THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
___________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                       August 17, 2009
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT THE VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS CONVENTION
Phoenix Convention Center
Phoenix, Arizona
10:06 A.M. MST
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Please, be seated. Thank you so much. Commander Gardner, thank you for your introduction and for your lifetime of service. I was proud to welcome Glen and your executive director, Bob Wallace, to the Oval Office just before the 4th of July, and I look forwarding to working with your next commander, Tommy Tradewell.
I want to also acknowledge Jean Gardner and Sharon Tradewell, as well as Dixie Hild and Jan Title and all the spouses and family of the Ladies Auxiliary. America honors your service as well.
Also Governor Jan Brewer is here, of Arizona; and Mayor Phil Gordon, our host here in Phoenix. I want to acknowledge President -- Dr. Joe Shirley, Jr., President of the Navajo Nation. And this wasn't on my original card, but this is just an extraordinary story and you may have already heard from her, but I just want to publicly acknowledge and thank Ms. Helen Denton the secretary to Dwight Eisenhower -- (applause) -- who typed up the orders for the Normandy invasion and is here today, and what an extraordinary story that is. (Applause.)
Members of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, I am honored and humbled to stand before you as Commander-in-Chief of the finest military the world has ever known. (Applause.) And we're joined by some of those who make it the finest force in world -- from Luke Air Force Base, members of the 56th Fighter Wing. (Applause.)
Whether you wear the uniform today, or wore it decades ago, you remind us of a fundamental truth. It's not the powerful weapons that make our military the strongest in the world. It's not the sophisticated systems that make us the most advanced. The true strength of our military lies in the spirit and skill of our men and women in uniform. And you know this. (Applause.)
You know this because it's the story of your lives. When fascism seemed unstoppable and our harbor was bombed, you battled across rocky Pacific islands and stormed the beaches of Europe, marching across a continent -- my own grandfather and uncle among your ranks -- liberating millions and turning enemies into allies.
When communism cast its shadow across so much of the globe, you stood vigilant in a long Cold War -- from an airlift in Berlin to the mountains of Korea to the jungles of Vietnam. When that Cold War ended and old hatreds emerged anew, you turned back aggression from Kuwait to Kosovo.
And long after you took off the uniform, you've continued to serve: supporting our troops and their families when they go to war and welcoming them when they come home; working to give our veterans the care they deserve; and when America's heroes are laid to rest, giving every one of them that final fitting tribute of a grateful nation. We can never say it enough: For your service in war and in peace, thank you VFW. Thank you. (Applause.)
Today, the story of your service is carried on by a new generation -- dedicated, courageous men and women who I have the privilege to lead and meet every day.
They're the young sailors, the midshipmen at the Naval Academy, who raised their right hand at graduation and committed themselves to a life of service. They're the soldiers I met in Baghdad who have done their duty, year after year, on a second, third or fourth tour. They're the Marines of Camp Lejeune, preparing to deploy and now serving in Afghanistan to protect Americans here at home. They're the airmen, like those here today, who provide the close air support that saves the lives of our troops on the ground. They're the wounded warriors -- at Landstuhl and Walter Reed and Bethesda and across America -- for whom the battle is not to fight, but simply to speak, to stand, to walk once more. They're the families that my wife Michelle has met at bases across the country. The spouses back home doing the parenting of two, the children who wonder when mom and dad may be coming home; the parents who watch their sons and daughters go off to war; and the families who lay a loved one to rest -- and the pain that lasts a lifetime.
To all those who have served America -- our forces, your families, our veterans -- you have done your duty. You have fulfilled your responsibilities. And now a grateful nation must fulfill ours. And that is what I want to talk about today.
First, we have a solemn responsibility to always lead our men and women in uniform wisely. And that starts with a vision of American leadership that recognizes that military power alone cannot be the first or only answer to the threats facing our nation.
In recent years, our troops have succeeded in every mission America has given them, from toppling the Taliban to deposing a dictator in Iraq to battling brutal insurgencies. At the same time, forces trained for war have been called upon to perform a whole host of missions. Like mayors, they've run local governments and delivered water and electricity. Like aid workers, they've mentored farmers and built new schools. Like diplomats, they've negotiated agreements with tribal sheikhs and local leaders.
But let us never forget we are a country of more than 300 million Americans. Less than 1 percent wears the uniform. And that 1 percent -- our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen -- have borne the overwhelming burden of our security. In fact, perhaps never in American history have so few protected so many.
So the responsibility for our security must not be theirs alone. That is why I have made it a priority to enlist all elements of our national power in defense of our national security -- our diplomacy and development, our economic might and our moral example, because one of the best ways to lead our troops wisely is to prevent the conflicts that cost American blood and treasure tomorrow.
As President, my greatest responsibility is the security and safety of the American people. As I've said before, that is the first thing I think about when I wake up in the morning, it's the last thing that I think about when I go to sleep at night. And I will not hesitate to use force to protect the American people or our vital interests. (Applause.)
But as we protect America, our men and women in uniform must always be treated as what they are: America's most precious resource. As Commander-in-Chief, I have a solemn responsibility for their safety. And there is nothing more sobering than signing a letter of condolence to the family of servicemen or women who have given their lives for our country.
And that's why I have made this pledge to our armed forces: I will only send you into harm's way when it is absolutely necessary. And when I do, it will be based on good intelligence and guided by a sound strategy. I will give you a clear mission, defined goals, and the equipment and support you need to get the job done. That's my commitment to you. (Applause.)
Which brings me to our second responsibility to our armed forces -- giving them the resources and equipment and strategies to meet their missions. We need to keep our military the best-trained, the best-led, the best-equipped fighting force in the world. And that's why, even with our current economic challenges, my budget increases defense spending.
We will ensure that we have the force structure to meet today's missions. And that's why we've increased the size of the Army and the Marine Corps two years ahead of schedule and have approved another temporary increase in the Army. And we've halted personnel reductions in the Navy and Air Force. And this will give our troops more time home between deployments, which means less stress on families and more training for the next mission. (Applause.) And it will help us put an end, once and for all, to stop-loss for those who've done their duty. (Applause.)
We will equip our forces with the assets and technologies they need to fight and win. So my budget funds more of the Army helicopters, crews, and pilots urgently needed in Afghanistan; the intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance that gives our troops the advantage; the special operations forces that can deploy on a moment's notice; and for all those serving in Afghanistan and Iraq, including our National Guard and Reserve, more of the protective gear and armored vehicles that save lives. (Applause.)
As we fight in two wars, we will plan responsibly, budget honestly, and speak candidly about the costs and consequences of our actions. And that's why I've made sure my budget includes the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In Iraq, after more than six years, we took an important step forward in June. We transferred control of all cities and towns to Iraq's security forces. The transition to full Iraqi responsibility for their own security is now underway. This progress is a testament to all those who have served in Iraq, both uniformed and civilian. And our nation owes these Americans -- and all who have given their lives -- a profound debt of gratitude. (Applause.)
Now, as Iraqis take control of their destiny, they will be tested and targeted. Those who seek to sow sectarian division will attempt more senseless bombings and more killing of innocents. This we know.
But as we move forward, the Iraqi people must know that the United States will keep its commitments. And the American people must know that we will move forward with our strategy. We will begin removing our combat brigades from Iraq later this year. We will remove all our combat brigades by the end of next August. And we will remove all our troops from Iraq by the end of 2011. And for America, the Iraq war will end.
By moving forward in Iraq, we're able to refocus on the war against al Qaeda and its extremist allies in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That's why I announced a new, comprehensive strategy in March -- a strategy that recognizes that al Qaeda and its allies had moved their base from the remote, tribal areas -- to the remote, tribal areas of Pakistan. This strategy acknowledges that military power alone will not win this war -- that we also need diplomacy and development and good governance. And our new strategy has a clear mission and defined goals: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda and its extremist allies.
In the months since, we have begun to put this comprehensive strategy into action. And in recent weeks, we've seen our troops do their part. They've gone into new areas -- taking the fight to the Taliban in villages and towns where residents have been terrorized for years. They're adapting new tactics, knowing that it's not enough to kill extremists and terrorists; we also need to protect the Afghan people and improve their daily lives. And today, our troops are helping to secure polling places for this week's election so that Afghans can choose the future that they want.
Now, these new efforts have not been without a price. The fighting has been fierce. More Americans have given their lives. And as always, the thoughts and prayers of every American are with those who make the ultimate sacrifice in our defense.
As I said when I announced this strategy, there will be more difficult days ahead. The insurgency in Afghanistan didn't just happen overnight and we won't defeat it overnight. This will not be quick, nor easy. But we must never forget: This is not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity. Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans. So this is not only a war worth fighting. This is a -- this is fundamental to the defense of our people.
And going forward, we will constantly adapt to new tactics to stay ahead of the enemy and give our troops the tools and equipment they need to succeed. And at every step of the way, we will assess our efforts to defeat al Qaeda and its extremist allies, and to help the Afghan and Pakistani people build the future that they seek.
Now, even as we lead and equip our troops for the missions of today, we have a third responsibility to fulfill. We must prepare our forces for the missions of tomorrow.
Our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen adapt to new challenges every day. But as we know, much of our defense establishment has yet to fully adapt to the post-Cold War world, with doctrine and weapons better suited to fight the Soviets on the plains of Europe than insurgents in the rugged terrain of Afghanistan. Twenty years after the Cold War ended, this is simply not unacceptable. It's irresponsible. Our troops, and our taxpayers, deserve better. (Applause.)
And that's why -- that's why our defense review is taking a top-to-bottom look at our priorities and posture, questioning conventional wisdom, rethinking old dogmas and challenging the status quo. We're asking hard questions about the forces we need and the weapons we buy. And when we're finished, we'll have a new blueprint for the 21st-century military that we need. And in fact, we're already on our way.
We're adopting new concepts -- because the full spectrum of challenges demands a full range of military capabilities -- both the conventional and the unconventional, the ability to defeat both an armored division and the lone suicide bomber; the intercontinental ballistic missile and the improvised explosive device; 18th-century-style piracy and 21st-century cyber threats. No matter the mission, we must maintain America's military dominance.
So even as we modernize our conventional forces, we're investing in the capabilities that will reorient our force to the future -- an Army that is more mobile and expeditionary and missile defenses that protect our troops in the field; a Navy that not only projects power across the oceans but operates nimbly in shallow, coastal waters; an Air Force that dominates the airspace with next-generation aircraft, both manned and unmanned; a Marine Corps that can move ashore more rapidly in more places.
And across the force, we're investing in new skills and specialties, because in the 21st century, military strength will be measured not only by the weapons our troops carry, but by the languages they speak and the cultures that they understand.
But here's the simple truth: We cannot build the 21st-century military we need, and maintain the fiscal responsibility that America demands, unless we fundamentally reform the way our defense establishment does business. It's a simple fact. Every dollar wasted in our defense budget is a dollar we can't spend to care for our troops or protect America or prepare for the future.
You've heard the stories: the indefensible no-bid contracts that cost taxpayers billions and make contractors rich; the special interests and their exotic projects that are years behind schedule and billions over budget; the entrenched lobbyists pushing weapons that even our military says it doesn't want. The impulse in Washington to protect jobs back home building things we don't need has a cost that we can't afford.
This waste would be unacceptable at any time, but at a time when we're fighting two wars and facing a serious deficit, it's inexcusable. It's an affront to the American people and to our troops. And it's time for it to stop. And this is not a Democratic issue or a Republican issue. (Applause.)
This is not a Democratic issue or a Republican issue -- it's about giving our troops the support that they need. And that's something that all Americans should be able to agree to. So I'm glad I have as a partner in this effort a great veteran, a great Arizonan, and a great American who has shown the courage to stand and fight this waste -- Senator John McCain. (Applause.) And I'm also proud to have Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who has served under eight Presidents of both parties, leading this fight at the Pentagon.
So already I've put an end to unnecessary no-bid contracts. I've signed bipartisan legislation to reform defense procurement so weapons systems don't spin out of control. And even as we increase spending on the equipment and weapons our troops do need, we've proposed cutting tens of billions of dollars in waste we don't need.
Think about it. Hundreds of millions of dollars for an alternate second engine for the Joint Strike Fighter -- when one reliable engine will do just fine. Nearly $2 billion to buy more F-22 fighter jets -- when we can move ahead with a fleet of newer, more affordable aircraft. Tens of billions of dollars to put an anti-missile laser on a fleet of vulnerable 747s.
And billions of dollars for a new presidential helicopter. Now, maybe you've heard about this. Among its other capabilities, it would let me cook a meal while under nuclear attack. (Laughter.) Now, let me tell you something, if the United States of America is under nuclear attack, the last thing on my mind will be whipping up a snack. (Laughter and applause.)
So this is pretty straightforward: Cut the waste. Save taxpayer dollars. Support the troops. That's what we should be doing. (Applause.) The special interests, contractors, and entrenched lobbyists, they're invested in the status quo. And they're putting up a fight. But make no mistake, so are we. If a project doesn't support our troops, if it does not make America safer, we will not fund it. If a system doesn't perform, we will terminate it. (Applause.) And if Congress sends me a defense bill loaded with a bunch of pork, I will veto it. We will do right by our troops and taxpayers, and we will build the 21st century military that we need. (Applause.)
Finally, we will fulfill our responsibility to those who serve by keeping our promises to our people. We will fulfill our responsibility to our forces and our families. That's why we're increasing military pay. That's why we're building better family housing and funding more childcare and counseling to help families cope with the stresses of war. And we've changed the rules so military spouses can better compete for federal jobs and pursue their careers.
We will fulfill our responsibility to our wounded warriors. For those still in uniform, we're investing billions of dollars for more treatment centers, more case managers and better medical care so our troops can recover and return where they want to be -- with their units. (Applause.)
But as the VFW well knows, for so many veterans the war rages on -- the flashbacks that won't go away, the loved ones who now seem like strangers, the heavy darkness of depression that has led to too many of our troops taking their own lives. Post-Traumatic Stress and Traumatic Brain Injury are the defining injuries of today's wars. So caring for those affected by them is a defining purpose of my budget -- billions of dollars more for treatment and mental health screenings to reach our troops on the frontier -- on the frontlines and more mobile and rural clinics to reach veterans back home. We are not going to abandon these American heroes. We are going to do right by them. (Applause.)
We will fulfill our responsibility to our veterans as they return to civilian life. I was proud to co-sponsor the Post-9/11 GI Bill as a senator. And thanks to VFW members across the country -- and leaders like Arizona's Harry Mitchell in Congress -- it is now the law of the land. (Applause.) And as President, I'm committed to seeing that it is successfully implemented.
For so many of you, like my grandfather, the original GI Bill changed your life -- helping you to realize your dreams. But it also transformed America, helping to build the largest middle class in history. We're saying the same thing to today's post-9/11 veterans: You pick the school, we'll help pick up the bill. (Applause.)
And as these veterans show -- start showing up on campuses, I'm proud that we're making this opportunity available to all those who have sacrificed, including Reservists and National Guard members and spouses and children, including kids who've lost their mom or dad. (Applause.) In an era when so many people and institutions have acted irresponsibly, we choose to reward the responsibility and service of our forces and their families.
Whether you've left the service in 2009 or 1949, we will fulfill our responsibility to deliver the benefits and care that you earned. And that's why I've pledged to build nothing less than a 21st-century VA. And I picked a lifelong soldier and wounded warrior from Vietnam to lead this fight, General Ric Shinseki. (Applause.)
We're dramatically increasing funding for veterans health care. This includes hundreds of millions of dollars to serve veterans in rural areas, as well as the unique needs of our growing number of women veterans. We're restoring access to VA health care for a half-million veterans who lost their eligibility in recent years -- our Priority 8 veterans.
And since there's been so much misinformation out there about health insurance reform, let me say this: One thing that reform won't change is veterans' health care. No one is going to take away your benefits -- that is the plain and simple truth. (Applause.) We're expanding access to your health care, not reducing it. (Applause.)
We're also keeping our promise on concurrent receipt. My budget ensures that our severely disabled veterans will receive both their military retired pay and their VA disability benefits. (Applause.) And I look forward to signing legislation on advanced appropriations for the VA so the medical care you need is never held up by budget delays. (Applause.)
I've also directed Secretary Shinseki to focus on a top priority -- reducing homelessness among veterans. (Applause.) After serving their country, no veteran should be sleeping on the streets. (Applause.) No veteran. We should have zero tolerance for that.
And we're keeping our promise to fulfill another top priority at the VA -- cutting the red tape and inefficiencies that cause backlogs and delays in the claims process. (Applause.) This spring, I directed the Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs to create one unified lifetime electronic health record for the members of the armed forces -- a single electronic record, with privacy guaranteed, that will stay with them forever. Because after fighting for America, you should not have to fight over paperwork to receive the benefits that you've earned. (Applause.)
Today, I can announce that we're taking another step. I've directed my Chief Performance Officer, my Chief Technology Officer and my Chief Information Officer to join with Secretary Shinseki in a new reform effort. We're launching a new competition to capture the very best ideas of our VA employees who work with you every day.
We're going to challenge each of our 57 regional VA offices to come up with the best ways of doing business, of harnessing the best information technologies, of cutting red tape and breaking through the bureaucracy. And then we're going to fund the best ideas and put them into action, all with a simple mission: cut those backlogs, slash those wait times, deliver your benefits sooner. (Applause.) I know you've heard this for years, but the leadership and resources we're providing this time means that we're going to be able to do it. That is our mission, and we are going to make it happen. (Applause.)
Now, taken together, these investments represent a historic increase in our commitment to America's veterans -- a 15 percent increase over last year's funding levels and the largest increase in the VA budget in more than 30 years. And over the next five years we'll invest another $25 billion to make sure that our veterans are getting what they need.
These are major investments, and these are difficult times. Fiscal discipline demands that we make hard decisions -- sacrificing certain things we can't afford. But let me be clear. America's commitment to its veterans are not just lines on a budget. They are bonds that are sacred -- a sacred trust we're honor bound to uphold.
These are commitments that we make to the patriots who serve -- from the day they enlist to the day that they are laid to rest. Patriots like you. Patriots like a man named Jim Norene.
His story is his own, but in it we see the larger story of all who serve. He's a child of the Depression who grew up to join that greatest generation; a paratrooper in the 502nd Parachute Infantry Regiment of the 101st Airborne; jumping in a daring daylight raid into Holland to liberate captive people; rushing to Bastogne at the Battle of the Bulge where his commanding general -- surrounded by the Germans and asked to surrender -- declared, famously, "Nuts."
For his bravery, Jim was awarded the Bronze Star. But like so many others, he rarely spoke of what he did or what he saw -- reminding us that true love of country is not boisterous or loud but, rather, the "tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime."
Jim returned home and built a life. He went to school on the GI Bill. He got married. He raised a family in his small Oregon farming town. And every Veterans Day, year after year, he visited schoolchildren to speak about the meaning of service. And he did it all as a proud member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. (Applause.)
Then, this spring, Jim made a decision. He would return to Europe once more. Eighty-five years old, frail and gravely ill, he knew he might not make it back home. But like the paratrooper he always was, he was determined.
So near Bastogne, he returned to the places he knew so well. At a Dutch town liberated by our GIs, schoolchildren lined the sidewalks and sang The Star-Spangled Banner. And in the quiet clearing of an American cemetery, he walked among those perfect lines of white crosses of fellow soldiers who had fallen long ago, their names forever etched in stone.
And then, back where he had served 65 years before, Jim Norene passed away, at night, in his sleep, quietly, peacefully -- the "tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime."
The next day, I was privileged to join the commemoration at Normandy to mark the day when the beaches were stormed and a continent was freed. There were Presidents and prime ministers and veterans from the far corners of the earth. But long after the bands stopped playing and the crowds stopped cheering, it was the story of a departed VFW member that echoed in our hearts.
Veterans of Foreign Wars, you have done your duty -- to your fallen comrades, to your communities, to your country. You have always fulfilled your responsibilities to America. And so long as I am President of the United States, America will always fulfill its responsibilities to you.
God bless you. God bless all our veterans. And God bless the United States of America. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
END
10:40 A.M. MST
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_______________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                             August 15, 2009
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
IN TOWN HALL ON HEALTH CARE
Central High school
Grand Junction, Colorado
3:44 P.M. MDT
THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  Thank you.  Hello, Grand Junction!  (Applause.)  Thank you so much.  Thank you.  Everybody please have a seat.  It is good to be back in Southwest Colorado.  (Applause.)  Last time I was here I had some really good peaches.  (Laughter.)  Somehow, though, Michelle and the girls got to go pick peaches -- and I'm hoping they bring some back for me.
It is nice to take a break from the back and forth in Washington.  I want to especially want to thank Nathan for his introduction and sharing his story.  (Applause.)  It's not easy to talk about an illness in the family.  It's not easy to talk about such a painful experience.  Because it's important that we understand what's at stake in this health care debate he's been willing to share it with us.  And so I'm very grateful to him.
We've got a couple of other special guests that I want to acknowledge.  First of all, I stole him from you to make him what I believe will be the best Secretary of the Interior in the history of the United States, Ken Salazar.  (Applause.)  But I left things in good hands with the outstanding congressman and brother of Ken, John Salazar.  (Applause.)
Your outstanding governor of this great state, Bill Ritter, is here.  (Applause.)  As well as the extraordinary First Lady of the state, Jeannie Ritter is here as well.  (Applause.)
Two of the finest young senators that we've got in Washington right now:  Senator Mark Udall.  (Applause.)  And Senator Michael Bennet.  (Applause.)
I want to thank the hospitality of Grand Junction Mayor Bruce Hill.  (Applause.)  And finally I want to thank Tillie Bishop for the invocation.  (Applause.)  And I want to thank the Central High students Elise Beckstead, Crystal Rossman, Axel Urie and Amelia LyBarger for their National Anthem and Pledge of Allegiance.  Thank you, guys.  (Applause.)
