cause us to part ways. These disagreements, about the role of government in our lives, about our national priorities and our national security, they've been taking place for over 200 years.  They're the very essence of our democracy.

But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day.  We can't wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about the other side -– a belief that if you lose, I win.  Neither party should delay or obstruct every single bill just because they can.  The confirmation of -- (applause) -- I'm speaking to both parties now.  The confirmation of well-qualified public servants shouldn't be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual senators.  (Applause.) 

Washington may think that saying anything about the other side, no matter how false, no matter how malicious, is just part of the game.  But it's precisely such politics that has stopped either party from helping the American people.  Worse yet, it's sowing further division among our citizens, further distrust in our government.

So, no, I will not give up on trying to change the tone of our politics.  I know it's an election year.  And after last week, it's clear that campaign fever has come even earlier than usual.  But we still need to govern. 

To Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve problems, not run for the hills.  (Applause.)  And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that 60 votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town -- a supermajority -- then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well.  (Applause.)  Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership.  We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions.  (Applause.)  So let's show the American people that we can do it together.  (Applause.)

This week, I'll be addressing a meeting of the House Republicans.  I'd like to begin monthly meetings with both Democratic and Republican leadership.  I know you can't wait.  (Laughter.)

Throughout our history, no issue has united this country more than our security.  Sadly, some of the unity we felt after 9/11 has dissipated.  We can argue all we want about who's to blame for this, but I'm not interested in re-litigating the past. I know that all of us love this country.  All of us are committed to its defense.  So let's put aside the schoolyard taunts about who's tough.  Let's reject the false choice between protecting our people and upholding our values.  Let's leave behind the fear and division, and do what it takes to defend our nation and forge a more hopeful future -- for America and for the world.  (Applause.)

That's the work we began last year.  Since the day I took office, we've renewed our focus on the terrorists who threaten our nation.  We've made substantial investments in our homeland security and disrupted plots that threatened to take American lives.  We are filling unacceptable gaps revealed by the failed Christmas attack, with better airline security and swifter action on our intelligence.  We've prohibited torture and strengthened partnerships from the Pacific to South Asia to the Arabian Peninsula.  And in the last year, hundreds of al Qaeda's fighters and affiliates, including many senior leaders, have been captured or killed -- far more than in 2008.

And in Afghanistan, we're increasing our troops and training Afghan security forces so they can begin to take the lead in July of 2011, and our troops can begin to come home.  (Applause.)  We will reward good governance, work to reduce corruption, and support the rights of all Afghans -- men and women alike.  (Applause.)  We're joined by allies and partners who have increased their own commitments, and who will come together tomorrow in London to reaffirm our common purpose.  There will be difficult days ahead.  But I am absolutely confident we will succeed.

As we take the fight to al Qaeda, we are responsibly leaving Iraq to its people.  As a candidate, I promised that I would end this war, and that is what I am doing as President.  We will have all of our combat troops out of Iraq by the end of this August.  (Applause.)  We will support the Iraqi government -- we will support the Iraqi government as they hold elections, and we will continue to partner with the Iraqi people to promote regional peace and prosperity.  But make no mistake:  This war is ending, and all of our troops are coming home.  (Applause.)   

Tonight, all of our men and women in uniform -- in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and around the world –- they have to know that we -- that they have our respect, our gratitude, our full support.  And just as they must have the resources they need in war, we all have a responsibility to support them when they come home.  (Applause.)  That's why we made the largest increase in investments for veterans in decades -- last year.  (Applause.)   That's why we're building a 21st century VA.  And that's why Michelle has joined with Jill Biden to forge a national commitment to support military families.  (Applause.)

Now, even as we prosecute two wars, we're also confronting perhaps the greatest danger to the American people -– the threat of nuclear weapons.  I've embraced the vision of John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan through a strategy that reverses the spread of these weapons and seeks a world without them.  To reduce our stockpiles and launchers, while ensuring our deterrent, the United States and Russia are completing negotiations on the farthest-reaching arms control treaty in nearly two decades.  (Applause.)  And at April's Nuclear Security Summit, we will bring 44 nations together here in Washington, D.C. behind a clear goal:  securing all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world in four years, so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists.  (Applause.)