Oh, and Central High principal Jody Diers is here.  (Applause.)  And it turns out school starts in two days.  (Laughter.)  You know, when I was going to school we always had until Labor Day.  (Laughter.)  It's rough for kids these days.  But it's important for us to be able to compete internationally, so it's great to see dedicated educators like we have here at Central High.  (Applause.)
You know, Nathan's story is the kind of story that I've read in letters and heard in town halls all across America.  And on Tuesday I was in New Hampshire talking about people denied coverage because of preexisting conditions.  Yesterday, I was in Montana talking about people who've had their insurance policies suddenly revoked, even though they were paying their premiums, just because they got sick.  Today we're talking about people like Nathan and his family who have insurance but are still stuck with huge bills because they've hit a cap on their benefits or they're charged exorbitant out-of-pocket fees.
And when you hear about these experiences, when you think about the millions of people denied coverage because of preexisting conditions and the thousands who have their policies cancelled because of an illness, the countless people like Nathan, I want you to remember one thing:  There but for the grace of God go I.  (Applause.)  This is something that sometimes we've forgotten during the course of this health care debate.  These are ordinary Americans.  They're no different from anybody else.  They're working hard, they're meeting their responsibilities, but they're held hostage by health insurance companies that deny them coverage, or drop their coverage, or charge fees that they can't afford for care that they desperately need.
It's hurting too many families and businesses.  It's wrong.  And we're going to fix it when we pass health insurance reform this year.  (Applause.)
Now, this is obviously a tough time for the families in Colorado and all across America.  I just want to rewind the clock a little bit, because sometimes people have forgotten what's transpired over the last seven, eight months.  Just six months ago, we were in the middle of the worst recession of our lifetimes.  We were losing about 700,000 jobs each month.  Economists from the left and the right, liberals and conservatives, feared the second coming of the Great Depression.  I don't know if everybody remembers that.  That was six months ago.  That's why we acted as fast as we could to pass a recovery plan to stop the freefall.  And there's been a lot of misinformation about that, so let me just talk briefly about what it is that we did.
The recovery plan was divided into three parts.  One-third of the money -- one-third of the money in the Recovery Act, the stimulus plan -- went to tax cuts that are already showing up in the paychecks of nearly 2 million working families in Colorado, including right here in Grand Junction.  (Applause.)  So I just want everybody to be clear:  One-third of it, tax cuts -- not tax increases -- more money in your pockets to spend as you wish.
We also cut taxes for small businesses on the investments that they make, and hundreds of Colorado small businesses have qualified for new loans backed by the Recovery Act -- including 11 businesses in Grand Junction alone.  (Applause.)
So that was one-third of it.
Now, another third of the money in the Recovery Act is for emergency relief for folks who've borne the brunt of this recession.  So we've extended unemployment benefits for more than 150,000 Colorado citizens.  (Applause.)  We've made health insurance 65 percent cheaper for families who are having to use COBRA because they lost their jobs and they're out there looking for work.  (Applause.)  And for states facing historic budget shortfalls, we provided assistance that has saved the jobs of tens of thousands of workers who provide essential services, like teachers and police officers.  And Governor Ritter will tell you, if we had not had some of that money in, then Colorado would have had to make much more painful job cuts in vital services and might have had to put in place some very painful state and local tax increases.  So that was the second third of the Recovery Act.
Now, the last third of the Recovery Act is for investments that are already putting people back to work.  There are almost 100 shovel-ready transportation projects already approved in Colorado which are beginning to create jobs.  Not far from here, for example, there's a project to pave and add lanes to State Highway 92.  Most of the work is being done by local businesses, because that's how we're going to create jobs and grow this economy again.
And by next month, projects will be underway at more than 100 national parks all over America, including Colorado.  (Applause.)  Now these are -- these are projects restoring trails, improving infrastructure, making park facilities more energy efficient.  Earlier today, some of you may know, I toured Yellowstone with Michelle and the girls.  We saw Old Faithful -- I hadn't seen it since I was 11 years old.  It's still going strong.  (Laughter.)  Tomorrow we're going to be visiting the Grand Canyon.
And I recently signed into law a public lands bill that designates the Dominguez-Escalante Canyon as a National Conservation Area here in Colorado.  (Applause.)  These are national treasures -- symbols of how much we owe to those who came before us, and the fact that we're borrowing this earth from those who will follow us.  And I want to thank especially Ken Salazar, because he's been leading the way on these vital issues, especially in the West.  (Applause.)
As we grapple with enormous challenges -- like health care -- the work of generations past reminds us of our duty to generations yet to come.
So there is no doubt that the recovery plan is doing what we said it would:  putting us on the road to recovery.  It's not solving all problems.  Unemployment is still way too high.  But we just saw last week that the jobs picture is beginning to turn.  We're starting to see signs that business investment is coming back.  But that doesn't mean we're out of the woods.  Even before this extraordinary financial crisis we had an economy that was working pretty well for the wealthiest Americans -- working pretty well for Wall Street bankers, for big corporations -- but it wasn't working so well for everybody else.  It was an economy of bubbles and busts.  It was an economy in which the average worker, their wages and incomes had flatlined for a decade.  It was an economy that rewarded recklessness over responsibility.  So we can't go back to that kind of economy.
If we want this country to succeed in the 21st century, we've got to lay a new foundation for lasting prosperity.  And health insurance reform is a key pillar of this new foundation.  (Applause.)  Because this economy -- this economy won't work for everyone until folks like Nathan and his family aren't pushed to the brink of bankruptcy by medical expenses; until companies aren't slashing payrolls and losing profits to pay for health insurance; until every single American has the security and peace of mind of quality, affordable health care.
And health care touches us all in profound ways -- which by the way means that it's only natural this debate is going to be an emotional one.  There's a lot at stake.  And I know there's been a lot of attention paid to some of the town hall meetings that are going on around the country -- especially those where tempers have flared, and TV really likes that.  You can have 20 really great town hall meetings, and if there's one where somebody loses their temper, that's the one TV wants to cover.
What you haven't been seeing are the constructive meetings going on all over the country.  That doesn't mean people agree with me on every single issue, but it means that we've been trying to figure out how do we solve what we know is an unsustainable problem in our health care system.  (Applause.)
So just yesterday -- just yesterday I held a town hall in Belgrade, Montana, and we had a pretty good crowd.  Some were big supporters of reform.  Some had concerns and questions.  Some were completely skeptical.  And I got tough questions.  But even though Montanans have strong opinions, they didn't shout at one another.  They were there to listen.  And that reflects the American people and what our democracy is about, a lot more than what's been covered on TV these last few days.  And that's why I thank all of you, whether you're for or against health care reform, for being here today.  (Applause.)
Now, I'm going to take a bunch of questions, but before I do, I want to just talk about what health insurance reform will mean for you, because there's a lot of misunderstandings out there.
First of all, what we're proposing is a common-sense set of consumer protections for people with health insurance, people with private insurance.  I expect that after reform passes, the vast majority of Americans are still going to be getting their insurance from private insurers.  So we've got to have some protections in place for people like Nathan, people like you.
So insurance companies will no longer be able to place an arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive or charge outrageous out-of-pocket expenses on top of your premiums.  That's what happened to Nathan and his wife.  Their son was diagnosed with hemophilia when he was born.  The insurance company then raised the premiums for his family and for all his coworkers who were on the same policy.  The family was approaching their cap.
And so on top of worrying about taking care of their son, they had the added worry of trying to find insurance that would cover him -- plus thousands and thousands of dollars in out-of-pocket costs.  Nathan and his wife even considered getting a divorce so that she might possibly go on Medicaid.
Now thankfully, Colorado's law doesn't allow coverage for small businesses to permanently exclude preexisting conditions like his son's, so eventually they found insurance.  But they're paying increasing premiums and they still have to face the prospect of hitting their new cap in the next few years.
Those are the stories I hear all over the country.  I heard from a teenager in Indiana diagnosed with leukemia.  The chemotherapy and intensive care he received cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.  His family hit their lifetime cap in less than a year.  They had insurance.  So the insurance wouldn't cover a bone marrow transplant and the family couldn't afford all the money that was needed.  The family turned to the public for help, but the boy died before he could receive that transplant.
If you think that can't happen to you or your family, think again.  Almost 90 percent of individual health insurance policies have lifetime benefit limits.  And about a third of family plans in the individual insurance market have lifetime limits under $3 million.  If you or your spouse or your child gets sick and you hit that limit, it's suddenly like you have no insurance at all.
And this is part of a larger story, of folks with insurance, paying more and more out of pocket.  In the past few years, premiums have nearly doubled for the average American family.  Total out-of-pocket costs have increased by almost 50 percent -- that's more than $2,000 per person.  And nobody is holding these insurance companies accountable for these practices.  And by the way, your employer is paying even more, and you may not even see the costs of it except for the fact that's why you're not getting a raise -- (applause) -- because it's going into your health care instead of your salary and income.
So we're going to ban arbitrary caps on benefits.  We'll place limits on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses.  No one in America should go broke because they get sick.  (Applause.)
Now, insurance companies will also be stopped from cancelling your coverage because you get sick or denying coverage because of your medical history.  (Applause.)  Again, if you think this has nothing to do with you, think again.  A recent report found that in the past few years, more than 12 million Americans were discriminated against by insurance companies because of a preexisting condition.  When we get health insurance reform, those days will be over.  And we will require insurance companies to cover routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies.  That saves money; it saves lives.  (Applause.)
At the same time -- I just want to be completely clear about this; I keep on saying this but somehow folks aren't listening -- if you like your health care plan, you keep your health care plan.  Nobody is going to force you to leave your health care plan.  If you like your doctor, you keep seeing your doctor.  I don't want government bureaucrats meddling in your health care.  But the point is, I don't want insurance company bureaucrats meddling in your health care either.  (Applause.)
So just to recap here, if you're one of nearly 46 million people who don't have health insurance, you will finally have quality, affordable options.  If you do have health insurance, we will help make that insurance more affordable and more secure.  Under the reform proposals that we've put out there, roughly 700,000 middle-class Coloradans will get a health care tax credit.  More than a million Coloradans will have access to a new marketplace where you can easily compare health insurance options; 87,000 small businesses in Colorado will be aided by new tax benefits, so when they're doing the right thing for their employees, they're not penalized for it.  (Applause.)  And we will do all of this without adding to our deficit over the next decade, largely by cutting waste and ending sweetheart deals for insurance companies that don't make anybody any healthier.  (Applause.)
Now here -- if you don't -- I know there's some skepticism:  Well, how are you going to save money in the health care system?  You're doing it here in Grand Junction.  (Applause.)  You know -- you know that lowering costs is possible if you put in place smarter incentives; if you think about how to treat people, not just illnesses; if you look at problems facing not just one hospital or physician, but the many system-wide problems that are shared.  That's what the medical community in this city did, and now you're getting better results while wasting less money.  And I know that your senator, Michael Bennet, has been working hard on legislation that's based on putting the innovations that are here in Grand Junction into practice across the system, and there's no reason why we can't do that.  (Applause.)
So the fact is, we are closer to achieving reform than we've ever been.  We have the American Nurses Association, we have the American Medical Association on board, because America's doctors and nurses know how badly we need reform.  (Applause.)  We have -- we have broad agreement in Congress on about 80 percent of what we're trying to achieve.  We have an agreement from drug companies to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors -- $80 billion that can cut the doughnut hole that seniors have to deal with on prescription drug plans in half.  (Applause.)  The AARP supports this policy, and agrees with us that reform must happen this year.
But look, because we're getting close, the fight is getting fierce.  And the history is clear:  Every time we're in sight of reform, the special interests start fighting back with everything they've got.  They use their influence.  They run their ads.  And let's face it, they get people scared.  And understandably -- I understand why people are nervous.  Health care is a big deal.  In fact, whenever America has set about solving our toughest problems, there have always been those who've sought to preserve the status quo by scaring the American people.
That's what happened when FDR tried to pass Social Security -- they said that was socialist.  They did -- verbatim.  That's what they said.  They said that everybody was going to have to wear dog tags and that this was a plot for the government to keep track of everybody.  When JFK and then Lyndon Johnson tried to pass Medicare, they said this was a government takeover of health care; they were going to get between you and your doctor -- the same argument that's being made today.
These struggles have always boiled down to a contest between hope and fear.  It was true when Social Security was born.  It was true when Medicare was created.  It's true in today's debate.  (Applause.)
But whether you have health insurance or you don't have health insurance, we all know we can't continue down this path.  Costs are rising far faster than wages.  Cuts -- the system works a lot better for insurance companies than it does for America's families.  To maintain what's best about our health care system, for you to keep what you've got if you're happy with it, is going to require change.
We've got to keep what's good about the system, especially the relationship between doctors, nurses, and their patients, while fixing what's broken -- because for all the scare tactics out there, what's truly scary is if we don't do anything.  We will continue to see 14,000 Americans lose their health insurance every day.  Premiums will continue to skyrocket, going up three times faster than your wages.  The deficit will continue to grow because most of it is Medicare and Medicaid.  Medicare will go into the red in less than a decade.  And insurance companies will continue to profit by discriminating against people just because they're sick.
So if you want a different future -- a brighter future -- I need your help.  (Applause.)  I need you to stand for hope.  I need you to knock on doors.  I need you to spread the word, because we are going to get this done this year.  Thank you, Grand Junction.  Thank you.  (Applause.)
Thank you.  Thank you.  All right.  Now, I've got time for a bunch of questions.  We've got a bunch of people in the audience with microphones.  Hold up your microphones, guys.  All right.  Now, the way we're going to do this is, I'm just going to go around the room.  Raise your hand.  To be fair I'm going to make sure it's girl, boy, girl, boy.  (Laughter.)  If you can introduce yourself and ask your question or make your comment, if you can keep your question or comment relatively brief, I will try to keep my answers relatively brief, and that way we can make sure that we get through more questions during the course of this event.  All right?  Okay.  Let's see hands.  And I'll start with this young lady right here in the pink blouse.  Oops, hold on, the mic doesn't -- can you check that mic?  Is it working?  Does it work?
Q    Good afternoon, Mr. President.  My name is Polly.  I work at Rocky Mountain Orthopedics here in Grand Junction.  On behalf of our CEO, I would like to extend an invitation for you to visit our successful practice to see how we provide excellent health care at a lower average cost to our patients.
My question is, the original health care House bill included funding for federally qualified health centers whose future budget would be based on expenses plus inflation.  If private physicians, hospitals, and other providers are going to be given incentives to reduce waste and cost, what will be done to ensure the government programs will do the same?
THE PRESIDENT:  Well, it's an excellent question.  Part of what's so important about reform is that right now the way Medicare and Medicaid operates, if it's starting to go over budget, we basically have two choices.  Either we raise taxes and just keep on paying more and more, and health care inflation is going up at least twice as fast as inflation on everything else, or what we do is we just tell the providers, we're going to give you less money -- period.  We'll reimburse you 80 cents or 90 cents for every dollar of services that you provide.  And then what happens is that the providers, they end up just charging people with private insurance to make up for the difference.  So that drives everybody's costs up.
Now what's been done here in Grand Junction, in other outstanding health programs like Mayo, is they started to change the delivery system so that you're actually getting more bang for your health care dollar.
Let me give you an example.  Right now if you go to your doctor and you get a test, a lot of times that test won't be forwarded to the next doctor or specialist that you have to see.  You have to take another test.  You might have to take three or four or five tests by the time your treatment is all completed.  That's a waste of money.  And if we can incentivize the provider to say, do one test and then e-mail the results to everybody who might be providing treatment, or the patient might be referred to, that right there saves a lot of money.
So what we want to do is to do this in Medicare and Medicaid, which will incentivize a lot of health systems around the country to start using some of the smart practices that you're using.  Frankly, Medicare and Medicaid is -- they provide a lot of care for a lot of patients, particularly seniors, and so if they hear from Medicare, can you start doing things smarter, they have an incentive to do it, and once they put a smarter system in place, the benefits spill over to the private insurance market, as well.  So we want to do it through Medicare and Medicaid, but we also want to see in the private insurance market that health providers start thinking smarter and providing better care, which often turns out to be lower-cost care.
Now, it's not going to happen overnight, because a lot of these systems have been put in place for a long time.  And if you're in Grand Junction or Mayo Clinic or Geisinger or other of these really good health care systems, what they've done is each year they are continually comparing notes, they've got a peer review process where doctors are exchanging ideas, and they're continually making the system better and better, smarter and smarter, and over time what we can do is bend the cost curve so that instead of having inflation go up a lot faster on health care than everything else, it matches everything else.
And if we could do that, if we could just get health care inflation to match the inflation on food and other items, all of our deficit -- long-term deficit problems would be solved.  Just that alone.  If we could just reduce the amount of health care inflation, our long-term debt and deficit problems would be solved.
So this is the most important thing we can do for deficit reduction.  And I want everybody to remember that, because in this debate you've heard a lot of people saying, "We can't afford to do this because our deficit and debt are too high."  The biggest driver of our deficit and debt is health care.  And if we don't change delivery systems and adapt some of the innovations that are being used where you work and in really good health care systems around the country, then we're going to be in red ink forever.
Okay.  Thank you so much for the question.  (Applause.)
All right.  Gentleman in the red shirt back there.  Wait for the mic so everybody can hear you.
Q    Thank you, Mr. President, for taking my question, for one.  I've got a bunch, but -- my name is Randy Piper (phonetic) and I have been in the health insurance business for over 25 years.  I'm also a big Steelers fan, as well.
THE PRESIDENT:  I like that in you.  (Applause.)  Are you allowed to confess that though here, where -- (laughter.)
Q    I can take it.  (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT:  All right, all right.  Go ahead.
Q    You have asked many times why insurance companies are so afraid of competing with a public plan option of coverage.  And I understand insurance companies need to get spanked every now and again for sure, but if the public plan option reimburses on average 55 cents by contract of every dollar of care to the provider, and the private insurance plans by contract reimburse an average of 85 cents per dollar of care, how can it be considered fair competition?  And thank you for being here today.  (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT:  No, I think it's a good question.  Thank you.  For those of you who have not been following the debate as closely, let me just describe what this issue of the public plan is all about.  And to do so, I've got to describe how we're looking to provide health insurance for people who currently don't have it.  I spent most of my time talking about what we would do for folks who have health insurance, but we've still got 46 million uninsured and I think it is the right thing to provide them with some help.  Most of them work.  Most of them are responsible.  But their employer -- maybe they work for a small business -- their employer just can't afford it because they don't have the bargaining power to get low enough rates to cover all their employees.  That's a big category of the uninsured.
So what we've said is, let's set up what's called a health insurance exchange.  It's essentially a marketplace where you could go online and you'd have a menu of options, most of them private insurers -- Aetna, BlueCross BlueShield -- insurance companies that wanted to participate, and they would list a range of plans just like when Mike and Mark want to get health insurance as members of the Senate, they go on to this exchange for federal health care -- for federal employees, and they select which plan works best for their families.
So we want everybody to be able to access that and choose which plan works best for them.  And if they can't afford it, even though we'd have a lot of bargaining power, we'd be able to get the same kinds of rates that really big companies are able to get or the federal system is able to get, some people will still not be able to afford it, and then we would provide some subsidies.  And there would be certain rules governing any insurance company that's participating:  You couldn't exclude for preexisting conditions; you couldn't have a lifetime cap; you'd have to limit out-of-pocket expenses.  So all the insurance rules that I talked about, that would be part of the deal if you as an insurer wanted to sell insurance through this exchange.
So far, so good.  The argument around public option is, should one of the choices -- not the only choice -- but one of the choices on that exchange be a public option?  And the idea here would be that a government-run non-for-profit would have its own option that people could sign up for -- they wouldn't have to, but they could sign up for it -- and if it could keep its costs lower and provide a good-quality service and good benefits, then that would help keep the insurance companies honest -- (applause) -- because the idea being -- the idea being that as a non-for-profit, potentially with lower administrative costs, they could do a good job.
Now, the insurance companies have come back and said, well, that's not fair, because nobody can compete against the government.  They have a legitimate point if, if what's being done is the government is either subsidizing that government plan -- essentially taking taxpayer money and saying, here, we'll just keep on spending money regardless of whether you run a good operation or not, then it's hard for insurance companies to compete against that.  And by the way, it would be wildly expensive for taxpayers.
So I've already said a public option can only work if they have to collect premiums just like a private insurer and compete on a level playing field.  That's point number one.
The second argument that's been made is the one that you just made, which is, if public option is reimbursing at Medicaid rates that are substantially lower than what private insurers have to negotiate for, then eventually, over time, private insurers might be run out of business.  So that's the second argument.
Now, what's happened in the House bill, that as it's been modified, is they've actually said we're going to negotiate rates, they won't be Medicaid rates.  So that actually solves the problem that you're addressing, because now this would be a negotiated process and prices would not be set just to Medicaid.  All right?
Now, there's a third argument against the public option, and this is the one, really, that you've been hearing mostly about, and that is just this idea that we shouldn't have government involved at all, that government is part of the problem, not part of the solution, to quote Ronald Reagan.  (Applause.)  We've got some supporters of that view.  And I guess the only -- look, I think you can have a legitimate position just saying you don't want to see more government involvement.  I understand the argument.  The only thing I would point out is, is that Medicare is a government program that works really well for our seniors and has protected people -- (applause) -- hold on one second, let's not start yelling.
It's true that it's expensive, but the truth is that actually the cost of Medicare inflation has actually gone up at a slower rate than private insurance.  So it's not because it's mismanaged; it's because of what was referred to in the first question -- the whole health care system is out of whack and way too expensive.  It's not government, per se.  It has to do with the fact that the health care system itself, the delivery systems, are not working the way they should.
So if you just believe the government shouldn't be involved in anything, or shouldn't be involved in health care, period, then you're right that you can't support the kind of reform that we're proposing.  The only thing I want to make sure of, though, is you've got to -- you make an honest argument, because nobody is talking about government takeover of health care.  There's a difference between what we're proposing, which has some government involvement, versus this idea that somehow government is going to take over everything and get between your and doctor.  That's not what we're proposing.