Now, these diplomatic efforts have also strengthened our hand in dealing with those nations that insist on violating international agreements in pursuit of nuclear weapons.  That's why North Korea now faces increased isolation, and stronger sanctions –- sanctions that are being vigorously enforced.  That's why the international community is more united, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated.  And as Iran's leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt:  They, too, will face growing consequences.  That is a promise.  (Applause.)

That's the leadership that we are providing –- engagement that advances the common security and prosperity of all people. We're working through the G20 to sustain a lasting global recovery.  We're working with Muslim communities around the world to promote science and education and innovation.  We have gone from a bystander to a leader in the fight against climate change. We're helping developing countries to feed themselves, and continuing the fight against HIV/AIDS.  And we are launching a new initiative that will give us the capacity to respond faster and more effectively to bioterrorism or an infectious disease -– a plan that will counter threats at home and strengthen public health abroad.

As we have for over 60 years, America takes these actions because our destiny is connected to those beyond our shores.  But we also do it because it is right.  That's why, as we meet here tonight, over 10,000 Americans are working with many nations to help the people of Haiti recover and rebuild.  (Applause.)  That's why we stand with the girl who yearns to go to school in Afghanistan; why we support the human rights of the women marching through the streets of Iran; why we advocate for the young man denied a job by corruption in Guinea.  For America must always stand on the side of freedom and human dignity.  (Applause.)  Always.  (Applause.)

Abroad, America's greatest source of strength has always been our ideals.  The same is true at home.  We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution:  the notion that we're all created equal; that no matter who you are or what you look like, if you abide by the law you should be protected by it; if you adhere to our common values you should be treated no different than anyone else.    

We must continually renew this promise.  My administration has a Civil Rights Division that is once again prosecuting civil rights violations and employment discrimination.  (Applause.)  We finally strengthened our laws to protect against crimes driven by hate.  (Applause.)  This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.  (Applause.)  It's the right thing to do.  (Applause.)  

We're going to crack down on violations of equal pay laws -– so that women get equal pay for an equal day's work.  (Applause.) And we should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system -– to secure our borders and enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nation.  (Applause.)

In the end, it's our ideals, our values that built America  -- values that allowed us to forge a nation made up of immigrants from every corner of the globe; values that drive our citizens still.  Every day, Americans meet their responsibilities to their families and their employers.  Time and again, they lend a hand to their neighbors and give back to their country.  They take pride in their labor, and are generous in spirit.  These aren't Republican values or Democratic values that they're living by; business values or labor values.  They're American values.  

Unfortunately, too many of our citizens have lost faith that our biggest institutions -– our corporations, our media, and, yes, our government –- still reflect these same values.  Each of these institutions are full of honorable men and women doing important work that helps our country prosper.  But each time a CEO rewards himself for failure, or a banker puts the rest of us at risk for his own selfish gain, people's doubts grow.  Each time lobbyists game the system or politicians tear each other down instead of lifting this country up, we lose faith.  The more that TV pundits reduce serious debates to silly arguments, big issues into sound bites, our citizens turn away.  

No wonder there's so much cynicism out there.  No wonder there's so much disappointment. 

I campaigned on the promise of change –- change we can believe in, the slogan went.  And right now, I know there are many Americans who aren't sure if they still believe we can change –- or that I can deliver it. 

But remember this –- I never suggested that change would be easy, or that I could do it alone.  Democracy in a nation of 300 million people can be noisy and messy and complicated.  And when you try to do big things and make big changes, it stirs passions and controversy.  That's just how it is.

Those of us in public office can respond to this reality by playing it safe and avoid telling hard truths and pointing fingers.  We can do what's necessary to keep our poll numbers high, and get through the next election instead of doing what's best for the next generation. 

But I also know this:  If people had made that decision 50 years ago, or 100 years ago, or 200 years ago, we wouldn't be here tonight.  The only reason we are here is because generations of Americans were unafraid to do what was hard; to do what was needed even when success was uncertain; to do what it took to keep the dream of this nation alive for their children and their grandchildren.

Our administration has had some political setbacks this year, and some of them were deserved.  But I wake up every day knowing that they are nothing compared to the setbacks that families all across this country have faced this year.  And what keeps me going -– what keeps me fighting -– is that despite all these setbacks, that spirit of determination and optimism, that fundamental decency that has always been at the core of the American people, that lives on.   