So we can have an honest disagreement, but I just want to be clear on what the debate is about.  It's about this narrow issue of the public plan.  It's not about somehow eliminating private insurance.  Everybody who has currently private insurance that works for them will be able to keep private insurance under the proposals that have been made in Congress.  All right?  (Applause.)
Okay, it's a woman's turn.  It's a young lady's turn.  Let me -- right there with the vest.  Yes, that's you.  (Laughter.)
Q    Hello, Mr. President, and thanks for being here.
THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.
Q    My name is Jamie and I am a nursing student at Mesa State.  (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT:  Outstanding.
Q    Being as I am a potential health care provider in the health care system, there are a few things in the plan that I read about that I wanted to understand more --
THE PRESIDENT:  Sure.
Q    -- as far as providers being required to report -- what was the words -- preventable medical errors in the health care system.  Now, as far as health care systems are concerned, we are required to report every error we see.  So I kind of want a clarification of how much you're expecting from providers in this system.
THE PRESIDENT:  Well, different states have different rules.  So we got kind of a patchwork.  I don't -- I confess I don't know exactly what the rules are here in Colorado.  But about 100,000 people die every year from preventable diseases and illnesses in hospitals.  Some of the ways that we could solve this are so simple.  There's actually a doctor who's put together a protocol -- washing your hands, a lot of just basic stuff that costs no money -- that has been shown repeatedly to cut these preventable illnesses and deaths down drastically -- by a magnitude of 50 percent, 75 percent reductions in preventable deaths just by applying these things that don't cost any money.
So the question then becomes, how do we get more hospitals, more doctors, more health systems, to adopt these systems.  And the best way to do it is to make sure that not only are they reporting these preventable errors, but that they're also available to consumers -- the American people -- so that if they've got too many of them, after a while they start getting embarrassed.  Right?  I mean, if you found out that there are two hospitals here in this city and one hospital has half the preventable deaths of the other hospital, you'd want to know that, wouldn't you?
The problem is right now oftentimes it's very hard for consumers to get that information directly.  So the idea is simply to make sure that that information is packaged in a way where you can comparison shop, and your employer -- if you're getting health insurance from your employer -- could comparison shop.  So we're putting some competitive pressure to improve quality across the system.  That's what we're talking about.  (Applause.)
By the way, thank you for being a nurse, because we need more nurses.  That's important.  (Applause.)
All right, gentleman right here in the t-shirt.  Hold on one second, we got a mic coming.
Q    Thank you for coming to Colorado.  It's a great place.
THE PRESIDENT:  It's a great place.  (Applause.)
Q    You touched on this.  I would like you to expand a little more.  This problem with misinformation in our country, it seems to me that it's not only just hurting health care reform, health insurance reform, it's dividing our country.  (Applause.)  Is it not maybe time -- I think we all know where it's coming from.  Is it not time that something can be done -- okay, I got to watch what I'm saying, but --
THE PRESIDENT:  Well, look, let me -- let me just -- let me address this.  You know, health care is really hard.  I mean, this is not easy.  I'm a reasonably dedicated student to this issue.  I've got a lot of really smart people around me who have been working on this for months now.  We've got really fine public servants like Senators Bennet and Udall who are working on this and thinking about it a lot.
And the truth is -- I want to be completely honest here -- there is no perfect, painless silver bullet out there that solves every problem, gives everybody perfect health care for free.  There isn't.  I wish there was.  I wish I could just say, you know what, we're going to change the system, everybody will get as much care as they want any time they want, everybody will have it, and it won't cost anything.  And doctors will be happy and nurses will be happy, hospitals will be happy, insurance companies will still make a lot of profits, drug companies will be able to charge as much as they want.  I can't do it.  Nobody can.
What I can do is try to sort through what are all the options available, be realistic about where we're going on health care, say to myself, if we keep on doing what we're doing, we are in a world of hurt.  We can't afford what we're doing right now.  More people are going to lose health insurance.  More employers are going to drop coverage or push more coverage onto their employees with higher premiums and higher deductibles.  Medicare and Medicaid will go broke.  State budgets and federal budgets will be unsustainable.
And then we're going to have to make some really bad decisions where we had no good options -- even worse options than we have right now.  And what's going to end up happening is -- mark my words -- if we do nothing, at some point Medicare in about eight to nine years goes into the red.  Somebody mentioned it's going broke -- yes, it is going broke.
So here's what's going to happen if we don't change the delivery systems and change some of the incentives -- we'll have a choice.  We'll either have to cut Medicare, in which case seniors then will bear the brunt of it, or we'll have to raise taxes, which nobody likes.  And we still will be paying about $5,000 to $6,000 more than any other advanced country in the world and not get better health care for it.  Now that doesn't make sense.
So in terms of misinformation, there is -- because there's no perfect solution, we can have legitimate debates about the public option that we just had.  That was a good, serious debate, and you can make a plausible argument as to why we shouldn't have a public option.  Now, I believe that we should on balance.  It's not perfect.  It's not going to solve every problem, but I think it actually would keep the insurance companies more honest.  You can have a honest disagreement with me on that.
What you can't do -- or you can, but you shouldn't do -- is start saying things like, we want to set up death panels to pull the plug on grandma.  I mean, come on.  (Applause.)  I mean, I just -- first of all, when you make a comment like that -- I just lost my grandmother last year.  I know what it's like to watch somebody you love, who's aging, deteriorate, and have to struggle with that.  So the notion that somehow I ran for public office, or members of Congress are in this so that they can go around pulling the plug on grandma?  I mean, when you start making arguments like that, that's simply dishonest, especially when I hear the arguments coming from members of Congress in the other party who, turns out, sponsored similar provisions.
Here's what this was about.  Here was the genesis of this little piece of information.  We had a provision in the House bill that would give the option -- the option -- of somebody getting counseling on end-of-life care or hospice care, and have it reimbursed by Medicare; the option -- voluntary -- so you'd have more information about how to deal with these situations.
Turns out the biggest proponent of this was a Republican congressman who is now a senator and a colleague of Mr. Udall and Mr. Bennet.  Turns out in Medicare Part D, which was passed by a Republican Congress, they had the exact same provision.
So when I have people who just a couple of years ago thought this was a good idea now getting on television suggesting that it's a plot against grandma or to sneak euthanasia into our health care system, that feels dishonest to me.  And we've got enough stuff to deal with without having these kinds of arguments.  (Applause.)
All right, so it's -- all right, it's a woman's turn here.  Yes, I sort of neglected this area right here.  Young lady right there, blond hair, black blouse -- white dress.  Yes, right there.  Go ahead.
Q    Hi, my name is Julie, and I'm a small business owner from Colorado Springs.  I am also a Republican that voted for you.
THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.
Q    You're welcome.  (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT:  What's your business?
Q    We make software.
THE PRESIDENT:  Excellent.  We need that.
Q    I hope so.  (Laughter.)  So I grew up in a blue-collar family, and my husband and I work very hard at our small business.  We've always treated our employees like family, given them great benefits, any time off they need with their family.  I volunteer in my professional community.  I volunteer at my children's schools.  And that's still not enough, because us small business owners that are on that cusp between middle class and the rich are going to bear the brunt of a lot of what this is going to cost.  Why is what I do now not enough?  (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT:  Let me -- I think it's a good question.  Let me talk about both cost and what this would mean for small businesses, because both issues would affect you.
First of all, remember what I said, I can't come up with a perfect solution that is completely free.  It is absolutely true that in order for us to provide help to those who have no insurance at all, that's going to cost some money.  It's going to cost some money.  We can't do it for free.  They've got no health insurance right now; we're going to help them.  It's 46 million people.  That's going to cost some money.
Now, what I've proposed is going to cost roughly $900 billion -- $800 billion to $900 billion.  That's a lot of money.  Keep in mind it's over 10 years.  So when you hear some of these figures thrown out there, this is not per year, this is over 10 years.  So let's assume it's about $80 billion a year.  It turns out that about two-thirds of that could be paid for by eliminating waste in the existing system.
So I'll give you -- let me give you one particular example.  We right now provide $177 billion over 10 years -- or about $17 billion, $18 billion a year -- to insurance companies in the forms of subsidies for something called Medicare Advantage where they basically run the Medicare program that everybody else has, except they get an extra bunch of money that they make a big profit off of.  And there's no proof, no evidence at all that seniors are better off using Medicare Advantage than regular Medicare.  If we could save that $18 billion a year, that is money that we can use to help people who right now need some help.
So about two-thirds of what we're talking about is paid for through the existing health care system, money that's already being paid by taxpayers -- does not require additional taxes.  But that still leaves one-third.
Now, in order to pay for that, there have been a lot of proposals out there.  One of them that I proposed, I still think is the best idea.  You may disagree, because I don't know what your income bracket is.  My proposal was that for people making more than $250,000 a year -- people like myself -- that we should, instead of getting the full itemized deduction of what our highest tax bracket is, we should just cap out our itemized deduction at 28 percent, which is what the average American gets.  So -- because my attitude is, I shouldn't get a bigger tax break if I write a check to my local church than if the janitor down the street writes a check to their local church.  We should get the same tax break.  If we were willing to do that, just that alone would pay for what we're talking about.  (Applause.)
Now, some members of Congress disagree with that and they've got other proposals, and that's going to be worked out in September.
I do want to make the point, though, that I have not proposed any plan that would put the burden on middle-class families in order to deal with this.  So when you hear people talking about I'm raising your taxes, the only tax policies I've implemented for middle-class families is a tax cut for 95 percent of working families.
Now, let me talk about small businesses.  I don't know your particular situation, whether you're providing health insurance right now to your employees.  If you are, then you stand to benefit from this plan because every proposal, both in the House and the Senate, that's been put forward, provides a huge number of subsidies to small business owners that are doing the right thing by their employees.  (Applause.)
So it is very likely -- you know, obviously we'd have to look at the calculation; I'd have to figure out how many employees you have, what kind of health insurance plan you had, et cetera -- but it is very likely that you would actually make money, gain from this plan, because you're already providing health insurance to your employees and we would give you some help.
The only category of folks who might not like this plan are employers who can afford to provide health insurance to their employees but aren't doing so, because what we would then say to them, what we'd say to them is, look, we're giving you affordable options; you are going to be able now to be part of a bigger pool.  You can buy your health insurance through that exchange that I was explaining to that gentleman there.  So you'll be able to get premiums and prices that are comparable to what big companies, Xerox or IBM, are getting for their employees, and we'll give you some help doing it.
But if you refuse to provide any health insurance for your employees at all, then we are going to ask you to make a contribution to help make sure those employees have health insurance, because by the way, it turns out if you as an employer are not providing that health insurance, the rest of us are, because those folks are going on Medicaid, or they're going to the hospitals for uncompensated care, and that's not fair.  (Applause.)
So the bottom line is this:  If you are a small business person who is providing health insurance for your employees, I am very sure that you would actually benefit from this.  But the problem is -- again, this is where the information has not been going out in as clear a fashion as possible, which is why I'm glad you asked the question.
All right?  Okay.  (Applause.)
All right, I'm going to call on this gentleman because he's been waving -- and he's shouted at me a couple of times, so I just want to -- I just want proof here that I'm happy to get a good debate going.
Q    How are you doing, Mr. President?
THE PRESIDENT:  I'm good.  What's your name?
Q    My name is Zack Lane (phonetic).  I'm a student at the University of Colorado in Boulder.
THE PRESIDENT:  Good to talk to you, Zack.  What do you study?
Q    Political science and business marketing.
THE PRESIDENT:  Fantastic.  All right, what's your question?
Q    My question is this.  And also, I'd love to have a debate, just all out, anytime, Oxford-style, if you'd like.  (Laughter.)  I understand -- I'm willing to do that.  But my question is this.  We all know the best way to reduce prices in this economy is to increase competition.  How in the world can a private corporation providing insurance compete with an entity that does not have to worry about making a profit, does not have to pay local property taxes -- (applause) -- they do not have to -- they're not subject to local regulations?  How can a company compete with that?  And I'm not looking for anything -- I don't want generalities.  I don't want philosophical arguments.  I'm just asking a question.
THE PRESIDENT:  That's a great question.  Thank you for the question.  (Applause.)
Now, I just want to point out that I partially answered the question earlier by explaining that certainly they can't compete if the taxpayer is standing behind the public option just shoveling more and more money at it, right?  That's certainly not fair.  And so I've already said I would not be in favor of a public option of that sort because that would just mean more expenses out of our pockets and we wouldn't be seeing much improvement in quality.
It is true that there are certain costs associated with a private business that a government would not have to worry about; you mentioned a couple of them.  It's not just, by the way, property taxes; it's also things like just the cost of capital.  In terms of the cost of borrowing, a public option -- insurance companies have to have a lot of money on hand and it's conceivable that a private entity that's having to pay a certain interest rate for their money would be really undermined if the government is able to get money much cheaper implicitly because Uncle Sam backs this operation.
So that's why I say, this is actually a legitimate debate.  I think that we can craft a system in which you've got a public option that has to operate independently, not subsidized by taxpayers -- it would be nonprofit, but we've already got nonprofits out there like BlueCross BlueShield -- that they would have to go on the market and get a market price for capital, so they wouldn't be able to just have the Federal Reserve write them a check.  I think there are ways that we can address those competitive issues.  And you're absolutely right, if they're not entirely addressed, then that raises a set of legitimate problems.
But the only point I wanted to make was the notion that somehow just by having a public option you have the entire private marketplace destroyed is just not borne out by the facts.  And in fact, right now you've got a lot of private companies who do very well competing against the government.  UPS and FedEx are doing a lot better than the post office.  (Applause.)  No, they are.  And so -- but the larger point I want to make -- and it's good to see a young person who's very engaged and confident challenging the President to a Oxford-style debate, I think this is good.  (Applause.)  You know, the -- this is good.  You know, I like that.  You got to have a little chutzpah, you know.
This is a legitimate debate to have.  All I'm saying is, though, that the public option, whether we have it or we don't have it, is not the entirety of health care reform.  This is just one sliver of it, one aspect of it.  And by the way, it's both the right and the left that have become so fixated on this that they forget everything else, like the fact that we can help Nathan make sure that he doesn't suddenly find himself -- (applause) -- completely broke in trying to treat his son.
So we are working on a series of proposals to address the questions that you're raising.  I believe that we can work them out.  But those are specific questions as opposed to broad, philosophical questions about whether government ever has a role to play or not.
Keep in mind, finally -- and this is the last point that I'll make -- that you have a bunch of countries that have systems in which government is involved but you still have a thriving private insurance market -- The Netherlands being a good example.  Everybody is covered.  Everybody has care.  The government has regulations in there.  But it does not somehow take over the entire private insurance market.  So I just want people to understand nobody is talking about a government takeover of health care.  I want to repeat that one last time.
All right.  I've got -- I've got one last -- I've got time for one last question.  I'm going to call on this young lady right here.  Oops, she just lost her question.  Go ahead.  Who's got a microphone?  Right here, right here.
Q    I cannot believe that we have the President of the United States of America in Grand Junction, Colorado!  (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT:  Good to be here.
Q    We are so proud of you.
THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  (Applause.)
Q    My name is Marie Elena, and I live in the Western Slope in Montrose, Colorado.  And I am a naturalized citizen, and I am proud to be an American in this beautiful land.  (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.
Q    As a child I had polio, and I had a series of surgeries, 52 of them, to correct my poor structure of bones -- between here, Denver, Montrose, and the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, Arizona.  I have been blessed with a good insurance, generally excellent doctors and care.  However, my major concern in cost, even with good -- even with a good insurance, the cost has been high, practically when I have been gone out of the network.  Why should our doctor treatment choice be limited by a geographic area or the state?  What kind of competition is this, Mr. President?  (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT:  Okay, all right.
Q    Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT:  This raises an important question, because it goes to the overall debate that's taking place out there right now.  When we talk about reform, you hear some opponents of reform saying that somehow we are trying to ration care, or restrict the doctors that you can see, or you name it.  Well, that's what's going on right now.  It's just that the decisions are being made by the insurance companies.
Now, in fairness, we probably could not construct a system in which you could see any doctor anywhere in the world anytime, regardless of expense.  That would be a hard system to set up.  So if you live in Maine, you know, we're going to fly you into California, put you up.  I mean, you can see -- and I'm not trying to make light of it -- you can just see the difficulty.
So any system we design, there are going to have to be some choices that have to be made in terms of where you go to see your doctor, what's going on, et cetera.  That's being done currently in the private marketplace.
All we're trying to do is to make sure that those decisions that are being made in the private marketplace aren't discriminating against people because they're already sick; that they are making sure that people get a good deal from the health care dollars that they are spending.
So let's make sure, for example, that if you go to a hospital, you get one of those operations that you discussed, and it turns out that two weeks later you've got to be readmitted because they didn't do it right the first time, that the hospital has to pay some penalty for that, or at least they're not being reimbursed as much as a hospital who gets it right the first time.  That's an example of changing incentives that can save us money.
The more that we make those kinds of changes that improve quality, reduce cost, the more likely it is that more Americans have more options and that they are not being jerked around.  It doesn't mean that everything is going to be perfect, but it does mean that consumers will have more choices, better options, more security, more protection.
That's all we're trying to accomplish here and we're trying to do it in a way that over time reduces costs overall for families, whether you're getting Medicare or you're getting Medicaid or you've got private insurance through your employer or you're a small business owner.  That's what we're trying to accomplish.
And I am confident that we can accomplish it -- but we're going to have to work hard to do it, and we're going to have to overcome some of the wrong information, and we're going to have to have an honest debate.  Nothing is going to be perfect.  We're going to have to make sure -- this is something, by the way, that people need to understand:  Even if everything goes perfectly and we pass legislation, let's say, in October, we're still going to have another three months of debate about this, then we're still going to have several years of implementation.  It's not going to happen overnight.  We're going to have to set up these reforms and these processes, and we're going to have to give insurance companies the chance to adjust, because, for example, if we don't have everybody covered, we can't construct a system that prevents insurance companies from discriminating against preexisting conditions.  I hope everybody understands that.
We can't tell insurance to take everybody if, on the other hand, you've got a whole bunch of people who are healthy and young who choose not to get insurance at all, because what ends up happening is then insurance companies are just going to take the people when they get sick.  Somebody won't buy insurance until they find out that they're sick.  Then they go into the insurance office and they say, give me insurance so I can go pay my bill.  Insurance companies would lose money pretty quick that way.
So if we're going to eliminate the preexisting conditions problem, we've got to also -- have the coverage problem, and that's why this is going to have to be phased in over a number of years.
Last point I want to make, and this has to do with the budget issues, because we've got a huge deficit right now and a huge debt, and I think that that's coloring how people view the debate.  I hear a lot of people say, how can we afford this right now?  We've got to reduce our deficit.
First, I want everybody to understand the source of our deficit, because if you don't understand that, then my argument won't make sense.  When I walked into the White House, I had gift-wrapped, waiting for me at the door a $1.3 trillion deficit -- $1.3 trillion.  Now, I say that -- (applause) -- I just want to -- I just want to -- I just want to -- I say that -- this was not -- and this is not, by the way, entirely the previous administration's fault.  The financial crisis was so bad that revenues plummeted and all this money was spent in making sure that the banking system did not completely collapse.  So all the actions that have been taken -- the bank bailout, the auto bailout, all that stuff -- that did spike the deficit.
But the problem actually is not that -- you know, the extraordinary steps that we've taken over these last one or two years.  The real problem is much longer.  Even if we had had no fiscal crisis whatsoever, we have a structural deficit.  We're spending more money than we are taking in.  We've been doing it for the last eight years.  When we passed the prescription drug benefit for Medicare, by a Republican Congress, they didn't pay for it.  They didn't want to raise taxes, but they wanted to get the benefit.  That just was red ink.  That just went into our structural deficit.
When we fought the Iraq war, we made that decision.  We didn't pay for it.  When we cut taxes on some of the wealthiest Americans, we did not compensate by making cuts in programs that were comparable.  So what that has all added up to is, we've got a structural deficit that over the course of the next 10 years is about $9 trillion.
Now, I say that because I just want everybody to understand, if we're going to tackle that problem, the only way we can do it in an intelligent way is if we get control of Medicare and Medicaid spending in some realistic way.  If we don't do that -- if we don't do that, we can't simply cut our way out of the problem or tax our way out of the problem.
I ask sometimes, when I'm in audiences, what people think the amount of federal budget is devoted to foreign aid.  And people will say, 25 percent; if we could just cut that out, we could eliminate the deficit.  Foreign aid is 1 percent of our budget -- 1 percent.  People think, well, it's all these pork projects and earmarks that everybody is getting.  One percent.  Almost all of our spending is Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, interest on the national debt, defense spending -- things that are very hard to cut.
Only about -- only about 30 percent of the overall budget, somewhere between 25 and 30 percent is non-defense discretionary spending.  That's everything for national parks, for education, you name it.  Every single program that you think of that you think of as a government program, that is only about 25 percent of the budget.  The rest of it is all Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.  And what's really going up fastest is Medicare and Medicaid.
So I just want everybody to understand, if you are a fiscal hawk, if you are -- if you are a deficit hawk and you are tired of this crazy spending in Washington and you want to finally make sure that we are looking out for the next generation, then you, more than anybody, should want to reform the health care system -- because if we don't do it, we can't solve that problem.  (Applause.)
Thank you, Grand Junction.  Love you.  (Applause.)
                                                          
END 
5:10 P.M. MDT
 
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
___________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                       August 14, 2009
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
IN TOWN HALL ON HEALTH CARE
Gallatin Field Airport
Belgrade, Montana
12:05 P.M. MDT
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, Montana! Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. It's great to be here. Please, everybody have a seat, have a seat. Thank you so much. Thank you. I am excited to be back in Montana. (Applause.) I want to --
Q Where's Michelle?
THE PRESIDENT: where's Michelle? Come on, what is this, chopped liver here? (Laughter.) Michelle and the girls were supposed to go white water rafting. Now, I just heard some rain out there, so I don't know what's going on there, but they're on their way.
I want to first of all acknowledge some outstanding public officials and great friends. First of all, the man who is working tirelessly to make sure that the American people get a fair deal when it comes to health care in America, please give Max Baucus a big round of applause. (Applause.) One of my favorite people in Washington, probably because he hasn't "gone Washington" -- still gets the same haircut, give it up for John Tester. (Applause.) Your own star here in Montana, the great governor of this state, please give Brian Schweitzer and his lovely wife Nancy a big round of applause. (Applause.) The lieutenant governor, John Bohlinger, is here. Give John a big round of applause. (Applause.) The mayor of Belgrade, Russ Nelson, is here. (Applause.) The mayor of Bozeman, Kaaren Jacobson is here. And somebody who I believe is destined to be one of the greatest Secretaries of the Interior in our history, former senator from Colorado, Ken Salazar, is here. Please give Ken a big round of applause. (Applause.)
Well, it is nice to be back. It's nice to take a break from the going ons in Washington. I'm thrilled to have a chance to spend some time with the folks in this beautiful state. After all, here in Montana you've got bears and moose and elk. In Washington you just have mostly bull. (Laughter.) So this is a -- (applause) -- this is a nice change of pace, being in Montana.
I especially want to thank Katie for her introduction. (Applause.) Where'd Katie go? There she is, right there. Katie's willingness to talk about such a painful experience is important, because we have to understand what's at stake in this health care debate. Katie's story is the kind of story that I've read in letters all throughout the campaign and everyday when I'm President. I hear about them in town halls all across America: The stories of hardworking people who are doing the right thing, they're acting responsibly, only to find out that they're penalized because others aren't doing the right thing, because others aren't acting responsibly.
On Tuesday, I was in New Hampshire talking about people denied insurance coverage because of preexisting conditions. Now today, we're talking about folks like Katie who've had their insurance policies suddenly revoked, even though they were paying premiums, because of a medical condition. They got sick, and suddenly that's when they get dropped. Tomorrow, in Colorado, we'll be talking about the people who have insurance but are still stuck with huge bills because they've hit a cap on their benefits or they're charged exorbitant out-of-pocket fees.
And when you hear about these experiences, when you think of the millions of people denied coverage because of preexisting conditions, when you think about the thousands who have their policies cancelled each year, like Katie, I want you to remember one thing: There but for the grace of God go I. (Applause.) Most of us have insurance. And most of us think, you know, knock on wood, that we're going to stay healthy. But we're no different than Katie and other ordinary Americans, no different than anybody else. We are held hostage at any given moment by health insurance companies that deny coverage, or drop coverage, or charge fees that people can't afford at a time when they desperately need care.
It's wrong. It's bankrupting families, it's bankrupting businesses. And we are going to fix it when we pass health insurance reform this year. We are going to fix it. (Applause.) Again, I want to specially thank Max for his hard work on a bill as chair of the Finance Committee. He has been committed to getting this done.
This is obviously a tough time in America. It's a tough time here in Montana. Just six months ago, we were in the middle of the worst recession in our lifetimes. We were losing about 700 [sic] jobs each month. Economists of all stripes feared a second coming of a Great Depression. And that's why we acted as fast as we could to pass a recovery plan to stop the freefall.
I want to just speak briefly about the recovery plan because that has colored how people view the health care debate. The recovery plan was divided into three parts. One-third of the money in the Recovery Act went to tax cuts that have already started showing up in the paychecks of about 400,000 working families in Montana. Four hundred thousand working families have seen their taxes reduced because of the Recovery Act. (Applause.)
We also cut taxes for small businesses on the investments that they make, and more than 200 Montana small businesses have now qualified for new loans backed by the Recovery Act, including 10 businesses right in the Bozeman area. (Applause.)
Another third of the money in the Recovery Act is for emergency relief for folks who've borne the brunt of this recession. What am I talking about? Unemployment insurance -- we've extended benefits for 40,000 Montana residents. We've made health insurance 65 percent cheaper for families who rely on COBRA when they lose their job and they're out there looking for work. (Applause.) And I think as your governor will testify, for states facing historic budget shortfalls, we provided assistance that has saved the jobs of tens of thousands of workers who provide essential services, like teachers and police officers. We've prevented painful jobs cuts, but we've also prevented a lot of painful state and local tax increases.
So that's two-thirds of the Recovery Act.
The last third of the Recovery Act is for investments that are already putting people back to work: rebuilding infrastructure. There are nearly 70 transportation projects already approved here in Montana. These are jobs fixing up the roads that run through the national forests, good jobs doing the work that America needs done. And most of the work is being done by local businesses, because that's how we're going to get this economy growing again.
So there is no doubt that the recovery plan is doing what we said it would: putting us on the road to recovery. We saw last Friday the jobs picture is beginning to turn. We're starting to see signs that business investment is coming back. So people, I think, sometimes when I listen to them on TV or on these cable shows, they seem to have a selective memory. We started with this mess. We're now pulling out of it. But that doesn't mean we're out of the woods. (Applause.) That doesn't mean we're out of the woods. You know that. In Bozeman, for example, the local job center recently reported seeing more than 8,000 job seekers for just 160 jobs.
So we can't just sit back and do nothing while families are struggling. Because even before this recession hit, we had an economy that was working pretty well for the wealthiest Americans -- working pretty well for Wall Street bankers and big corporations -- but it wasn't working so well for everybody else. It was an economy of bubbles and busts. It was an economy in which recklessness, and not responsibility, was rewarded. We can't go back to that kind of economy.
If we want a country that succeeds in the 21st century then we have to lay a new foundation for lasting prosperity. And health insurance reform is one of the key pillars of this new foundation. (Applause.) This economy won't work for everyone until folks like Katie and her husband can start that small business without fear of losing their health coverage; until companies aren't slashing payroll and losing profits to pay for health insurance; until every single American has the security and the peace of mind of knowing they've got quality, affordable care.
And the fact is, health care touches all of our lives in a profound way. Now, that also makes this debate an emotional one. I know there's been a lot of attention paid to some of the town hall meetings that are going on around the country, especially when tempers flare -- TV loves a ruckus.
What you haven't seen on TV -- and what makes me proud -- are the many constructive meetings going on all over the country. Everywhere -- everywhere across the country, you're seeing people who are coming together and having a civil, honest -- often difficult -- conversation about how we can improve the system. That's how democracy is supposed to work.
Earlier this week, I held a town hall in New Hampshire. A few thousand people showed up. Some were big supporters of health insurance reform, some had concerns and questions, some were downright skeptical -- didn't believe it could be done. But I was glad to see that people were there not to shout, they were there to listen and ask questions. That reflects America a lot more than what we've seen covered on television for the last few days -- and I want to thank you for coming here today in that spirit. (Applause.)
Now, before I take questions, I just want to talk briefly about what health insurance reform will mean for you. We still have work to do in Congress. The bills aren't finalized. But I just want you to understand about 80 percent of this has already been agreed to. And here are the basic principles that folks are talking about.
First, health insurance reform will mean a set of common-sense consumer protections for folks with health insurance. So those of you who have health insurance, this is what it will mean. Insurance companies will no longer be able to cancel your coverage because you get sick. (Applause.) That's what happened to Katie. It can't happen anymore.
If you do the responsible thing, if you pay your premiums each month so that you are covered in case of a crisis, when that crisis comes -- if you have a heart attack or your husband finds out he has cancer or your son or daughter is rushed to the hospital -- at the time when you're most vulnerable and most frightened, you can't be getting a phone call from your insurance company saying that your insurance is revoked. It turns out, once you got sick, they scoured your records looking for reasons to cancel your policy. They'd find a minor mistake on your insurance form that you submitted years ago. That can't be allowed to happen. (Applause.)
One report -- one report found that three insurance companies alone had canceled 20,000 policies in this way over the past few years. One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer discovered he hadn't reported gall stones he didn't know about. True story. Because his treatment was delayed, he died. A woman from Texas was diagnosed with an aggressive form of breast cancer, was scheduled for a double mastectomy. Three days before surgery, the insurance company canceled the policy, in part because she forgot to declare a case of acne. True story. By the time she had her insurance reinstated, the cancer had more than doubled in size.
And this is personal for me. I'll never forget my own mother, as she fought cancer in her final months, having to worry about whether the insurance company would refuse to pay for her treatment. The insurance company was arguing that she should have known that she had cancer when she took her new job -- even though it hadn't been diagnosed yet. If it could happen to her, it could happen to any one of us. It's wrong. And when we pass health insurance reform, we're going to put a stop to it once and for all. That is what Max Baucus is working on. (Applause.)
Number two: Insurance companies will be prohibited from denying coverage because of your medical history. A recent report found that in the past three years, more than 12 million Americans were discriminated against by insurance companies because of a preexisting condition. No one holds these companies accountable for these practices. But we will.
And insurance companies will no longer be able to place an arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime. (Applause.) And that will help -- that will help 3,700 households in Montana. We'll place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, as well, because no one in America should be broke when they get sick. (Applause.) And finally -- finally, we'll require insurance companies to cover routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies, because that saves money and that saves lives. (Applause.)
So that's what health care reform is all about. Right now we've got a health care system that all too often works better for the insurance companies than it does for the American people. We want to change that.
Now, if you are one of nearly 46 million people who don't have health insurance, you'll finally have quality affordable options. And if you do have health insurance, we'll help make sure that your insurance is more affordable and more secure. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan. This is not some government takeover. If you like your doctor, you can keep seeing your doctor. This is important. I don't want government bureaucrats meddling in your health care, but I also don't want insurance company bureaucrats meddling in your health care either. (Applause.) That's what reform is about. (Applause.)
Now, let me say this: Under the proposals that Max is working on, more than 100,000 middle-class Montanans will get a health care tax credit. More than 200,000 Montanans will have access to a new marketplace where you can easily compare health insurance options. Nearly 30,000 small businesses in Montana will be helped by new tax benefits, as well. (Applause.) And we will do all this without adding to our deficit over the next decade, largely by cutting waste and ending sweetheart deals for insurance companies that don't make anybody any healthier. (Applause.)
So the fact is, we are closer to achieving health insurance reform than we've ever been in history. We have the American Nurses Association and the American Medical Association on board because America's doctors and nurses know how badly we need reform. We have broad agreement in Congress on about 80 percent of what we're trying to achieve. And we continue to work on the other 20 percent. We have an agreement from the drug companies, who violently opposed reform in the past, to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors. The AARP supports this policy, and agrees with us that reform must happen this year.
But because we're getting close, the fight is getting fierce. And the history is clear: Every time we are in sight of health insurance reform, the special interests fight back with everything they've got. They use their influence, they run their ads, and their political allies try to scare the heck out of everybody. It happened in '93. It's happening now. It happened, by the way, when Lyndon Johnson tried to propose Medicare. It happened when John F. Kennedy tried to propose Medicare.
We can't let them do it again. Not this time. (Applause.) Because for all the scare tactics out there -- for all the scare tactics out there, what is truly scary -- what's truly risky -- is if we do nothing. If we keep the system the way it is right now, we will continue to see 14,000 Americans lose their health insurance every day. And that could be you. Premiums will continue to skyrocket, rising three times faster than wages. That will be you. The deficit will continue to grow. Medicare will go into the red in less than a decade.
So for all the seniors out there who understandably are worried about Medicare, understand if we don't reform the system, in about eight years Medicare goes in the red. And given the deficits that we have right now, we've got to start thinking how are we going to pay for that. Insurance companies will continue to profit by discriminating against people for being sick.
So if you want a different future -- a brighter future -- I need your help. Change is never easy -- and by the way, it never starts in Washington. It starts with you. So I need you to keep knocking on doors, talking to your neighbors, spread the facts. (Applause.) Fight against the fear. This is not about politics; this is about helping the American people, and if we can get it done this year, the American people are going to be better off.
Thank you, Montana. Thank you. (Applause.)
All right, everybody have a seat. So we are going to try to take as many questions as we can in the time that we've got. And we haven't pre-selected anybody, or pre-screened the questions. All we want to do is just ask you to raise your hand if you've got a question. And I'm going to go girl-boy-girl-boy so I don't get into trouble. (Laughter.)
There are -- there are people in the audience with microphones, as you can see. And so if you can -- once I call on you, if you can just wait until they bring the microphone, stand up so we can all see your lovely face, and introduce yourself, and then I will ask -- I will answer the question. And if you can keep your questions relatively brief, I'll try to keep my answers relatively brief.
All right, this young lady right here in the blue blouse. Right there.
Q Hi, Mr. President. Thank you so much for coming to Southwest Montana. We really appreciate you being here. (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. It's great to be here.
Q I was laid off in January. I am currently uninsured. My two children have Medicaid right now. And my question is, without going into too much detail, can you tell us what you -- if you have kind of looked at Canada, England's system, and sort of -- can you pick and choose from those systems that work, that we see there's some success rate and apply that to what you're trying to push through right now?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me tell you what happens in other industrialized countries. First of all, I think it's important for everybody to understand that Americans spend $5,000 to $6,000 per person more than any other advanced nation on earth -- $5,000 or $6,000 more than any other person -- any other country on earth.
Now, if you think that -- how can that be? Well, you probably don't notice it, because what's happening is if you've got health insurance through your job, more and more of what would be your salary and wages is going to health insurance. But you don't notice it; you just notice that you're not getting a raise. But a bigger and bigger portion of compensation is going to health care here in the United States. Now that's point number one.
So clearly we've got a system that isn't as efficient as it should be because we're not healthier than these people in these other countries.
Having said that, most other countries have some form of single-payer system. There are differences -- Canada and England have more of what's called -- what people I guess would call a socialized system, in the sense that government owns the hospitals, directly hires doctors -- but there are a whole bunch of countries like the Netherlands where what they do is, it's a single-payer system only in the sense that government pays the bill, but it's all private folks out there -- private doctors, private facilities. So there are a bunch of different ways of doing it.
Now, what we need to do is come up with a uniquely American way of providing care. (Applause.) So I'm not in favor of a Canadian system, I'm not in favor of a British system, I'm not in a favor of a French system. That's not what Max is working on. Every one of us, what we've said is, let's find a uniquely American solution because historically here in the United States the majority of people get their health insurance on the job. So let's build on that system that already exists -- because for us to completely change that, it would be too disruptive. That's where suddenly people would lose what they have and they'd have to adjust to an entirely new system. And Max and I agree that's not the right way to go.
So all we've said is, in building a better system, what are the elements? Well, number one, for people like you, you should be able to get some help going into the private insurance marketplace and buying health insurance. So we would give you a tax credit, a subsidy of some sort, to help you obtain insurance.
Now, the problem is, if you're going out there on your own, then it's much more expensive than if you go in a big group. So we would allow you to buy into a health care exchange that would give you some power to negotiate for a better rate, because you're now part of a big pool. We would also make sure that if you do have health insurance that you are protected from some of the policies that we've already talked about that have not been very good for consumers. So you wouldn't be able to be banned for preexisting conditions. There would be caps on the amount of out-of-pocket expenses you would have to spend. So we would reform the insurance market for people who already have health insurance.
And if we do those things -- making it better for folks who already have insurance, making it easier for you to buy insurance, and helping small businesses who want to do the right thing by their employees but just can't afford it because they're charged very high rates, they can't get a good deal from the insurance companies -- if we do those things, then we can preserve the best of what our system offers -- the innovation, the dynamism -- but also make sure that people aren't as vulnerable. Now, that's essentially what we're talking about with health care reform.
And so when you start hearing people saying, you know, we're trying to get socialized medicine and we're trying to have government bureaucrats meddle in your decision-making between you and your doctor, that's just not true.
All right? Okay. It's a guy's turn. Gentleman right there in the back, with the green.
Q I think most of us know that Medicare is one of the best social programs this nation has ever put together. (Applause.) It works extremely well and helps the people who need it the most. But money doesn't grow on trees. How can we be assured that increasing coverage to others is not going to make Medicare more expensive or less effective?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think this is a good point, and I appreciate the question, because a lot of seniors are concerned about this. First of all, it is important to know that Medicare is a government program. So when you hear people saying, "I hate government programs, but keep your hands off my Medicare" -- (laughter) -- then there's a little bit of a contradiction there. And I have been hearing that quite a bit, all right, so I just want to -- (applause) -- I want to be clear about that.
Medicare is a terrific program and it gives our seniors security. And I want Medicare to be there for the next generation, not just for this generation. But if we don't make some changes in how the delivery system works, if we don't eliminate some of the waste and inefficiencies in the system, then seniors are really going to be vulnerable. So what we've proposed is not to reduce benefits -- benefits on Medicare would stay the same -- it's not to ration. What we are asking is that we eliminate some of the practices that aren't making people healthier.
Example number one: Subsidies to insurance companies under Medicare amount to about $177 billion over 10 years. That's how much we think we could save by eliminating subsidies to insurance companies that are offering what's called Medicare Advantage. It doesn't help seniors any more than regular Medicare does. (Applause.)
And so if we took that $177 billion, we're not making seniors worse off, but we've got that money now not only to strengthen the health care system overall, but potentially to cover more people. Now, the insurance companies don't like it, but it's the right thing to do.
Let me give you another example of changes that we should make. Right now when you go into the hospital, you get a procedure under Medicare, if you end up having to come back to that hospital a week later because something went wrong, they didn't do it right, the hospital doesn't pay any penalty for that; they just get reimbursed for a second time or a third time -- same fee, same service.
Now, think about that if car -- auto repair shops operated the same way. You take your car in and you get it fixed, and a week later the thing is broken again. You go in. The guy says, well, let me charge you all over again, and I'll do just the same thing. That doesn't make sense. So what we've said is, let's give hospitals an incentive. Let's say to the hospitals, we're going to charge you for overall treatment of whatever the problem is. And if you get it right the first time, you get to keep a little extra money. But if you keep on having the person coming back again and again, then there's a disincentive.
Those are the examples of the kinds of changes that can be made that aren't reductions in benefits, but they save the system money overall, and by the way, will actually increase the life expectancy of the Medicare Trust Fund, which is in deep trouble if we don't do something, because as you said, money doesn't grow on trees. So we're actually trying to help preserve Medicare and make people healthier in the process.
All right. (Applause.) Young lady in the back there, right there. No, well, actually, I was pointing -- I didn't see you. Right there. No, the young lady in the blue who stood up there.
Q Good afternoon, Mr. President. I'm a Bozeman resident. Sorry, I'm a little nervous.
THE PRESIDENT: You're doing great. (Laughter.)
Q Thank you. I'm a single mother of two children. I'm an MSU student. I have a son that suffers from many disabilities. He's disabled for the rest of his life. He's 11 years old. He suffers from autism. He's non-verbal. He suffers from extremely hard to control epilepsy, and he's Type I diabetic. He has been sick with these ailments ever since he was nine months old. My question to you is, I rely heavily on his Medicaid to support good health care for him. What, with this reform, would happen with his Medicaid -- Medicare coverage -- or Medicaid coverage, sorry.
THE PRESIDENT: First of all, thank you for sharing your story. You are a heroic mom, so we are grateful to you and your son is lucky. (Applause.)
If you currently qualify for Medicaid -- your son currently qualifies for Medicaid, he would continue to qualify for Medicaid. So it would not have an impact on his benefit levels and his ability to get the care that he needs.
Some of the reforms that we're talking about, though -- what I just referred to as delivery system reforms, where we help, for example, encourage doctors when they are seeing a patient, instead of having five tests, do one test and then e-mail all the tests to five specialists. Those kinds of changes can save money in the Medicaid and the Medicare systems overall, and that will actually help Governor Schweitzer, who has to come up with half of Medicaid in his state budget every year, it will actually help him then be able to pay for it.
So we're not changing the benefit levels or who qualifies for Medicaid -- we might see some expansion of Medicaid, in fact, under the reforms that have been proposed in some of the legislation -- but we do have to make the whole system overall just a little bit smarter, make sure we're getting a better bang for the buck, so that the money is there for the services that your son needs. Okay.
This also includes, by the way, preventive care, wellness care, because our system really is not a health care system, it's more like a disease care system, right? We wait until people get sick and then we provide them care. Now, think about it -- are we better off waiting until somebody gets diabetes and then paying a surgeon for a foot amputation, or are we better off having somebody explain to a person who's obese and at risk of diabetes to change their diet, and if they contract diabetes to stay on their medications? Obviously the second is more cost-efficient, but right now the health care system is perverse. It does not incentivize those things that actually make people better or keeps them out of hospitals in the first place, and that's what we have to change overall to make sure that the resources are there for your son. Okay? (Applause.)
It's a gentleman's turn, and I'm going to call on that gentleman right there -- right there.
Q My name is Randy --
THE PRESIDENT: Hold on, Randy. There you go.
Q Okay. My name is Randy, I'm from Ekalaka, Montana. And as you can see, I'm a proud NRA member. (Applause.) I believe in our Constitution, and it's a very important thing. I also get my news from the cable networks because I don't like the spin that comes from them other places.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, you got to be -- you got to be careful about them cable networks, though. (Laughter.) But that's okay, go ahead, go on with your question.
Q Max Baucus, our senator, has been locked up in a dark room there for months now trying to come up with some money to pay for these programs. And we keep getting the bull. That's all we get, is bull. You can't tell us how you're going to pay for this. You're saving here, you're saving over there, you're going to take a little money here, you're going to take a little money there. But you have no money. The only way you're going to get that money is to raise our taxes. You said you wouldn't. (Applause.) Max Baucus says he doesn't want to put a bill out that will. But that's the only way you can do that.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, let -- I'm happy to answer the question.
Q Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Look, you are absolutely right that I can't cover another 46 million people for free. You're right. I can't do that. So we're going to have to find some resources. If people who don't have health insurance are going to get some help, then we're going to have to find money from somewhere.