It lives on in the struggling small business owner who wrote to me of his company, "None of us," he said, "…are willing to consider, even slightly, that we might fail."

It lives on in the woman who said that even though she and her neighbors have felt the pain of recession, "We are strong.  We are resilient.  We are American."

It lives on in the 8-year-old boy in Louisiana, who just sent me his allowance and asked if I would give it to the people of Haiti. 

And it lives on in all the Americans who've dropped everything to go someplace they've never been and pull people they've never known from the rubble, prompting chants of "U.S.A.! U.S.A.!  U.S.A!" when another life was saved. 

The spirit that has sustained this nation for more than two centuries lives on in you, its people.  We have finished a difficult year.  We have come through a difficult decade.  But a new year has come.  A new decade stretches before us.  We don't quit.  I don't quit.  (Applause.)  Let's seize this moment -- to start anew, to carry the dream forward, and to strengthen our union once more.  (Applause.)

Thank you.  God bless you.  And God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)

                                         END                   10:20 P.M. EST
 

Remarks by the First Lady at the Joint Armed Forces Officers' Wives' Luncheon

Bolling Air Force Base

1:00 P.M. EST

     MRS. OBAMA:  Thank you, everyone.  Thank you so much.  All right, everyone, take a seat, and have a glass of wine -- (laughter) -- all right, because I'm going to sell you guys out.  (Laughter.)  They were passing around a little glass, and I was like, what's that?  (Laughter.)  So please feel free.  Don't wait till I leave when the desserts come out to get the wine.  (Laughter.) 

     I'm really thrilled to be here.  Thank you, Holly, for your kind introduction and for your support of our Air Force families and for all the work that you've done to put together this luncheon, as well as the entire committee.  I know that it's hard enough to pull off something like this, but then you invite the First Lady --and all my stuff -- (laughter) -- and it becomes a little bit harder.  But this is absolutely wonderful.  I've had a great time, and I'm just thrilled to be here.  So again let's give Holly and the entire committee a big round of applause for all the work that they've done.  (Applause.)

And I'm going to be especially nice to Holly because her husband commands the Air Force District of Washington.  So he not only keeps the skies of Washington safe, but he's responsible for when my husband comes back on Air Force One.  (Laughter.)  So Holly, you and me, we've got to get together -- (laughter) -- and get this thing worked out. 

But it's really an honor to be here with all of you.   I also want to thank Elizabeth Biddle for the invocation, as well as the beautiful rendition of the national anthem.  I want to thank all of you at JAFOWL, the committee, for this, you know, just wonderful invitation and for bringing us all together.

As we saw earlier, doing the medley, which you all got really fired up about, I like that -- (laughter) -- we see that Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard -- Active, Guard and Reserve –- we all are one force and we're all one family.  And you always feel it when you're in a room full of wonderful spouses.

And it's also great to see so many familiar faces, people that I've worked with over the course of the year -- Becky, Deborah, Mary, Sandee and others, all the wives of the Joint Chiefs of Staff -- women who do so much for our military families and who I'm very proud to call my friends.

In fact, we just had a few of you guys over for dinner last week.  We had the Joint Chiefs, the combatant commanders and their spouses over for dinner a few weeks ago at the White House.  And it was a wonderful evening, very inspiring, because we shared the evening with several wounded warriors.  So it was wonderful to have you at my home, and I'm happy that we're switching the tables today.

Now, I know this is the Joint Armed Forces Officers’ Wives’ Club, but today I want to start by thanking you, not simply because of who you're married to, but because of what you do every day, because of the spirit of service that's defined your entire lives. 

You all are truly leaders in your own right.  And I don't know if you hear that enough, but it's real.  You are the vital link between your husbands and the troops they command, making sure their needs and those of their families are heard and met.  You're often that mom away from home, the person that other military wives go to for advice and support.  And it's always amazing because you do all of this for other families even as your own families serve.  For that alone, you all deserve this nation's unending gratitude.

But, you not only provide support to your husbands and to other families.  Many of you have also watched your own sons and daughters put on the uniform and go into harm's way.  And you've experienced all the emotions that come with that -- all the worries, all the anxieties, but also that incredible pride. 

So I want to particularly thank all of the Blue Star moms who are here today, and I'd like to have you all stand.  Thank you.  (Applause.)  

And I also want to salute another remarkable group of women who I know here today -- the women, who for nearly 40 years, have made sure that no American is ever buried alone at Arlington National Cemetery.  Please join me in thanking the Arlington Ladies.  Please stand, ladies.  (Applause.)

And finally, some of you not only married someone in uniform, but we sometimes don't remember that many of you also wore a uniform yourself.  You volunteered, you served, you defended our freedoms.  So, please, would all the women who served in the armed forces please stand and be recognized.  Yay!  (Applause.)  To all of you, thank you.  Thank you for your service to this country.

So the President and I, as you've heard, and our daughters, we've been in the White House for a year now.  (Laughter.)  It's been a year.  As a mom, I often say my priority this year has really been the girls -- making sure that they make this transition smoothly -- as smoothly as possible.  I mean, you think about it, these little girls, they've had to get adjusted to a new city, a new house -- it's a nice house, but it's still a new house -- (laughter) -- to a new school and new friends.

And so when people ask me what I'm most proud of this first year, I usually give them two responses.  I usually say, first, as a mother I am most proud that our two girls have made that adjustment and they've built a new life here and are happy and healthy, and as I say, as normal as they could possibly be under these circumstances.  I joke that I still recognize them.  (Laughter.)  So that's a good thing.

Then the other response is as First Lady.  And I tell people that at the top of the list of priorities that I've had over this year, it's been the time that I have spent highlighting the service of our incredible military families.

And that's what I want to talk about today with you.  I want to talk about what you do for America and also what America needs to do for all of you.
 
From day one, this has been a mission of mine, along with the Vice President's wife, Dr. Jill Biden -- my dear, dear friend and a Blue Star mom herself -- who has been a tireless advocate in support of our extraordinary National Guard and Reserve members and their families.  Jill and I have been working hard on this.  One of the first things that we wanted to do was to first listen and learn.

So with many of you we had a series of roundtable discussions -- thank you all -- with our military spouses.  We met with Deborah and Sandee and other wives of the Joint Chiefs to get their advice and guidance on how to develop our initiatives, and that was incredibly helpful.  We also met with the senior enlisted advisors' wives to discuss what's working in the ranks and what also could be improved.

     These conversations gave Jill and I just really critical guidance and insight for what would be our subsequent visits to bases and military communities around the country. 

And as I think back on all the incredible experiences of this past year -- and we have had many -- I've met the Queen, the Pope -- we've done a lot -- (laughter) -- I have to say that those visits to the military bases have been one of my greatest privileges as First Lady, truly.  Through these interactions that we've had, I've gained an even greater level of respect and gratitude for our troops and their amazing families.  It is a sight to see. 

     I remember visiting the soldiers and their families at Fort Bragg, one of my first visits with Charlene Austin -- and we were just talking about that.  She hosted me for my first visits.  And there I saw firsthand the toll that these wars have taken on these soldiers who have carried so much of the burden of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

     I will never forget the families that the President and I met at Fort Hood after suffering such a horrible tragedy.  They showed us incredible strength -- the strength that binds Army families together.  I remember the sailors and their families at Norfolk, and what a thrill it was for me to share their excitement as we welcomed home the crew of the aircraft carrier, the USS Eisenhower, and the hospital ship Comfort.  They were coming back from treating patients and delivering health care and humanitarian assistance across the Americas, including Haiti. 

And as we all know, only after a few short months at home, the Comfort is back in Haiti, along with many other branches of our military, delivering aid with their civilian counterparts, helping the Haitian people, and all the while showing the very best of America and making us all so proud.

     I remember visiting the airmen and women and their families at Eglin Air Force Base where some of the pilots and crew had just returned from Iraq; it was their sixth deployment in as many years. 

I think of the Coast Guardsmen and women who will serve aboard the new cutter that I am proud to sponsor, the Stratton, which honors Commander Dorothy Stratton, who led the SPARS during World War II.  (Applause.) 

     And I can never forget our Marines, who are a part of our daily lives at the White House in a very special way.  And we see them display the same professionalism in our home every single day that defines their service around the world.  They are a joy to have in our lives.