Now, what I've identified, and most of the committees have identified and agreed to, including Max Baucus's committee, is that there -- overall this bill will cost -- let's say it costs $800 billion to $900 billion. That's a lot of money. That's a lot of money. That's over 10 years, though, all right? So that's about $90 billion -- $80 billion to $90 billion a year.
About two-thirds of it -- two-thirds -- can be obtained by doing some of the things I already mentioned, like eliminating subsidies to insurance companies. So you're right, that's real money. I just think I would rather be giving that money to the young lady here who doesn't have health insurance and giving her some help, than giving it to insurance companies that are making record profits. (Applause.) Now, you may disagree. I just think that's a good way to spend our money.
But your point is well taken, because even after we spend -- even after we eliminate some of the waste and we've gotten those savings from within the health care system, that's only two-thirds. That still means we've got to come up with one-third. And that's about $30 billion a year that we've got to come up with. Now, keep in mind the numbers change, partly because there are five different bills right now. This is all going to get merged in September. But let's assume it costs about $30 billion a year over 10 years. We do have to come up with that money.
When I was campaigning, I made a promise that I would not raise your taxes if you made $250,000 a year or less. That's what I said. But I said that for people like myself, who make more than that, there's nothing wrong with me paying a little bit more in order to help people who've got a little bit less. That was my commitment. (Applause.)
So what I've said is -- so what I've said is let's, for example, just -- this is the solution that I originally proposed; some members in Congress disagree, but we're still working it through -- what I've said is we could lower the itemized deductions that I can take on my income tax returns every year so that instead of me getting 36 percent, 35 percent deductions, I'll just get 28 percent, like people who make less money than me.
If I'm writing a check to my local church, I don't know why Uncle Sam should be giving me a bigger tax break than the person who makes less money than me, because that donation means just as much. (Applause.) If we just did that alone -- just that change alone, for people making more than $250,000, that alone would pay for the health care we're talking about. (Applause.)
So my point is -- my point is, number one, two-thirds of the money we can obtain just from eliminating waste and inefficiencies. And the Congressional Budget Office has agreed with that; this is not something I'm just making up; Republicans don't dispute it. And then the other third we would have to find additional revenue, but it wouldn't come on the backs of the middle class.
Now, let me just make one final point. I know that there are some people who say, I don't care how much money somebody makes; they shouldn't have to pay higher taxes. And I respect that opinion. I respect that view. But the truth of the matter is, is that we've got to get over this notion that somehow we can have something for nothing, because that's part of how we got into the deficits and the debt that we're in, in the first place. (Applause.)
When the previous administration passed the prescription drug bill, that was something that a lot of seniors needed, right? They needed prescription drug help. The price tag on that was hundreds of billions of dollars. You know how we paid for it? We didn't. It just got added on to the deficit and the debt.
So it amuses me sometimes when I hear some of the opponents of health care reform on the other side of the aisle or on these cable shows yelling about how we can't afford this, when Max and I are actually proposing to pay for it, and they passed something that they didn't pay for at all and left for future generations to have to pay in terms of debt. That doesn't make sense to me. (Applause.)
All right, can I say this, though? Randy, I appreciate your question, the respectful way you asked it, and by the way, I believe in the Constitution, too. So thank you very much. Appreciate it. (Applause.)
All right, right there in the green in the back there. Yes, that's you.
Q Okay, so when funding dried up last fall due to the economic downturn, I lost my job at a non-profit helping struggling teens. And I'd like to thank you because -- because of your stimulus funding to community health clinics, I now have a new job helping people who are -- (applause) --
THE PRESIDENT: That's great.
Q -- mostly uninsured people with mental health. I'm a therapist.
THE PRESIDENT: That's great.
Q So I wanted to thank you for that. But there was a gap in there where I lost my insurance in between losing my job at the non-profit and my current job. And I'd like to ask you how you will help people with that gap when they're unemployed.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, the recovery package, the stimulus helped people precisely with that gap when we said we'll cover 65 percent of the cost of COBRA. How many people here have been on COBRA or tried to get on COBRA? All right, so just for those of you who aren't familiar with it, if you lose your job, under federal law you're able to access something called COBRA which allows you to pay the premiums for the health care insurance that you had until you find your next job. Sounds like a good deal.
Here's the only problem, as I said before, most of us don't realize how much our insurance costs our employers because we're not seeing the actual bill that's being paid mostly by our employers. So when we lose a job, suddenly we get this bill for a thousand dollars or $1,200 or $1,500 a month, and that's absolutely the worst time for you to have to come up with that money, is when you've lost your job.
So what we did was, let's -- we said because this is such a extraordinary crisis, let's pick up 65 percent of that temporarily so that the huge numbers of people who've lost their jobs because of this financial downturn, they get a little bit more of a cushion.
Now, that was the initial help that we wanted to do to provide that bridge. When we pass health reform, you are going to be in a position where, first of all, you will be able to have selected a plan that you can carry with you whether you've lost your job or not, and depending on your income levels, you will also be qualified for a tax credit that will help you pay and continue your coverage even if you've lost your job.
And for a lot of people -- this is especially important for a lot of people who are self-employed because increasingly, you know, if you're a consultant, you're somebody who's opened up your own shop, a little mom and pop store somewhere, you are the people who have the toughest time getting insurance because you just don't have enough employees for the insurance companies to take you seriously.
That's why what we want to do is create an exchange -- it's like a marketplace -- where you can go and choose from a menu of different options, different kinds of plans that you think might be right for you. And one of the options that's being debated is, should there be a public option, all right? (Applause.) And I want to -- I want to just explain this briefly, because this is where the whole myth of a government takeover of health care comes from. And not everybody -- not even every Democrat -- agrees on the public option, but I just want at least people to be informed about what the debate is about.
The idea is, if you go to that marketplace and you're choosing from a bunch of different options, should one of the options be a government-run plan that still charges you premiums? You still have to pay for it just like private insurance, but government would not -- this government option would not have the same profit motive. It would be obviously like a non-for-profit. It would have potentially lower overhead, so it might be able to give you a better deal, should you be able to choose from that option among many others. That's what the debate is about. (Applause.)
Now, what the opponents of a public option will argue is, you can't have a level playing field; if government gets into the business of providing health insurance, they will drive private insurers out of the health insurance market. That's the argument that's made. (Applause.) And I -- that is a legitimate, it's a fair concern, especially if the public option was being subsidized by taxpayers, right? I mean, if they didn't -- if they could just keep on losing money and still stay in business, after a while they would run everybody else out. And that's why any discussion of a public option has said that it's got to pay for itself, it's not subsidized by private insurers.
The only point I want to make about this is whether you're for or against a public option, just understand that the public option is not a government takeover of health insurance. Everybody here who still has -- who has currently private insurance, you would more than likely still be on your private insurance plan. Employers wouldn't stop suddenly providing health insurance. So that is where this idea of government-run health care came from. It is not an accurate portrayal of the debate that's going on in Washington right now. All right?
It's a gentleman's turn. This gentleman right there, sitting -- right there, yes. Yes, sir.
Q Thank you. Given your comments regarding the public option, I would like, if you could, to comment on the following -- and also welcome, and thank you. And I believe in reform as well. I've learned that Medicare pays about 94 percent of hospital cost. And I've learned that Medicaid pays about 84 percent of hospital cost. And I've learned this from a reputable source, my brother who is a chief administrative officer at a large hospital group. He also explains to me, when I communicate with him, that private insurers -- his hospital collects about 135 percent of cost from private insurers, and that makes up the difference. So if public option is out there, will it pay for its way, or will be under-funded like Medicare and Medicaid? Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: It's a great question, and I'll try to be succinct on this. This is a complicated area. Anybody who has ever gotten a bill from a hospital knows it's a complicated area. But here's the short answer. I believe that Medicare should -- Medicare and Medicaid should not be obtaining savings just by squeezing providers.
Now, in some cases, we should change the delivery system, so that providers have a better incentive to provide smarter care. Right? So that they're treating the illness instead of just how many tests are done, or how many MRIs are done, or what have you -- let's pay for are you curing the patient. But that's different from simply saying, you know what, we need to save some money, so let's cut payments to doctors by 10 percent and see how that works out. Because that's where you do end up having the effect that you're talking about. If they're only collecting 80 cents on the dollar, they've got to make that up somewhere, and they end up getting it from people who have private insurance.
This is true, also, by the way, of emergency room care. Each of us spend -- even though we don't know it; our employer pays for it so we don't notice it on our tab -- each of us spend about a thousand dollars per family, maybe $900 per family, paying for uncompensated care -- people without health insurance going in, getting fixed up. That money comes from somewhere -- well, it comes from you. You just don't see it on your bill.
And so if we can help provide coverage to people so that they're getting regular primary care and they're not going to the emergency room, we will obtain some savings and that's partly -- going to Randy's earlier question -- that's partly how we'll end up paying for giving people health insurance -- because we're already paying for it right now, we just don't notice it. (Applause.) We are paying for it in uncompensated care that is subsidized by the rest of us who have health insurance.
All right. I think this is the signal that I only have a few more questions. I'm going to take two more questions. If I'm in Montana, I got to call on somebody with a cowboy hat. (Laughter.) Absolutely. You've got a little plaque on there -- is it the --
Q Montana Ambassadors. We're a business advisory group appointed by the governor. We've served three Republican and two Democratic governors, and I'd like to welcome you on behalf of the Montana Ambassadors to Montana.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you so much. Well, you make a great ambassador. (Applause.)
Q Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely.
Q My question -- and I'm glad you called on me -- it has to do with the COBRA question -- because I'm in the building materials business; I own a lumberyard in a beautiful little town of a thousand people about 40 miles southwest of here, Ennis. And I was -- when the economy took a nosedive, I was forced to take my workforce from 11 people to six. And I want to -- like most employers in America, I want to, you know, provide -- I think it's my responsibility to provide health insurance; you know, we like to take care of our peeps, so to speak. (Laughter.) And so I went on --
THE PRESIDENT: Is that a Montana phrase, "peeps"? (Laughter.)
Q And so I went searching for replacement coverage for the employees that have been laid off, only to find out that COBRA doesn't apply to me because I have less than 20 employees. And that conservatively affects 80 percent of all workers in Montana.
So they were pretty much out on their own, and I was wondering if -- what we can do to eliminate discrimination against small employers. As an example, we're a lumberyard. We're out there lifting boards and packing stuff all day long. Every one of my remaining seven employees are fit. So why are we, and I as an employer, able to provide a lesser level of benefits to my employees, and yet an employer with 30 employees who sit in cubicles on their butts instead of working them off -- (laughter) -- gets a better rate? (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that's a pretty good question. So for all of you who are all sitting on your -- what did you call them? (Laughter.) No, as I said, small business is probably as vulnerable as anybody. And one of the things that Max has been working very hard on -- and this just doesn't get advertised, so I just want to make sure everybody is paying attention here -- one of the things that we're trying to do is give a substantial subsidy to help small businesses allow their employees to get health insurance, because there are a lot of employers just like you who want to do the right thing, but they're a small shop, they're operating on small margins, they've got no leverage with the insurance companies.
So there are two ways we want to help. Number one, we want the small business to be able to buy into the exchange. That allows you then to use the purchasing power of everybody who is in the exchange to get the best rates from the insurance companies. That right away would drive down the premiums that you'd have to pay.
And the second thing we want to do is for employers who are doing the right thing and providing health insurance that is real, then we want to give you a tax break so that it's easier for you to make your bottom line.
Now, this is something that a lot of small businesses would benefit from. Nobody is talking about it. And since small businesses are the place where you're seeing the fastest job growth, it makes sense for us to provide this kind of protection. This, I guarantee you, will end up being an important component of whatever we pass out of Washington. All right? (Applause.)
I've only got time for one more question, and it's a guy's turn, and I want somebody who's got a concern or is skeptical about health care reform. Here we go, there we go. I knew we could find a couple here. So I'll call on this gentleman right here in the pale blue shirt -- and hopefully that list is not too long. All right, go ahead. Introduce yourself, though.
Q My name is Mark Montgomery. I'm from Helena, Montana.
THE PRESIDENT: Great to see you, Mark.
Q I appreciate you coming here. It's great to be able to do this.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
Q Mr. President, I make a living selling individual health insurance. (Laughter.) Obviously I've paid very close attention to this insurance debate. As you know, the health insurance companies are in favor of health care reform and have a number of very good proposals before Congress to work with government to provide insurance for the uninsured and cover individuals with preexisting conditions. Why is it that you've changed your strategy from talking about health care reform to health insurance reform and decided to vilify the insurance companies? (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Okay, that's a fair question, that's a fair question. First of all, you are absolutely right that the insurance companies, in some cases, have been constructive. So I'll give you a particular example. Aetna has been trying to work with us in dealing with some of this preexisting conditions stuff. And that's absolutely true. And there are other companies who have done the same.
Now, I want to just be honest with you, and I think Max will testify, that in some cases what we've seen is also funding in opposition by some other insurance companies to any kind of reform proposals. So my intent is not to vilify insurance companies. If I was vilifying them, what we would be doing would be to say that private insurance has no place in the health care market, and some people believe that. I don't believe that. (Applause.) What I've said is let's work with the existing system. We've got private insurers out there. But what we do have to make sure of is that certain practices that are very tough on people, that those practices change.
Now, one point I want to make about insurance: Some of the reforms that we want for the insurance market are very hard to achieve, unless we've got everybody covered. This is the reason the insurance companies are willing to support reform, because their attitude is if we can't exclude people for preexisting conditions, for example, if we can't cherry pick the healthy folks from the not-so-healthy folks, well, that means that we're taking on more people with more expensive care. What's in it for us? The answer is if they've got more customers, then they're willing to make sure that they are eliminating some of these practices. If they've got fewer customers, they're less willing to do it.
So it's important for people -- when people ask me sometimes, why don't you just do the insurance reform stuff and not expand coverage for more people, my answer is I can't do the insurance reform stuff by itself. The only way that we can change some of the insurance practices that are hurting people now is to make sure that everybody is covered and everybody has got a stake in it, and then the insurance companies are able and willing to make some of these changes that will help people who have insurance right now. But thank you for the question. I appreciate it. (Applause.)
All right. I'm going to -- even though I shouldn't do this, I'm going to take one more question. My team always -- and I'm going to call on this person right here to get the last word.
Q Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead.
Q Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you for coming to Bozeman and bringing your beautiful family to the last best place in the world. (Applause.)
Because you're a constitutional scholar, I think it would be terrible to let you escape from Montana without sharing with you the most perfect preamble to a constitution of any state constitution.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, okay. Well, I'd like to -- I want to hear this. This is a good way to end our town hall.
Q It is. "We the people of Montana, grateful to God for the quiet beauty of our state, the grandeur of our mountains, the vastness of our rolling plains, and desiring to improve the quality of life, the quality of opportunity and to secure the blessings of liberty for this and future generations do ordain and establish this constitution." I hope you take a look at the whole constitution. You'll like it. Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that's very nice. Well, thank you. Listen, Montana, you've been terrific. I hope this has been informative. Thank you for the questions. Let's get to work. Thank you. (Applause.)
END
1:07 P.M. MDT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
___________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                       August 12, 2009
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT THE MEDAL OF FREEDOM CEREMONY
East Room
3:07 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: There are many honors and privileges bestowed on the occupant of this house, but few mean as much to me as the chance to award America's highest civilian medal to the recipients that are here today. This is a chance for me -- and for the United States of America -- to say thank you to some of the finest citizens of this country, and of all countries.
The men and women we honor today have led very different lives and pursued very different careers. They're pioneers in science and medicine. They're gifted artists and indomitable athletes. They have made their mark in the courtroom, in the community, and in Congress. And what unites them is a belief -- that most -- forgive me to those of you who are not Americans -- but what we consider to be that most American of beliefs -- that our lives are what we make of them; that no barriers of race, gender, or physical infirmity can restrain the human spirit; and that the truest test of a person's life is what we do for one another.
The recipients of the Medal of Freedom did not set out to win this or any other award. They did not set out in pursuit of glory or fame or riches. Rather, they set out, guided by passion, committed to hard work, aided by persistence, often with few advantages but the gifts, grace, and good name God gave them.
So, let them stand as an example here in the United States -- and around the world -- of what we can achieve in our own lives. Let them stand as an example of the difference we can make in the lives of others. Let each of their stories stand as an example of a life well lived.
One of the last things Suzy Komen did before she passed away was ask her sister Nancy to make her a promise. Nancy promised her she would prevent other families battling breast cancer from hurting the way theirs had. What began with $200 and a list of friends has become a global Race for the Cure, a campaign that has eased the pain and saved the lives of millions around the world. In the months after her sister's death, Nancy lay awake at night, thinking about the promise she had made and wondering whether one person could really make a difference. Nancy's life is the answer.
While an intern at Miami's Jackson Memorial, Dr. Pedro José Greer came across a patient in a coma without a known name or address -- a homeless man, found by firefighters, suffering from tuberculosis. In the days that followed, the physician Little Havana knows as Dr. Joe searched for clues about the patient's life in the squalor under Miami's highways. Deciding that Miami's homeless deserved better, Dr. Greer founded Camillus Health Concern, a clinic that now offers care to over 4,000 poor and homeless patients. It's a life that might be distilled into a question Dr. Greer asks all of us: "If we don't fight injustice, who will?"
Professor Stephen Hawking was a brilliant man and a mediocre student -- (laughter) -- when he lost his balance and tumbled down a flight of stairs. Diagnosed with a rare disease and told he had just a few years to live, he chose to live with new purpose. And happily, in the four decades since, he has become one of the world's leading scientists. His work in theoretical physics -- which I will not attempt to explain further here -- (laughter) -- has advanced our understanding of the universe. His popular books have advanced the cause of science itself. From his wheelchair, he's led us on a journey to the farthest and strangest reaches of the cosmos. In so doing, he has stirred our imagination and shown us the power of the human spirit here on Earth.
Told he was too small to play college football, Jack Kemp became a pro quarterback. Cut by four teams, he led the Buffalo Bills to two championships. Football, he once said, gave him a good sense of perspective about politics: He'd "already been booed, cheered, cut, sold, [and traded]." (Laughter.) Makes me feel better. (Laughter.) A conservative thinker, a Republican leader, and a defender of civil rights, he was that rare patriot who put country over party, never forgetting what he learned on the gridiron -- that it takes each of us doing our part, and all of us working together, to achieve a common goal. It's a life from which we can all draw lessons, Democrat and Republican alike.
After purchasing an $8 racket with money earned from chores, 11-year-old Billie Jean declared a goal to be the number one tennis player in the world. Yet, what we honor are not simply her 12 Grand Slam titles, 101 doubles titles, and 67 singles titles -- pretty good, Billie Jean -- (laughter) -- we honor what she calls "all the off-the-court stuff" -- what she did to broaden the reach of the game, to change how women athletes and women everywhere view themselves, and to give everyone -- regardless of gender or sexual orientation -- including my two daughters -- a chance to compete both on the court and in life. As Billie Jean once said, we should "never, ever underestimate the human spirit." Nor should we underestimate Billie Jean King's spirit.
Born and raised in Jim Crow Alabama, preaching in his blood, the Reverend Joseph Lowery is a giant of the Moses generation of civil rights leaders. It was just King, Lowery, and a few others, huddled in Montgomery, who laid the groundwork for the bus boycott and the movement that was to follow. A founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Lowery was later asked to serve as President. He agreed to serve for one year, but wound up serving, as he puts it, for 20 one-year terms. (Laughter.) Throughout his life, some have called him crazy. But one of my favorite sermons that I heard Dr. Lowery once deliver, he said: There's good crazy and there's bad crazy -- (laughter) -- and sometimes you need a little bit of that good crazy to make the world a better place.
Born just a generation past the Battle of the Little Big Horn, a grandson of a scout for General Custer himself, Dr. Joseph Medicine Crow was the first member of his tribe to attend college and earn a Master's. Before completing his PhD, he left to serve in World War II. Wearing war paint beneath his uniform, and a sacred feather beneath his helmet, Joseph Medicine Crow completed the four battlefield deeds that made him the last Crow war chief. Historian, educator, and patriot -- a good man, a bacheitche in Crow -- Dr. Medicine Crow's life reflects not only the warrior spirit of the Crow people, but America's highest ideals.
His name was Harvey Milk, and he was here to recruit us -- all of us -- to join a movement and change a nation. For much of his early life, he had silenced himself. In the prime of his life, he was silenced by the act of another. But in the brief time in which he spoke -- and ran and led -- his voice stirred the aspirations of millions of people. He would become, after several attempts, one of the first openly gay Americans elected to public office. And his message of hope -- hope unashamed, hope unafraid -- could not ever be silenced. It was Harvey who said it best: "You gotta give 'em hope."
When a young Sandra Day graduated from Stanford Law School near the top of her class -- in two years instead of the usual three -- she was offered just one job in the private sector. Her prospective employer asked her how well she typed and told her there might be work for her as a legal secretary. Now, I cannot know how she would have fared as a legal secretary -- (laughter) -- but she made a mighty fine justice of the United States Supreme Court. (Laughter and applause.) A judge and Arizona legislator, cancer survivor, child of the Texas plains, Sandra Day O'Connor is like the pilgrim in the poem she sometime quotes who has forged a new trail and built a bridge behind her for all young women to follow.
It's been said that Sidney Poitier does not make movies, he makes milestones -- milestones of artistic excellence; milestones of America's progress. On screen and behind the camera, in films such as The Defiant Ones, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, Uptown Saturday Night, Lilies of the Field -- for which he became the first African American to win an Academy Award for Best Actor -- Poitier not only entertained, but enlightened, shifting attitudes, broadening hearts, revealing the power of the silver screen to bring us closer together. The child of Bahamian tomato farmers, Poitier once called his driving purpose to make himself a better person. He did -- and he made us all a little bit better along the way.