     And then we can never forget our wounded warriors -- the inspirational men and women that the President and I have welcomed to the White House and those we have met all around the country. 

Unfortunately for too many of them, the battle continues even after they come home.  They are the servicemen that I met at a VA hospital in the Bronx, working so hard to get back on their feet, and in some cases to get back to their units.  That's all they cared about. 

They're the patriots like the young Navy SEAL who joined us at the Joint Chiefs dinner last week at the White House.  This young man attended the dinner with his little sister.  I got to sit next to them.  She was a nurse who moved to Washington to care for her brother -- left her career behind.  And he explained to me how he stepped on an IED in Afghanistan and lost both of his legs.  Then just four months later he finished a half-marathon.  The courage -- yes -- (applause) -- the courage and the optimism of both he and his sister was breathtaking.  Their continued love of life and of country was something to behold. 

And I will always remember all of the wives and husbands, all the moms and the dads that the President and I have met at Arlington on Memorial Day and Veterans Day and all around the country -- spouses who've lost their best friend in the world; parents who have laid their children to rest. 

And as a wife, as a mother, I simply cannot imagine the depths of their pain and loss.  Yet every time I meet them, they show a strength and a resolve that always leaves me in awe.  Their sacrifice reminds us all that our men and women in uniform, as well as their families, are our nation's greatest military asset. 

So at every one of these visits that I've had, collecting these memories, my goal has been simple.  First, to listen.  Listen to those voices, listen to those concerns, listen to those needs. 

The second goal is to share what I've heard with a team of dedicated leaders who also care deeply about military families -- from the President, the Vice President, to Secretary Gates, to Admiral Mullen, to leaders down the chain of command.  These people care deeply. 

And finally, my goal has been to work hard to ensure that the concerns and needs that we hear actually lead to some real change coming out of Washington, because the quality of the lives of our military and their families means a great deal, because in the history of our all-volunteer force, we have never asked so much of so few. 

We've seen the huge burden of eight years of war on our troops -- tour after tour, year after year, missing out on moments that every parent treasures:  a baby's first steps, the first words, the day the training wheel comes off the bike, birthdays, anniversaries. 

We've seen the sacrifices of families on the home front -- spouses back home left to do the parenting of two, juggling play dates and ballet recitals and practices; keeping the household together all on their own; holding down jobs -- all the while trying to hide their own fear and worries when the kids look up and ask when mommy or daddy are coming home.

And somehow despite everything that's going on in your lives, military families still find the time to serve others -- coaching Little League, running the PTA, making Christmas special for kids with Toys for Tots, volunteering at churches and hospitals, mentoring young people, being role models in your own right.  You just keep on serving -- keep on serving your communities, keep on serving this country. 

And all of you, our troops and families, you do your duty and you do it without complaint.  No complaint here, right?  (Laughter.)  You give your all and ask very little in return, only that we back you up so our troops can do their job.

That's why my husband and his administration have worked to do right by our armed forces and their families; to be there for you like you have been there for us; to lighten your load as you have lightened all of ours.

Because of your willingness to advocate for change, all of you here, some really important progress has been made in just one year.  Deborah -- Deborah Mullen -- has been telling me ever since we met that just like our troops, our spouses also need the very best support and counseling.  Many of you share the need to reduce the stress of long deployments and to give our troops more time home between deployments. 

So this is what happened.  My husband heard you, and moved to increase the size of the military.  That's why his first budget included pay raises and funding for better military housing and more money for child care, in addition to more funds for career development, counseling and support for spouses.

Last year's budget also included money to improve care and treatment for our wounded warriors, especially those with post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injury.

And the budget increased major -- it made major increases in funding for veterans' health care, including women veterans, plus the largest increase in the VA budget in more than 30 years. 

And something that I'm especially proud of that we just talked about at the table, the President worked with the Congress to extend the Family and Medical Leave Act to all our military families and to caregivers of our wounded warriors, because just like other Americans, our military spouses need to care for their loved ones without fear of losing their jobs.  This commitment to our forces and their families continues today.

And I'm happy to announce that the President's 2011 budget that he'll introduce next week will further increase funding for military family support programs by more than 3 percent to a record $8.8 billion.  And this increase is going to include funds for counseling and support for spouses and families, including our Guard and Reserve families, to the tune of $1.9 billion.  It includes $1.3 billion to reduce shortages in military child care and to keep our military child care among the best this country has to offer -- that's something that I got to see -- because we can't forget that military kids also serve in their own special way.  We can't forget these kids.

They're just like any other child in this country, except for the fact that their lives are turned upside down every time their mom or dad has to go halfway around the country, risking their lives so that all our children can enjoy the freedoms of this democracy.

It is so incredibly hard for these kids.  As a result, they often experience more anxiety; they can have a harder time focusing at school; they can have a higher risk of depression.  So we can never forget just how much these wars affect our military kids, and we all have an obligation to ensure that these kids have the support they need at home and at school.

So I'm proud to announce that this year's budget will include more money for youth programs for military kids.  And then, at the direction of Secretary Gates, the budget will also include funds to improve and build new DOD schools, from Georgia to Germany.  And this is all part of a major effort -- (applause) -- this is part of a major effort over the next five years to renovate or replace more than half of our DOD schools, which will benefit tens of thousands of children from military families.
In response to one of the top concerns expressed by military spouses, this year's budget will also include $84 million for spousal career development, including tuition assistance and federal internship programs.  Yay.  (Applause.) 

And I want to thank all the Coast Guard spouses who spoke to me about housing challenges -- yes.  (Laughter.)  As a result, the President's budget will include $14 million in new funding for quality Coast Guard housing.  And I know that's a big one.  (Applause.)

These are all major investments, and they are the result of military families speaking up and being heard.  And they are part of a larger ongoing commitment to care for our troops and their families even after the fighting ends.

But in addition to good government and funding, supporting our troops and their families requires active citizens.  That's why I've made it a priority to keep asking all Americans to join the cause of supporting our military families.  And that's why last Veterans Day, Jill and I helped launch Mission Serve -- a national network that brings civilian and military service groups together to help support our troops and families.  But this network also encourages communities to tap that incredible spirit of service of our military families, as well as the talents of our veterans.

We're asking Americans to engage and support military families any way they can, from business owners helping veterans and military spouses find a job or develop skills, to professionals in areas such as mental health and law offering their services pro bono, to ordinary folks out there doing simple things like driving a carpool or offering to babysit or making a home-cooked meal for a military family in their own community.  Our men and women in uniform and their families sacrifice for us, every single one of us, so every single one of us can do something in return, even if it's something as simple as saying thank you.

Last spring, I had the opportunity to thank one of those military families during a visit to the White House.  Staff Sergeant Robert Henline was deployed to Baghdad with the 82nd Airborne Division out of Fort Bragg when a massive explosion destroyed his Humvee, and he was the sole survivor and suffered terrible burns over more than a third of his body.  Well, back at Fort Bragg, his wife Connie had to leave their three kids with family and she made the trip to a hospital in Texas to care for her husband.
    
So day after day and month after month, Connie stayed by his bedside.  She fed him and she tended to his wounds, helped him through dozens of painful surgeries.  And that's one story, part of the story, because back at home, their oldest daughter, Brittany, helped to hold the family together.  And overnight, she went from being a 15-year-old teenager to a mom for her younger brother and sister.  She had to get her driver's license early so she could run errands and do the shopping.  She made the meals, she did the laundry, she helped with homework -- yes, a 15-year-old.  And at night, her younger siblings would crawl into Brittany's bed and seek the security that they would get from their mother.

So when Operation Homefront named Brittany their Military Child of the Year, the President and I were honored to welcome the whole Henline family to the White House:  the father who had endured such horrible injuries, the wife who never left his bedside, and Brittany, the daughter who grew up faster than she had ever planned.

And when a reporter asked Brittany how a teenager could take on so much responsibility, she did what you all do.  She didn't speak of herself, but she spoke of her younger brother and sister.  And she said simply, "They needed me, and my priorities changed.  My family came first."

So you see, that is the strength and the spirit and courage that our military families display every day.  You put your own priorities aside, you take care of one another, and you take care of this nation.  So as First Lady, I cannot thank you all enough for that sacrifice, and I promise you that I will use every ounce of my energy and being to make sure that America always takes care of you.
    

So thank you, thank you so much.  Thank you for having me here, and have some wine.  (Applause.)

END
1:25 P.M. EST