Dolores Conchita Figueroa del Rivero -- (applause) -- knows the adversity that comes with a difficult name. (Laughter.) I can relate. (Laughter.) Known to the world by the name that has lit up Broadway marquees, Chita Rivera's career had an improbable start. Accompanying a nervous classmate on an audition, she decided to audition herself, and impressed the choreographer, Jerome Robbins, who would make her famous as Anita in West Side Story. Sassy, electric -- that rare performer who can sing, dance, and act -- Chita Rivera revealed that still rarer ability to overcome when she recovered from a car accident that shattered her leg. She ended up retaking the stage, won a Tony for Kiss of the Spider Woman. And like her unforgettable Anita, Chita Rivera has shown that life can indeed be bright in America.
The only girl in a family of four brothers, Mary Robinson learned early on what it takes to make sure all voices are heard. As a crusader for women and those without a voice in Ireland, Mary Robinson was the first woman elected President of Ireland, before being appointed U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights. When she traveled abroad as President, she would place a light in her window that would draw people of Irish descent to pass by below. Today, as an advocate for the hungry and the hunted, the forgotten and the ignored, Mary Robinson has not only shone a light on human suffering, but illuminated a better future for our world.
After graduating from the University of Chicago School of Medicine in 1948, Janet Rowley got married, and gave birth to four sons, making medicine a hobby and making family her priority. It was not until she was almost 40 that she took up serious medical research, and not until almost a decade later that she discovered, hunched over her dining room table, examining small photos of chromosomes, that leukemia cells are notable for changes in their genetics -- a discovery that showed cancer is genetic, and transformed how we fight the disease. All of us have been touched in some way by cancer, including my family -- and so we can all be thankful that what began as a hobby became a life's work for Janet.
The glint in the eye and the lilt in the voice are familiar to us all. But the signature quality of Archbishop Desmond Tutu, says Nelson Mandela, is a readiness to take unpopular stands without fear. Perhaps that explains what led the Arch, as he's known, to preach amid tear gas and police dogs, rallying a people against apartheid. And later, when a free South Africa needed a heart big enough to forgive its sins, Archbishop Desmond Tutu was called to serve once more -- as chairman of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Tribune of the downtrodden, voice of the oppressed, cantor of our conscience, Desmond Tutu possesses that sense of generosity, that spirit of unity, that essence of humanity that South Africans know simply as Ubuntu.
Thirty-five years ago, a young economics professor at a university in Bangladesh was struck by the disconnect between the theories he was teaching in class and the reality of the famine outside. So, determined to help, Mohammed Yunus left the classroom for a village, and discovered that just $27 would free dozens of artisans, vendors, and rickshaw pullers from debt. Offering himself as a guarantor, he withdrew a loan, paid off their debts, and founded Grameen Bank -- a bank that has disbursed over $8 billion, lifting millions of people from poverty with microloans. Mohammed Yunus was just trying to help a village, but he somehow managed to change the world.
There's a story Ted Kennedy sometimes tells. It's about a boy who sees an old man tossing starfish stranded by a receding tide back into the sea. "There are so many," asks the boy, "what difference can your efforts possibly make?" The old man studies the starfish in his hand and tosses it to safety, saying: "It makes a difference to that one." For nearly half a century, Ted Kennedy has been walking that beach, making a difference for that soldier fighting for freedom, that refugee looking for a way home, that senior searching for dignity, that worker striving for opportunity, that student aspiring to college, that family reaching for the American Dream. The life of Senator Edward M. Kennedy has made a difference for us all.
These are the 2009 recipients of the Medal of Freedom. At a moment when cynicism and doubt too often prevail, when our obligations to one another are too often forgotten, when the road ahead can seem too long or hard to tread, these extraordinary men and women -- these agents of change -- remind us that excellence is not beyond our abilities, that hope lies around the corner, and that justice can still be won in the forgotten corners of this world. They remind us that we each have it within our powers to fulfill dreams, to advance the dreams of others, and to remake the world for our children.
And it is now my distinct and extraordinary honor to ask each of them to come forward to receive their award, as a military aide reads their citation. (Applause.)
MILITARY AIDE: Drawing strength from tragedy, Nancy Goodman Brinker has transformed the nation's approach to breast cancer. When her sister was diagnosed in 1977, most breast cancer victims knew relatively little about the disease and suffered from popular stigmas. Nancy G. Brinker promised to challenge these norms. She founded Susan G. Komen for the Cure in honor of her sister, and today, the organization supports research and community awareness programs across the United States and around the world. Nancy G. Brinker's unique passion and determination have been a blessing to all those whose lives have been touched by breast cancer.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Pedro José Greer Jr. (Applause.)
Dr. Pedro José "Joe" Greer Jr. has devoted his career to improving medical services for the uninsured. A native of Miami, he followed his passion for helping others to medical school and founded the Camillus Health Concern (CHC) in 1984 as a medical intern. Today, CHC treats thousands of homeless patients a year, serving as a model clinic for the poor, and inspiring physicians everywhere to work with indigent populations. Dr. Greer's tremendous contributions to the South Florida community, and our nation as a whole, stand as a shining example of the difference one person can make in the lives of many.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Stephen Hawking. (Applause.)
Persistent in his pursuit of knowledge, Stephen Hawking has unlocked new pathways of discovery and inspired people around the world. He has dedicated his life to exploring the fundamental laws that govern the universe, and he has contributed to some of the greatest scientific discoveries of our time. His work has stirred the imagination of experts and lay persons alike. Living with a disability and possessing an uncommon ease of spirit, Stephen Hawking's attitude and achievements inspire hope, intellectual curiosity, and respect for the tremendous power of science.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Joanne Kemp, accepting on behalf of her husband, Jack French Kemp. (Applause.)
A statesman and a sports icon, Jack French Kemp advocated for his beliefs with an unwavering integrity and intellectual honesty. On the football field, he earned the respect and admiration of his teammates for his judgment and leadership. As a public servant, he placed country before party, and ideas before ideology. Jack Kemp saw bridges where others saw divisions, and his legacy serves as a shining example for all those who strive to challenge conventional wisdom, stay true to themselves, and better our nation.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Kara Kennedy, accepting on behalf of her father, Edward M. Kennedy. (Applause.)
For more than four decades, Senator Edward M. Kennedy has boldly fought for equal opportunity, fairness, and justice for all Americans. In his tireless quest for a more perfect Union, Senator Kennedy has reformed our schools, strengthened our civil rights, helped seniors and working families, lifted up the poor, and worked to ensure that every American has access to quality and affordable health care. With volumes of laws bearing his name and countless lives touched by his extraordinary passion, Senator Kennedy has accumulated several lifetimes' worth of achievements. The United States proudly recognizes this righteous citizen, devout public servant, and giant among men.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Billie Jean Moffitt King. (Applause.)
Through her example and advocacy, Billie Jean Moffitt King has advanced the struggle for greater gender equality around the world. In an age of male-dominated sports, her pioneering journey took her from Long Beach, California, to the lawns of All England Club and the International Tennis Hall of Fame. Her athletic acumen is matched only by her unwavering defense of equal rights. With Billie Jean King pushing us, the road ahead will be smoother for women, the future will be brighter for LGBT Americans, and our nation's commitment to equality will be stronger for all.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Reverend Joseph E. Lowery. (Applause.)
Reverend Joseph E. Lowery has marched through life with faith and purpose, carrying with him the legacy of a movement that touched America's conscience and changed its history. At the forefront of the major civil rights events of our time -- from the Montgomery bus boycott to protests against apartheid -- he has served as a tireless beacon for nonviolence and social justice. As a pastor and civil rights advocate, he co-founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and championed the cause of peace and freedom around the world. The United States proudly honors this outstanding leader.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Joseph Medicine Crow. (Applause.)
As a warrior and living legend, history flows through Dr. Joseph Medicine Crow -- High Bird. Born on a reservation and raised by traditional grandparents, he became the first member of his tribe to earn a Master's degree. For his valiant service in World War II, he was awarded the status of Crow War Chief, and his renowned studies of the first Americans and contributions to cultural and historical preservation have been critical to our understanding of America's history. Joe Medicine Crow is a symbol of strength and survival, and the United States honors him for his dedication to this country and to all Native Americans.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Stuart Milk accepting on behalf of his uncle, Harvey Bernard Milk. (Applause.)
Harvey Bernard Milk dedicated his life to shattering boundaries and challenging assumptions. As one of the first openly gay elected officials in this country, he changed the landscape of opportunity for the nation's gay community. Throughout his life, he fought discrimination with visionary courage and conviction. Before his tragic death in 1978, he wisely noted, "Hope will never be silent," and called upon Americans to stay true to the guiding principles of equality and justice for all. Harvey Milk's voice will forever echo in the hearts of all those who carry forward his timeless message.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Sandra Day O'Connor. (Applause.)
Sandra Day O'Connor has paved the way for millions of women to achieve their dreams. Completing law school in just two years, she graduated third in her class at a time when women rarely entered the legal profession. With grace and humor, tenacity and intelligence, she rose to become the first woman on the United States Supreme Court. Her historic 25-term tenure on the Court was defined by her integrity and independence, and she has earned the nation's lasting gratitude for her invaluable contributions to history and the law.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Sidney Poitier. (Applause.)
Ambassador and actor, Sidney Poitier has left an indelible mark on American culture. Rising from the tomato farms of the Bahamas, his talent led him to Broadway, Hollywood, and global acclaim. In front of black and white audiences struggling to right the nation's moral compass, Sidney Poitier brought us the common tragedy of racism, the inspiring possibility of reconciliation, and the simple joys of everyday life. Ultimately, the man would mirror the character, and both would advance the nation's dialogue on race and respect.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Chita Rivera. (Applause.)

F

rom stage to screen, Chita Rivera has captured America's imagination with her magnetic presence and radiant voice. Over a career that has spanned a half-century, she has received numerous accolades for her performances, including two Tony Awards, six additional Tony nominations, and the Kennedy Center Honors Award. As fearless as "Anita" in West Side Story, and as self-reliant as "Aurora" in Kiss of the Spider Woman, she has broken barriers under Broadway's lights and inspired a generation of women to follow in her remarkable footsteps. The United States honors Chita Rivera for her lifetime of achievement as one of America's great artists.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Mary Robinson. (Applause.)
For Mary Robinson, the fight to end discrimination and suffering is an urgent moral imperative. She has been a trail-blazing crusader for women's rights in Ireland and a forceful advocate for equality and human rights around the world. Whether courageously visiting conflict-stricken regions, or working to inject concern for human rights into business and economic development, Mary Robinson continues this important work today, urging citizens and nations to make common cause for justice.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Janet Davison Rowley. (Applause.)
Dr. Janet Davison Rowley was the first scientist to identify a chromosomal translocation as the cause of leukemia and other cancers -- considered among the most important medical breakthroughs of the past century. After enrolling at the University of Chicago at age 15, she went on to challenge the conventional medical wisdom about the cause of cancer in the 1970s, which had placed little emphasis on chromosomal abnormalities. Her work has proven enormously influential to researchers worldwide who have used her discovery to identify genes that cause fatal cancers and to develop targeted therapies that have revolutionized cancer care. The United States honors this distinguished scientist for advancing genetic research and the understanding of our most devastating diseases.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Mpilo Tutu. (Applause.)
With unflagging devotion to justice, indomitable optimism, and an unmistakable sense of humor, Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Mpilo Tutu has stirred the world's conscience for decades. As a man of the cloth, he has drawn the respect and admiration of a diverse congregation. He helped lead South Africa through a turning point in modern history, and with an unshakable humility and firm commitment to our common humanity, he helped heal wounds and lay the foundation for a new nation. Desmond Tutu continues to give voice to the voiceless and bring hope to those who thirst for freedom.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
Muhammad Yunus. (Applause.)
With his belief in the self-reliance of all people, Professor Muhammad Yunus has altered the face of finance and entrepreneurship. As an academic, he struggled with pervading economic theories and their effects on the people of his native Bangladesh. Yearning for a new way of lifting people out of poverty, he revolutionized banking to allow low-income borrowers access to credit. In the process, he has enabled citizens of the world's poorest countries to create profitable businesses, support their families, and help build sustainable communities. In doing so, Muhammad Yunus has unleashed new avenues of creativity and inspired millions worldwide to imagine their own potential.
(The medal is presented.) (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Before we break up, why don't we all give an extraordinary round of applause to these remarkable men and women. (Applause.)
Thank you very much for joining us, everyone. Thank you very much.
END
3:44 P.M. EDT

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
___________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                       August 12, 2009
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AND SUPREME COURT JUSTICE SONIA SOTOMAYOR
AT RECEPTION IN HER HONOR
EAST ROOM
10:17 A.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning, everybody, and welcome to the White House. I am glad all of you could be with us today as we honor the newest member of our highest Court who I'm proud to address, for the very first time, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor. (Applause.)
We are also honored to be joined by Justice Sotomayor's new colleagues. We have Justice Ginsburg who is here -- (applause) -- as well as Justice Stevens. So I just want to thank both Justice Stevens and Justice Ginsburg not only for being here today, but for your extraordinary service on the Court. And I know you'll be giving Justice Sotomayor some good tips. (Laughter.)
I also want to thank everyone who's worked so hard to bring us to this day. I want to thank especially our Judiciary Committee Chairman, Senator Patrick Leahy -- (applause) -- as well as our Senate Majority Leader, Senator Reid -- (applause) -- for their outstanding work to complete this process before the August recess.
I want to thank Senator Schumer and Senator Gillibrand, both of whom are Justice Sotomayor's home-state senators, for their extraordinary work on her behalf. I want to thank all the members of Congress who've taken the time to join us here at the White House event. And I want to acknowledge all the advocates and groups who organized and mobilized and supported these efforts from the very beginning. Your work was absolutely critical to our success, and I appreciate all that you've done. So pat yourselves on the back. Congratulations. (Applause.)
Two members of Congress that I just especially want to acknowledge -- Senator Bob Menendez, who worked so hard on the Senate side. (Applause.) And Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez, who is our chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. (Applause.)
And I think we all want to take a moment to recognize the woman who, in so many ways, truly made this day possible -- Justice Sotomayor's mother, Celina Sotomayor. (Applause.) Mrs. Sotomayor is here with her husband, Omar; and Justice Sotomayor's brother, Juan; and other members of their family. And we're thrilled that they could join us here today.
And by the way -- I don't normally do this, but let me also just thank my extraordinary White House staff who helped to usher this stuff through. We're very proud of them. (Applause.) Thank you very much.
Of course, we're here not just to celebrate our extraordinary new Supreme Court justice and all those who've been a part of her journey to this day. We're here, as well, to celebrate an extraordinary moment for our nation. We celebrate the impact Justice Sotomayor has already had on people across America who have been inspired by her exceptional life story. We celebrate the greatness of a country in which such a story is possible. And we celebrate how, with their overwhelming vote to confirm Justice Sotomayor, the United States Senate –- Republicans and Democrats -- tore down yet one more barrier and affirmed our belief that in America, the doors of opportunity must be open to all.
With that vote, the Senate looked beyond the old divisions and they embraced excellence. They recognized Justice Sotomayor's intellect, her integrity, and her independence of mind; her respect for the proper role of each branch of government; her fidelity to the law in each case that she hears; and her devotion to protecting our core constitutional rights and liberties.
Justice William Brennan once said that in order for government to ensure those rights for all its citizens, government officials must be attentive to the concrete human realities at stake in the decisions they make. They must understand, as Justice Brennan put it, "the pulse of life beneath the official version of events." The pulse of life beneath the official version of events.
Justice Sotomayor understands those realities because she's witnessed them firsthand as a prosecutor, a litigator, and a judge, working to uphold our laws, keep our communities safe, and give people the chance to live out their dreams -- work that she has done with devotion, with distinction, and with an unyielding commitment to give back to this country that has given her so much.
And she understands these things because she's lived these things -- because her life is one of those "only in America" stories: raised by a single mom in the South Bronx determined to give her every opportunity to succeed; propelled by the talent and hard work that would earn her scholarships and honors at the best schools in the country; driven always by the belief that it doesn't matter where you come from, or what you look like, or what challenges life throws your way -- no dream is beyond reach in the United States of America.
And with her extraordinary breadth and depth of experience, Justice Sotomayor brings to the Court both a mastery of the letter of the law and an understanding of how the law actually unfolds in our daily lives -- its impact on how we work and worship and raise our families; on whether we have the opportunities we need to live the lives we imagine.
That understanding is vital for the work of a Supreme Court justice, as Justice Stevens and Justice Ginsburg will testify -- the work of applying principles set forth at our founding to the cases and controversies of our time.
For as visionary as our founders were, they did not presume to know exactly how the times would change, what new questions fate and history would set before us. Instead, they sought to articulate ideals that would be timeless -- ideals that would accommodate the ever-changing circumstances of our lives and preserve for each new generation our most sacred rights and freedoms.
When Justice Sotomayor put her hand on that Bible and took that oath, we took yet another step towards realizing those ideals. We came yet another step closer to the more perfect union that we all seek.
Because while this is Justice Sotomayor's achievement –- the result of her ability and determination -– this moment is not just about her. It's about every child who will grow up thinking to him or herself, if Sonia Sotomayor can make it, then maybe I can, too. (Applause.) It's about every mother or father who looks at the sacrifices Justice Sotomayor's mother made, and the successes she and her brother have had, and thinks, I may not have much in my own life, but if I work hard enough, maybe my kids can have more. It's about everyone in this nation facing challenges and struggles in their lives, who hear Justice Sotomayor's story and thinks to themselves, if she could overcome so much and go so far, then why can't I?
Nearly 80 years ago, as the cornerstone was laid for the building that became our Supreme Court, Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes declared, "The Republic endures and this is the symbol of its faith."
Justice Sotomayor's rise from humble beginnings to the height of achievement is yet another symbol of that faith -- faith that the American Dream still endures; faith that "equal justice under the law" is not just an inscription in marble, but an animating ideal of our democracy; faith that in this great nation, all things are still possible for all people.
This is a great day for America, and I know that all of us here are proud and honored to have been a part of it.
And so, with that, I would like to introduce the newest member of the United States Supreme Court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor. (Applause.)
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR: No words can adequately express what I am feeling. No speech can fully capture my joy in this moment. Nothing can convey the depth of gratitude I feel to the countless family members, starting with Mom and my brother, and the many friends and colleagues -- so many of you who are here with me today, and the others who aren't -- who have helped me to reach this moment. None of this would have happened without all of you.
Mr. President, I have the most heartfelt appreciation for the trust that you've placed in me by nominating me. And I want to convey my thanks to the Judiciary Committee, led by Chairperson Leahy, for conducting a respectful and timely hearing, and to all members of the Senate for approving the President's selection. I am so grateful to all of you for this extraordinary opportunity.
I am most grateful to this country. I stand here today knowing that my confirmation as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court would never have been possible without the opportunities presented to me by this nation. More than two centuries ago, in a Constitution that contains fewer than 5,000 words, our founders set forth their vision for this new land. Their self-proclaimed task was to form a more perfect union, to establish justice, and to secure the blessings of liberty for themselves and their posterity. Over the years, the ideals at the heart of that document have endured, as subsequent generations have expanded those blessings, these rights and freedoms to more and more Americans.
Our Constitution has survived domestic and international tumult, including a civil war, two world wars, and the catastrophe of September 11th. It draws together people of all races, faiths, and backgrounds from all across this country who carry its words and values in our heart. It is this nation's faith in a more perfect union that allows a Puerto Rican girl from the Bronx to stand here now. (Applause.)
I am struck again today by the wonder of my own life, and the life we in America are so privileged to lead. In reflecting on my life experiences, I am thinking also today of the judicial oath of office that I first took almost two decades ago, and that I reiterated this past weekend -- to judge without respect to what a person looks like, where they come from, or whether they are rich or poor, and to treat all persons as equal under the law. That is what our system of justice requires, and it is the foundation of the American people's faith in the rule of law, and it is why I am so passionate about the law.
I am deeply humbled by the sacred responsibility of upholding our laws and safeguarding the rights and freedoms set forth in our Constitution. I ask not just my family and friends, but I ask all Americans, to wish me divine guidance and wisdom in administering my new office.
I thank you all again for the love and support you have shown me. And I thank President Obama and the United States Senate for the tremendous honor and privilege they have granted me. Thank you. (Applause.)
END
10:32 A.M. EDT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
___________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                       August 11, 2009
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
IN HEALTH INSURANCE REFORM TOWN HALL
Portsmouth High School
Portsmouth, New Hampshire
1:05 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, Portsmouth! Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you so much. Everybody have a seat. Oh, thank you so --
AUDIENCE MEMBER: We love you!
THE PRESIDENT: I love you back. Thank you. (Laughter.) It is great to be back in Portsmouth. (Applause.) It's great to be back in New Hampshire. I have to say, though, that most of my memories of this state are cold. (Laughter.) So it's good to be here in August.
There are a couple of people that I want to acknowledge who are here today, some special guests. First of all, I want to thank principal Jeffrey Collins, and the Portsmouth students and faculty and staff. (Applause.) Thank you -- our host for today. Your own outstanding governor, John Lynch is here. (Applause.) And his wonderful wife, Dr. Susan Lynch is here, the First Lady of New Hampshire. (Applause.) Your United States senator, doing a great job, Jeanne Shaheen is here. (Applause.) The governor of the great state of Maine, and we are glad he's here in New Hampshire today, John Baldacci is here. (Applause.)
Two of my favorite people, they are just taking Congress by storm, outstanding work -- Paul Hodes, Carol Shea-Porter -- give them a big round of applause. (Applause.) And we've got your own mayor, Tom Ferrini is here. Where's Tom? There he is. (Applause.)
Now, I want to thank more than anybody, Lori, for that introduction, and for sharing her story with the rest of us. (Applause.) Thank you, Lori. Lori's story is the same kind of story that I've read in letters, that I've heard in town hall meetings just like this one for the past five years. In fact, some of you were in that town hall -- those town hall meetings, as I was traveling all throughout New Hampshire. It's the story of hardworking Americans who are held hostage by health insurance companies that deny them coverage, or drop their coverage, or charge fees that they can't afford for care that they desperately need.
I believe it is wrong. It is bankrupting families and businesses, and that's why we are going to pass health insurance reform in 2009. (Applause.)
Now, this is obviously a tough time for families here in New Hampshire and all across America. Six months ago, we were in the middle of the worst recession of our lifetimes. I want you to remember what things were like in January and February. We were losing about 700,000 jobs per month. And economists of all stripes feared a second-coming of the Great Depression. That was only six months ago.
That's why we acted as fast as we could to pass a Recovery Act that would stop the freefall. And I want to make sure everybody understands what we did. One-third of the money in the Recovery Act went to tax cuts that have already started showing up in the paychecks of about 500,000 working families in New Hampshire -- (applause) -- 500,000 families in New Hampshire. We also cut taxes for small businesses on the investments that they make, and over 300 New Hampshire small businesses have qualified for new loans backed by the Recovery Act.
Now, that was a third -- that was a third of the Recovery Act. Another third of the money in the Recovery Act is for emergency relief for folks who've borne the brunt of this recession. So we've extended unemployment benefits for 20,000 New Hampshire residents. (Applause.) We've made health insurance 65 percent cheaper for families who rely on COBRA while they're looking for work. (Applause.) And for states that were facing historic budget shortfalls, we provided assistance that has saved the jobs of tens of thousands of workers who provided essential services -- like teachers and police officers. (Applause.) So it's prevented a lot of painful cuts in the state, but also a lot of painful state and local tax increases.
Now, the last third of the Recovery Act is for investments that are already putting people back to work. These are jobs refurbishing bridges and pavement on I-95; or jobs at the community health centers here in Portsmouth that will be able to add nurses, and extend hours, and serve up to 500 new patients. These are good jobs doing the work America needs done. And, by the way, most of the work is being done by private, local businesses, because that's how we're going to grow this economy again.
So there is no doubt that the Recovery Act has helped put the brakes on this recession. We just saw last Friday the job picture is beginning to turn. We're starting to see signs that business investment is coming back.
But, New Hampshire, that doesn't mean we're out of the woods, and you know that. It doesn't mean we can just sit back and do nothing while so many families are still struggling, because even before this recession hit we had an economy that was working pretty well for the wealthiest Americans, it was working pretty well for Wall Street bankers, it was working pretty well for big corporations, but it wasn't working so well for everybody else. It was an economy of bubbles and busts. And we can't go back to that kind of economy.
If we want this country to succeed in the 21st century -- and if we want our children to succeed in the 21st century -- then we're going to have to take the steps necessary to lay a new foundation for economic growth. We need to build an economy that works for everybody, and not just some people. (Applause.)
Now, health insurance reform is one of those pillars that we need to build up that new foundation. I don't have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don't have health insurance coverage today. In the wealthiest nation on Earth, 46 million of our fellow citizens have no coverage. They are just vulnerable. If something happens, they go bankrupt, or they don't get the care they need.
But it's just as important that we accomplish health insurance reform for the Americans who do have health insurance -- (applause) -- because right now we have a health care system that too often works better for the insurance industry than it does for the American people. And we've got to change that. (Applause.)
Now, let me just start by setting the record straight on a few things I've been hearing out here -- (laughter) -- about reform. Under the reform we're proposing, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.
You will not be waiting in any lines. This is not about putting the government in charge of your health insurance. I don't believe anyone should be in charge of your health insurance decisions but you and your doctor. (Applause.) I don't think government bureaucrats should be meddling, but I also don't think insurance company bureaucrats should be meddling. That's the health care system I believe in. (Applause.)
Now, we just heard from Lori about how she can't find an insurance company that will cover her because of her medical condition. She's not alone. A recent report actually shows that in the past three years, over 12 million Americans were discriminated against by insurance companies because of a preexisting condition. Either the insurance company refused to cover the person, or they dropped their coverage when they got sick and they needed it most, or they refused to cover a specific illness or condition, or they charged higher premiums and out-of-pocket costs. No one holds these companies accountable for these practices.
And I have to say, this is personal for Lori but it's also personal for me. I talked about this when I was campaigning up here in New Hampshire. I will never forget my own mother, as she fought cancer in her final months, having to worry about whether her insurance would refuse to pay for her treatment. And by the way, this was because the insurance company was arguing that somehow she should have known that she had cancer when she took her new job -- even though it hadn't been diagnosed yet. So if it could happen to her, it could happen to any one of us.
And I've heard from so many Americans who have the same worries. One woman testified that an insurance company would not cover her internal organs because of an accident she had when she was five years old. Think about that -- that covers a lot of stuff. (Laughter.) They're only going to cover your skin. (Laughter.) Dermatology, that's covered; nothing else. (Laughter.)
Another lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because the insurance company discovered he had gall stones that he hadn't known about when he applied for insurance. Now, that is wrong, and that will change when we pass health care reform. That is going to be a priority. (Applause.)
Under the reform we're proposing, insurance companies will be prohibited from denying coverage because of a person's medical history. Period. (Applause.) They will not be able to drop your coverage if you get sick. (Applause.) They will not be able to water down your coverage when you need it. (Applause.) Your health insurance should be there for you when it counts -- not just when you're paying premiums, but when you actually get sick. And it will be when we pass this plan. (Applause.)
Now, when we pass health insurance reform, insurance companies will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime. And we will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because no one in America should go broke because they get sick. (Applause.)
And finally -- this is important -- we will require insurance companies to cover routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies -- (applause) -- because there's no reason we shouldn't be catching diseases like breast cancer and prostate cancer on the front end. That makes sense, it saves lives; it also saves money -- and we need to save money in this health care system.
So this is what reform is about. For all the chatter and the yelling and the shouting and the noise, what you need to know is this: If you don't have health insurance, you will finally have quality, affordable options once we pass reform. (Applause.) If you do have health insurance, we will make sure that no insurance company or government bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need. And we will do this without adding to our deficit over the next decade, largely by cutting out the waste and insurance company giveaways in Medicare that aren't making any of our seniors healthier. (Applause.) Right. (Laughter.)
Now, before I start taking questions, let me just say there's been a long and vigorous debate about this, and that's how it should be. That's what America is about, is we have a vigorous debate. That's why we have a democracy. But I do hope that we will talk with each other and not over each other -- (applause) -- because one of the objectives of democracy and debate is, is that we start refining our own views because maybe other people have different perspectives, things we didn't think of.
Where we do disagree, let's disagree over things that are real, not these wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to anything that's actually been proposed. (Applause.) Because the way politics works sometimes is that people who want to keep things the way they are will try to scare the heck out of folks and they'll create boogeymen out there that just aren't real. (Applause.)
So this is an important and complicated issue that deserves serious debate. And we have months to go before we're done, and years after that to phase in all these reforms and get them right. And I know this: Despite all the hand-wringing pundits and the best efforts of those who are profiting from the status quo, we are closer to achieving health insurance reform than we have ever been. We have the American Nurses Association supporting us. (Applause.) We have the American Medical Association on board. (Applause.)
America's doctors and nurses know firsthand how badly we need reform. We have broad agreement in Congress on about 80 percent of what we're trying to do. We have an agreement from the drug companies to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors. We can cut the doughnut hole in half if we pass reform. (Applause.) We have the AARP on board because they know this is a good deal for our seniors. (Applause.)
But let's face it, now is the hard part -- because the history is clear -- every time we come close to passing health insurance reform, the special interests fight back with everything they've got. They use their influence. They use their political allies to scare and mislead the American people. They start running ads. This is what they always do.
We can't let them do it again. Not this time. Not now. (Applause.) Because for all the scare tactics out there, what is truly scary -- what is truly risky -- is if we do nothing. If we let this moment pass -- if we keep the system the way it is right now -- we will continue to see 14,000 Americans lose their health insurance every day. Your premiums will continue to skyrocket. They have gone up three times faster than your wages and they will keep on going up.
Our deficit will continue to grow because Medicare and Medicaid are on an unsustainable path. Medicare is slated to go into the red in about eight to 10 years. I don't know if people are aware of that. If I was a senior citizen, the thing I'd be worried about right now is Medicare starts running out of money because we haven't done anything to make sure that we're getting a good bang for our buck when it comes to health care. And insurance companies will continue to profit by discriminating against people for the simple crime of being sick. Now, that's not a future I want for my children. It's not a future that I want for the United States of America.
New Hampshire, I was up here campaigning a long time. (Laughter.) A lot of you guys came to my town hall events. Some of you voted for me, some of you didn't. But here's one thing I've got to say: I never said this was going to be easy. I never said change would be easy. If it were easy, it would have already been done. Change is hard. And it doesn't start in Washington. It begins in places like Portsmouth, with people like Lori, who have the courage to share their stories and fight for something better. (Applause.)
That's what we need to do right now. And I need your help. If you want a health care system that works for the American people -- (applause) -- as well as it works for the insurance companies, I need your help -- knocking on doors, talking to your neighbors. Spread the facts. Let's get this done. (Applause.)
Thank you. Thank you. (Applause.)
AUDIENCE: Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can!
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. I remember that.
Everybody have a seat. All right, this is the fun part. (Laughter.) Now, first of all, by the way, let's thank the band -- I didn't see the band over here. Thank you, band. (Applause.) Great job.
All right, here's how we're going to do this. We do a lot of town hall meetings in New Hampshire, so everybody knows the basic outlines of this thing. If you have a question just raise your hand. There are people with microphones in the audience. I am going to try to go girl-boy-girl-boy, to make sure it's fair. (Laughter.) If I hear only from people who agree with me I'm going to actively ask some folks who are concerned about health care, give them a chance to ask their questions, because I think we've got to make sure that we get out -- surface some of the debates and concerns that people have. Some of them are legitimate. I'm going to try to get through as many questions as I can. But if you can keep your question or comment relatively brief, then I will try to keep my answers relatively brief, okay? (Laughter.)
All right, so we're just going to go around the room and I'm going to start with this gentleman right here, this gentleman right here. Please introduce yourself, if you don't mind.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Welcome to Portsmouth and New Hampshire. My name is Peter Schmidt. I'm a state representative from Dover. I'm a senior citizen. I have a wonderful government-run health care plan called Medicare. I like it. It's affordable, it's reasonable, nobody tells me what I need to do. I just go to my doctor at the hospital, I get care.
Now, one of the things you've been doing in your campaign to change the situation is you've been striving for bipartisanship. I think it's a wonderful idea, but my question is, if the Republicans actively refuse to participate in a reasonable way with reasonable proposals, isn't it time to just say we're going to pass what the American people need and what they want, without the Republicans? (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me make a couple of points. First of all, you make a point about Medicare that's very important. I've been getting a lot of letters, pro and con, for health care reform, and one of the letters I received recently, a woman was very exercised about what she had heard about my plan. She says, "I don't want government-run health care. I don't want you meddling in the private marketplace. And keep your hands off my Medicare." (Laughter.) True story.
And so I do think it's important for particularly seniors who currently receive Medicare to understand that if we're able to get something right like Medicare, then there should be a little more confidence that maybe the government can have a role -- not the dominant role, but a role -- in making sure the people are treated fairly when it comes to insurance. (Applause.)
Under our proposal, the majority of Americans will still be getting their health care from private insurers. All we want to do is just make sure that private insurers are treating you fairly so that you are not buying something where if you failed to read the fine print, next thing you know, when you actually get sick, you have no coverage.
We also want to make sure that everybody has some options. So there's been talk about this public option. This is where a lot of the idea of government takeover of health care comes from. All we want to do is set up a set of options so that if you don't have health insurance or you're underinsured you can have the same deal that members of Congress have, which is they can look at a menu of options -- we're calling it an exchange, but it’s basically just a menu of different health care plans -- and you will be able to select the one that suits your family best.
And I do think that having a public option as part of that would keep the insurance companies honest, because if they've got a public plan out there that they've got to compete against, as long as it's not being subsidized by taxpayers, then that will give you some sense of what -- sort of a good bargain for what basic health care would be. (Applause.)
Now, I think that there are some of my Republican friends on Capitol Hill who are sincerely trying to figure out if they can find a health care bill that works -- Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Mike Enzi of Wyoming, Olympia Snowe from Maine have been -- (applause) -- yes, I got to admit I like Olympia, too. (Laughter.) They are diligently working to see if they can come up with a plan that could get both Republican and Democratic support.
But I have to tell you, when I listen to folks like Lori and families all across America who are just getting pounded by the current health care system, and when I look at the federal budget and realize that if we don't control costs on health care, there is no way for us to close the budget deficit -- it will just keep on skyrocketing -- when I look at those two things, I say we have to get it done. And my hope is we can do it in a bipartisan fashion, but the most important thing is getting it done for the American people. (Applause.)
All right. Let's -- this young lady right here. All right, this young lady right here. She's still enjoying her summer. When do you go back to school?
Q I go back to school September 3rd.
THE PRESIDENT: September 3rd, okay. What's your name?
Q Julia Hall from Malden, Massachusetts.
THE PRESIDENT: Nice to meet you, Julia. (Applause.)
Q I saw -- as I was walking in, I saw a lot of signs outside saying mean things about reforming health care. How do kids know what is true, and why do people want a new system that can -- that help more of us?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the -- I've seen some of those signs. (Laughter.) Let me just be specific about some things that I've been hearing lately that we just need to dispose of here. The rumor that's been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for "death panels" that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we've decided that we don't -- it's too expensive to let her live anymore. (Laughter.) And there are various -- there are some variations on this theme.
It turns out that I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills that allowed Medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life care, setting up living wills, the availability of hospice, et cetera. So the intention of the members of Congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues of end-of-life care when they're ready, on their own terms. It wasn't forcing anybody to do anything. This is I guess where the rumor came from.
The irony is that actually one of the chief sponsors of this bill originally was a Republican -- then House member, now senator, named Johnny Isakson from Georgia -- who very sensibly thought this is something that would expand people's options. And somehow it's gotten spun into this idea of "death panels." I am not in favor of that. So just I want to -- (applause.) I want to clear the air here.
Now, in fairness, the underlying argument I think has to be addressed, and that is people's concern that if we are reforming the health care system to make it more efficient, which I think we have to do, the concern is that somehow that will mean rationing of care, right? -- that somehow some government bureaucrat out there will be saying, well, you can't have this test or you can't have this procedure because some bean-counter decides that this is not a good way to use our health care dollars. And this is a legitimate concern, so I just want to address this.
We do think that systems like Medicare are very inefficient right now, but it has nothing to do at the moment with issues of benefits. The inefficiencies all come from things like paying $177 billion to insurance companies in subsidies for something called Medicare Advantage that is not competitively bid, so insurance companies basically get a $177 billion of taxpayer money to provide services that Medicare already provides. And it's no better -- it doesn't result in better health care for seniors. It is a giveaway of $177 billion.
Now, think about what we could do with $177 billion over 10 years. I don't think that's a good use of money. I would rather spend that money on making sure that Lori can have coverage, making sure that people who don't have health insurance get some subsidies, than I would want to be subsidizing insurance companies. (Applause.)
Another way of putting this is right now insurance companies are rationing care. They are basically telling you what's covered and what's not. They're telling you: We'll cover this drug, but we won't cover that drug; you can have this procedure, or, you can't have that procedure. So why is it that people would prefer having insurance companies make those decisions, rather than medical experts and doctors figuring out what are good deals for care and providing that information to you as a consumer and your doctor so you can make the decisions?
So I just want to be very clear about this. I recognize there is an underlying fear here that people somehow won't get the care they need. You will have not only the care you need, but also the care that right now is being denied to you -- only if we get health care reform. That's what we're fighting for. (Applause.)
All right. Gentleman back here, with the baseball cap. Right there.
Q Good afternoon, Mr. President. Bill Anderson from New Hampshire. In reference to what you just said -- I'm presently under the New Hampshire Medicaid system and I have to take a drug called Lipitor. When I got onto this program they said, no, we're not going to cover Lipitor -- even though I'd been on that pill for probably 10 years, based on the information my doctor feels is right for me. And I had to go through two different trials of other kinds of drugs before it was finally deemed that I was able to go back on the Lipitor through the New Hampshire Medicaid system. So here it is, the Medicaid that you guys are administering and you're telling me that it's good -- but in essence, I'm dealing with the same thing, and you're telling me the insurance companies are doing. Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that's a legitimate point. I don't know all the details, but it sounds to me like they were probably trying to have you take a generic as opposed to a brand name. Is that right? And it turned out that you did not have as good of a reaction under the generic as the brand name, and then they put you back on the brand name. Is that what happened?
Q Correct, to save money.
THE PRESIDENT: Well -- right. Look, there may be -- in nine out of 10 cases, the generic might work as well or better than the brand name. And we don't want to just subsidize the drug companies if you've got one that works just as well as another.
The important thing about the story that you just told me was -- is that once it was determined that, in fact, you needed the brand name, you were able to get the brand name. Now, I want to be absolutely clear here: There are going to be instances where if there is really strong scientific evidence that the generic and the brand name work just as well, and the brand name costs twice as much, that the taxpayer should try to get the best deal possible, as long as if it turns out that the generic doesn't work as well, you're able to get the brand name.
So the basic principle that we want to set up here is that -- if you're in private insurance, first of all, your private insurance can do whatever you want. If you're under a government program, then it makes sense for us to make sure that we're getting the best deal possible and not just giving drug makers or insurers more money than they should be getting. But ultimately, you've got to be able to get the best care based on what the doctor says.
And it sounds like that is eventually what happened. It may be that it wasn't as efficient -- it wasn't as smooth as it should have been, but that result is actually a good one. And you think about all the situations where a generic actually would have worked -- in fact, one of the things I want to do is to speed up generics getting introduced to the marketplace, because right now drug companies -- (applause) -- right now drug companies are fighting so that they can keep essentially their patents on their brand-name drugs a lot longer. And if we can make those patents a little bit shorter, generics get on the market sooner, ultimately you as consumers will save money. All right? But it was an excellent question, so thank you.
All right, it's a young woman's turn -- or a lady's turn. Right here. Yes, you.
Q Good afternoon, Mr. President. I'm Jackie Millet (phonetic) and I'm from Wells, Maine, and my question is, I am presently on Medicare and I do have a supplement. But if something happens to my husband, I lose the supplement. And what will happen? I take a lot of medications. I need a lot -- I've had a lot of procedures. And how will Medicare under the new proposal help people who are going to need things like this?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, another myth that we've been hearing about is this notion that somehow we're going to be cutting your Medicare benefits. We are not. AARP would not be endorsing a bill if it was undermining Medicare, okay? So I just want seniors to be clear about this, because if you look at the polling, it turns out seniors are the ones who are most worried about health care reform. And that's understandable, because they use a lot of care, they've got Medicare, and it's already hard for a lot of people even on Medicare because of the supplements and all the other costs out of pocket that they're still paying.
So I just want to assure we're not talking about cutting Medicare benefits. We are talking about making Medicare more efficient, eliminating the insurance subsidies, working with hospitals so that they are changing some of the reimbursement practices.
Right now hospitals, they are not penalized if there are constant readmission rates from patients that have gone through the hospital. If you go to a -- if you go to a car company or a auto shop, if you say, "Can I have my car repaired?", you get your car repaired -- if two weeks later it's broken down again, if you take it back, hopefully they're not going to charge you again for repairing the car. You want them to do it right the first time. And too often we're not seeing the best practices in some of these hospitals to prevent people from being readmitted. That costs a lot of money. So those are the kinds of changes we're talking about.
Now, in terms of savings for you as a Medicare recipient, the biggest one is on prescription drugs, because the prescription drug companies have already said that they would be willing to put up $80 billion in rebates for prescription drugs as part of a health care reform package.
Now, we may be able to get even more than that. But think about it. When the prescription drug plan was passed, Medicare Part D, they decided they weren't going to negotiate with the drug companies for the cheapest available price on drugs. And as a consequence, seniors are way over-paying -- there's that big doughnut hole that forces them to go out of pocket. You say you take a lot of medications; that means that doughnut hole is always something that's looming out there for you. If we can cut that doughnut hole in half, that's money directly out of your pocket. And that's one of the reasons that AARP is so supportive, because they see this as a way of potentially saving seniors a lot of money on prescription drugs. Okay?
All right. The gentleman right here in the white shirt.
Q Good afternoon, Mr. President. My name is Ben Hershinson (ph). I'm from Ogunquit, Maine, and also Florida. And I'm a Republican -- I don't know what I'm doing here, but I'm here. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: We're happy to have you. We're happy to have you. (Applause.)
Q Mr. President, you've been quoted over the years -- when you were a senator and perhaps even before then -- that you were essentially a supporter of a universal plan. I'm beginning to see that you're changing that. Do you honestly believe that? Because that is my concern. I'm on Medicare, but I still worry that if we go to a public option, period, that the private companies, the insurance companies, rather than competing -- because who can compete with the government; the answer is nobody. So my question is do you still -- as yourself, now -- support a universal plan? Or are you open to the private industry still being maintained?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think it's an excellent question, so I appreciate the chance to respond. First of all, I want to make a distinction between a universal plan versus a single-payer plan, because those are two different things.
A single-payer plan would be a plan like Medicare for all, or the kind of plan that they have in Canada, where basically government is the only person -- is the only entity that pays for all health care. Everybody has a government-paid-for plan, even though in, depending on which country, the doctors are still private or the hospitals might still be private. In some countries, the doctors work for the government and the hospitals are owned by the government. But the point is, is that government pays for everything, like Medicare for all. That is a single-payer plan.
I have not said that I was a single-payer supporter because, frankly, we historically have had a employer-based system in this country with private insurers, and for us to transition to a system like that I believe would be too disruptive. So what would end up happening would be, a lot of people who currently have employer-based health care would suddenly find themselves dropped, and they would have to go into an entirely new system that had not been fully set up yet. And I would be concerned about the potential destructiveness of that kind of transition. All right? So I'm not promoting a single-payer plan.
I am promoting a plan that will assure that every single person is able to get health insurance at an affordable price, and that if they have health insurance they are getting a good deal from the insurance companies. That's what I'm fighting for. (Applause.)
Now, the way we have approached it, is that if you've got health care under a private plan, if your employer provides you health care or you buy your own health care and you're happy with it, you won't have to change.
What we're saying is, if you don't have health care, then you will be able to go to an exchange similar to the menu of options that I used to have as a member of Congress, and I can look and see what are these various private health care plans offering, what's a good deal, and I'll be able to buy insurance from that exchange. And because it's a big pool, I'll be able to drive down costs, I'll get a better deal than if I was trying to get health insurance on my own.
This is true, by the way, for small businesses, as well. A lot of small businesses, they end up paying a lot more than large businesses per person for health care, because they've got no bargaining power, they've got no leverage. So we wanted small businesses to be able to buy into this big pool, okay?
Now, the only thing that I have said is that having a public option in that menu would provide competition for insurance companies to keep them honest.
Now, I recognize, though, you make a legitimate -- you raise a legitimate concern. People say, well, how can a private company compete against the government? And my answer is that if the private insurance companies are providing a good bargain, and if the public option has to be self-sustaining -- meaning taxpayers aren't subsidizing it, but it has to run on charging premiums and providing good services and a good network of doctors, just like any other private insurer would do -- then I think private insurers should be able to compete. They do it all the time. (Applause.)
I mean, if you think about -- if you think about it, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? No, they are. It's the Post Office that's always having problems. (Laughter.)
So right now you've got private insurers who are out there competing effectively, even though a lot of people get their care through Medicare or Medicaid or VA. So there's nothing inevitable about this somehow destroying the private marketplace, as long as -- and this is a legitimate point that you're raising -- that it's not set up where the government is basically being subsidized by the taxpayers, so that even if they're not providing a good deal, we keep on having to pony out more and more money. And I've already said that can't be the way the public option is set up. It has to be self-sustaining.
Does that answer your question? Okay, thank you. (Applause.)
All right, right there. Go ahead.
Q Hello, Mr. President. My name is Linda Becher (ph). I'm from Portsmouth and I have proudly taught at this high school for 37 years.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, congratulations.
Q Thank you. (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: What do you teach?
Q I teach English and Journalism.
THE PRESIDENT: Excellent.
Q Yes, thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Sure.
Q And in those 37 years, I've been lucky enough to have very good health care coverage and my concerns currently are for those who do not. And I guess my question is if every American who needed it has access to good mental health care, what do you think the impact would be on our society?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you raise the -- (applause) -- you know, mental health has always been undervalued in the health insurance market. And what we now know is, is that somebody who has severe depression has a more debilitating and dangerous illness than somebody who's got a broken leg. But a broken leg, nobody argues that's covered. Severe depression, unfortunately, oftentimes isn't even under existing insurance policies.
So I think -- I've been a strong believer in mental health parity, recognizing that those are serious illnesses. (Applause.) And I would like to see a mental health component as part of a package that people are covered under, under our plan. Okay? (Applause.)
All right. This gentleman right here.
Q Hello, Mr. President. I'm Justin Higgins from Stratham, New Hampshire.
THE PRESIDENT: How are you, Justin?
Q Fine, thank you. There's a lot of misinformation about how we're going to pay for this health care plan. And I'm wondering how we're going to do this without raising the taxes on the middle class, because I don't want the burden to fall on my parents, and also I'm a college student so --
THE PRESIDENT: They've already got enough problems paying your college tuition. (Laughter.)
Q Exactly. Exactly.
THE PRESIDENT: I hear you.
Q Also I'm looking towards my future with career options and opportunities and I don't want inflation to skyrocket by just adding this to the national debt. So I'm wondering how we can avoid both of those scenarios. (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Right, it's a great question. First of all, I said I won't sign a bill that adds to the deficit or the national debt. Okay? So this will have to be paid for. That, by the way, is in contrast to the prescription drug bill that was passed that cost hundreds of billions of dollars, by the previous administration and previous Congress, that was not paid for at all, and that was a major contributor to our current national debt.
That's why you will forgive me if sometimes I chuckle a little bit when I hear all these folks saying, "oh, big-spending Obama" -- when I'm proposing something that will be paid for and they signed into law something that wasn't, and they had no problem with it. Same people, same folks. And they say with a straight face how we've got to be fiscally responsible. (Applause.)
Now, having said that, paying for it is not simple. I don't want to pretend that it is. By definition, if we're helping people who currently don't have health insurance, that's going to cost some money. It's been estimated to cost somewhere between, let's say, $800 billion and a trillion dollars over 10 years. Now, it's important that we're talking about over 10 years because sometimes the number "trillion" gets thrown out there and everybody think it's a trillion dollars a year -- gosh, that -- how are we going to do that? So it's about a hundred billion dollars a year to cover everybody and to implement some of the insurance reforms that we're talking about.
About two-thirds of those costs we can cover by eliminating the inefficiencies that I already mentioned. So I already talked about $177 billion worth of subsidies to the insurance companies. Let's take that money, let's put it in the kitty. There's about $500 billion to $600 billion over 10 years that can be saved without cutting benefits for people who are currently receiving Medicare, actually making the system more efficient over time.
That does still leave, though, anywhere from $300 billion to $400 billion over 10 years, or $30 billion to $40 billion a year. That does have to be paid for, and we will need new sources of revenue to pay for it. And I've made a proposal that would -- I want to just be very clear -- the proposal, my preferred approach to this would have been to take people like myself who make more than $250,000 a year, and limit the itemized deductions that we can take to the same level as middle-class folks can take them. (Applause.)
Right now, the average person -- the average middle-class family, they're in the 28-percent tax bracket, and so they basically can itemize, take a deduction that is about 28 percent. I can take -- since I'm in a much higher tax bracket, I can take a much bigger deduction. And so as a consequence, if I give a charitable gift, I get a bigger break from Uncle Sam than you do.
So what I've said is let's just even it out. That would actually raise sufficient money. Now, that was my preferred way of paying for it. Members of Congress have had different ideas. And we are still exploring these ideas.
By the time that we actually have a bill that is set, that is reconciled between House and Senate and is voted on, it will be very clear what those ideas are. My belief is, is that it should not burden people who make $250,000 a year or less.
And I think that's the commitment that I made, the pledge that I made when I was up here running in New Hampshire, folks. So I don't want anybody saying somehow that I'm pulling the bait- and-switch here. I said very specifically I thought we should roll back Bush tax cuts and use them to pay for health insurance. That's what I'm intending to do. All right? (Applause.)
Okay, I've only got time for a couple more questions. Somebody here who has a concern about health care that has not been raised, or is skeptical and suspicious and wants to make sure that -- because I don't want people thinking I just have a bunch of plants in here. All right, so I've got one right here -- and then I'll ask the guy with two hands up because he must really have a burning question. (Laughter.)
All right, go ahead.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. I've worked in the medical field for about 18 years and seen a lot of changes over those 18 years. I currently work here at the high school as a paraprofessional. I have a little, you know, couple questions about the universal insurance program, which, if I understand you correctly, President Obama, you seek to cover 50 million new people over and above the amount of people that are currently getting health care at this moment.
THE PRESIDENT: It will probably -- I just want to be honest here. There are about 46 million people who are uninsured. And under the proposals that we have, even if you have an individual mandate, probably only about 37-38 million, so somewhere in that ballpark.
Q Okay, I'm off a little bit. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't over-selling my plan here.
Q That's okay, Mr. President. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: She's okay --
Q He winked at me. (Laughter.) My concern is for where are we going to get the doctors and nurses to cover these? Right now I know that there's a really -- people are not going to school to become teachers to teach the nursing staffs. Doctors have huge capacities; some of them are leaving private to go to administrative positions because of the caseload that they're being made to hold. I really do feel that there will be more demand with this universal health care and no added supply. I also understand that it was to be taken from Medicare, about $500 billion -- correct me if I'm wrong on that.
THE PRESIDENT: I just said that.
Q Okay. Also, you know, I'm very, very concerned about the elderly. I don't know if this is also correct, but I understand that a federal health board will sit in judgment of medical procedures and protocols to impose guidelines on all providers -- when to withhold certain types of care -- like, what is the point you get to when we say, I'm sorry that this cannot happen. Thank you very much for letting me ask those questions, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course. Well, first of all, I already mentioned that we would be taking savings out of Medicare that are currently going to insurance subsidies, for example. So that is absolutely true.
I just want to be clear, again: Seniors who are listening here, this does not affect your benefits. This is not money going to you to pay for your benefits; this is money that is subsidizing folks who don't need it. So that's point number one.
Point number two: In terms of these expert health panels -- well, this goes to the point about "death panels" -- that's what folks are calling them. The idea is actually pretty straightforward, which is if we've got a panel of experts, health experts, doctors, who can provide guidelines to doctors and patients about what procedures work best in what situations, and find ways to reduce, for example, the number of tests that people take -- these aren't going to be forced on people, but they will help guide how the delivery system works so that you are getting higher-quality care. And it turns out that oftentimes higher-quality care actually costs less.
So let me just take the example of testing. Right now, a lot of Medicare patients -- you have something wrong with you, you go to your doctor, doctor checks up on you, maybe he takes -- has a test, he administers a test. You go back home, you get the results, the doctor calls you and says, okay, now you got to go to this specialist. Then you have to take another trip to the specialist. The specialist doesn't have the first test, so he does his own test. Then maybe you've got to, when you go to the hospital, you've got to take a third test.
Now, each time taxpayers, under Medicare, are paying for that test. So for a panel of experts to say, why don't we have all the specialists and the doctors communicating after the first test and let's have electronic medical records so that we can forward the results of that first test to the others -- (applause) -- that's a sensible thing to do. That is a sensible thing to do.
So we want -- if I'm a customer, if I'm a consumer and I know that I'm overpaying $6,000 for anything else, I would immediately want the best deal. But for some reason, in health care, we continue to put up with getting a bad deal. We’re paying $6,000 more than any other advanced country and we're not healthier for it -- $6,000 per person more, per year. That doesn’t make any sense. So there's got to be a lot of waste in the system. And the idea is to have doctors, nurses, medical experts look for it.
Now, the last question that you asked is very important and I don't have a simple solution to this. If you look at the makeup of the medical profession right now, we have constant nurses shortages and we have severe shortages of primary care physicians. Primary care physicians, ideally family physicians, they should be the front lines of the medical profession in encouraging prevention and wellness. (Applause.) But the problem is, is that primary care physicians, they make a lot less money than specialists --
AUDIENCE MEMBER: And nurse practitioners.
THE PRESIDENT: And nurse practitioners, too. (Applause.) And nurses, you've got a whole other issue which you already raised, which is the fact that not only are nurses not paid as well as they should, but you also have -- nursing professors are paid even worse than nurses. So as a consequence, you don't have enough professors to teach nursing, which means that's part of the reason why you've got such a shortage of nurses.
So we are going to be taking steps, as part of reform, to deal with expanding primary care physicians and our nursing corps. On the doctors' front, one of the things we can do is to reimburse doctors who are providing preventive care and not just the surgeon who provides care after somebody is sick. (Applause.) Nothing against surgeons. I want surgeons -- I don't want to be getting a bunch of letters from surgeons now. I'm not dissing surgeons here. (Laughter.)
All I'm saying is let's take the example of something like diabetes, one of --- a disease that's skyrocketing, partly because of obesity, partly because it's not treated as effectively as it could be. Right now if we paid a family -- if a family care physician works with his or her patient to help them lose weight, modify diet, monitors whether they're taking their medications in a timely fashion, they might get reimbursed a pittance. But if that same diabetic ends up getting their foot amputated, that's $30,000, $40,000, $50,000 -- immediately the surgeon is reimbursed. Well, why not make sure that we're also reimbursing the care that prevents the amputation, right? That will save us money. (Applause.)
So changing reimbursement rates will help. The other thing that will really help both nurses and doctors, helping pay for medical education for those who are willing to go into primary care. And that's something that we already started to do under the Recovery Act, and we want to do more of that under health care reform. (Applause.)
All right, last question, last question right here. This is a skeptic, right?
Q I am a skeptic.
THE PRESIDENT: Good.
Q Thank you, Mr. President, for coming to Portsmouth. My name is Michael Layon (ph). I'm from Derry, New Hampshire, District 1 in the congressional district. I'm one of the people that turned myself in on the White House Web page the other day for being a skeptic of this bill. I'm proud to have done so.
THE PRESIDENT: Before you ask this question, just because you referred to it, can I just say this is another example of how the media ends up just completing distorting what's taken place. What we've said is that if somebody has -- if you get an e-mail from somebody that says, for example, "Obamacare is creating a death panel," forward us the e-mail and we will answer the question that's raised in the e-mail. Suddenly, on some of these news outlets, this is being portrayed as "Obama collecting an enemies list." (Laughter.)
Now, come on, guys. You know, here I am trying to be responsive to questions that are being raised out there --
Q And appreciate it. (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: And I just want to be clear that all we're trying to do is answer questions.
All right, go ahead.
Q So my question is for you, and I know in the White House the stand which you're on has often been referred to as the bully pulpit. Why have you not used the bully pulpit to chastise Congress for having two systems of health care -- one for all of us, and one for them? (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, look, first of all, if we don't have health care reform, the gap between what Congress gets and what ordinary Americans get will continue to be as wide as it is right now. And you are absolutely right -- I don't think Carol or Paul would deny they've got a pretty good deal. They've got a pretty good deal. I mean, the fact is, is that they are part -- by the way, I want you to know, though, their deal is no better than the janitor who cleans their offices; because they are part of a federal health care employee plan, it is a huge pool. So you've got millions of people who are part of the pool, which means they've got enormous leverage with the insurance companies, right? So they can negotiate the same way that a big Fortune 500 company can negotiate, and that drives down their costs -- they get a better deal.
Now, what happens is, those members of Congress -- and when I was a senator, same situation -- I could, at the beginning of the year, look at a menu of a variety of different health care options, most of them -- these are all private plans or they could be non-for-profit, Blue Cross Blue Shield, or Aetna, or what have you -- they would have these plans that were offered. And then we would then select what plan worked best for us.
But there were certain requirements -- if you wanted to sell insurance to federal employees there were certain things you had to do. You had to cover certain illnesses. You couldn't exclude for preexisting conditions. I mean, there were a lot of rules that had been negotiated by the federal government for those workers.
Now, guess what. That's exactly what we want to do with health care reform. (Applause.) We want to make sure that you are getting that same kind of option. That's what the health exchange is all about, is that you -- just like a member of Congress -- can go and choose the plan that's right for you. You don't have to. If you've got health care that you like, you don't have to use it.
So for example, for a while, Michelle, my wife, worked at the University of Chicago Hospital. She really liked her coverage that she was getting through the University of Chicago Hospital, so I did not have to use the federal employee plan. But I had that option available.
The same is true for you. Nobody is going to force you to be part of that plan. But if you look at it and you say, you know what, this is a good deal and I've got more leverage because maybe I'm a small business or maybe I'm self-employed, or maybe I'm like Lori and nobody will take me because of a preexisting condition, and now suddenly got these rules set up -- why wouldn't I want to take advantage of that?
Now, there are legitimate concerns about the cost of the program, so I understand if you just think no matter what, no matter how good the program is, you don't think that we should be paying at all for additional people to be covered, then you're probably going to be against health care reform and I can't persuade you. There are legitimate concerns about the public option -- the gentleman who raised his hand. I think it's a good idea, but I understand some people just philosophically think that if you set up a public option, that that will drive public insurance out -- or private insurers out. I think that's a legitimate concern. I disagree with it, but that's a legitimate debate to have.
But I want everybody to understand, though, the status quo is not working for you. (Applause.) The status quo is not working for you. And if we can set up a system, which I believe we can, that gives you options, just like members of Congress has options; that gives a little bit of help to people who currently are working hard every day but they don't have health care insurance on the job; and most importantly, if we can make sure that you, all of you who have insurance, which is probably 80 or 90 percent of you, that you are not going to be dropped because of a preexisting condition, or because you lose your job, or because you change your job -- that you're actually going to get what you paid for, that you're not going to find out when you're sick that you got cheated, that you're not going to hit a lifetime cap where you thought you were paying for insurance but after a certain amount suddenly you're paying out of pocket and bankrupting yourself and your family -- if we can set up a system that gives you some security, that's worth a lot.
And this is the best chance we've ever had to do that. But we're all going to have to come together, we're going to have to make it happen. I am confident we can do so, but I'm going to need your help, New Hampshire.
Thank you very much, everybody. God bless you. (Applause.)
END
2:15 P.M. EDT

 

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                            August 7, 2009
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
ON THE ECONOMY
Rose Garden
1:16 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon, everybody. I'd like to say a few words about the state of our economy, and what we're doing to put Americans back to work and build a new foundation for growth.
Last week, we received a report on America's Gross Domestic Product -- a key measure of our economic's [sic] health -- and it showed marked improvement over the last few months. This morning, we received additional signs that the worst may be behind us. Though we lost 247,000 jobs in July, that was nearly 200,000 fewer jobs lost than in June, and far fewer than the nearly 700,000 jobs a month that we were losing at the beginning of the year.
Today we're pointed in the right direction. We're losing jobs at less than half the rate we were when I took office. We've pulled the financial system back from the brink, and a rising market is restoring value to those 401(k)s that are the foundation of a secure retirement. We've enabled families to reduce the payments on their mortgages, making their homes more affordable and reducing the number of foreclosures. We helped revive the credit markets and opened up loans for families and small businesses.
While we've rescued our economy from catastrophe, we've also begun to build a new foundation for growth. That's why we passed an unprecedented Recovery Act less than a month after I took office -- and did so without any of the earmarks or pork-barrel spending that's so common in Washington. Now, there's a lot of misinformation about the Recovery Act. So let me repeat what it is and what it is not. The plan is divided into three parts.
One-third of the money is for tax relief that's going directly to families and small businesses. For Americans struggling to pay rising bills with shrinking wages, we've kept a campaign promise to put a middle class tax cut in the pocket of 95 percent of working families -- a tax cut that began showing up in paychecks about four months ago. We also cut taxes for small businesses on the investments they make, and substantially increased loans through the Small Business Administration.
Another third of the money in the Recovery Act is for emergency relief that is helping folks who have borne the brunt of this recession. For Americans who were laid off, we expanded unemployment benefits -- a measure that's already made a difference in the lives of 12 million Americans. We're making health insurance 65 percent cheaper for families that rely on COBRA while they're looking for work. And for states facing historic budget shortfalls, we provided assistance that saved the jobs of tens of thousands of teachers and police officers and other public service workers.
So these two thirds of the Recovery Act have helped people weather the worst phase of this recession, while saving jobs and stabilizing our economy. The last third is dedicated to the vital investments that are putting people back to work today to create a stronger economy tomorrow. Part of that is the largest new investment of infrastructure in America since Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System back in the 1950s. These are jobs rebuilding America: upgrading roads and bridges, and renovating schools and hospitals.
Now as we begin to put an end to this recession, we have to consider what comes next -- because we can't afford to return to an economy based on inflated profits and maxed out credit cards; an economy where we depend on dirty and outdated sources of energy; an economy where we're burdened by soaring health care costs that serve only the special interests. This won't create sustainable growth, it won't shrink our deficit, and it won't create jobs.
And that's why we've put an end to the status quo that got us into this crisis. We cannot turn back to the failed policies of the past, nor can we stand still. Now is the time to build a new foundation for a stronger, more productive economy that creates the jobs of the future.
And this foundation has to be supported by several pillars to our economy. We need a historic commitment to education, so that America is the most highly-educated, well-trained workforce in the world. We need health insurance reform that brings down costs, provides more security for folks who have insurance, and affordable options for those who don't. And we need to provide incentives that will create new, clean energy sources for our industries. That's where the jobs of the future are, that is the competition that will shape the 21st century, and that's a race that America must win.  So we have a lot further to go. As far as I'm concerned, we will not have a true recovery as long as we're losing jobs, and we won't rest until every American that is looking for work can find a job. I have no doubt that we can make these changes. It won't be easy, though. Change is hard -- especially in Washington. We have a steep mountain to climb, and we started in a very deep valley. But I have faith in the American people -- in their capacity for hard work and innovation, in their commitment to one another, and their courage to face adversity.
We've seen already that strength of character over the course of this recession. Across the country, people have persevered even as bills have piled up and work has been hard to come by. Everywhere I go, I meet Americans who've kept their confidence in their country and in our future. That's how we've pulled the economy back from the brink. That's why we're turning this economy around. I am convinced that we can see a light at the end of tunnel, but now we're going to have to move forward with confidence and conviction to reach the promise of a new day.
Thank you very much.
END
1:23 P.M. EDT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                      August 7, 2009

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT FUNDRAISER FOR STATE SENATOR CREIGH DEEDS

August 6, 2009
Hilton McLean Tysons Corner
Tysons Corner, Virginia
6:25 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, Virginia! (Applause.) It is good to be in Virginia. (Applause.) It's not that far away, but -- (laughter) -- it's still just good to be here. I still get a good vibe from Virginia. And I just want to begin by telling you one of the reasons I love Virginia is because early in my campaign, January -- 2007 -- (laughter) -- I'm trying to remember it, it's all a blur -- right after I announced I called up the new governor of Virginia, and obviously he was new, not very experienced -- (laughter) -- because he decided he was going to endorse my candidacy at a time when nobody could pronounce my name. (Laughter and applause.) And he has been at my side ever since, and he's been on the side of the people of Virginia every since. Give it up for Tim Kaine. (Applause.)
Now, there's a pattern that's emerged in Virginia. You had a guy named Mark Warner -- (applause) -- who recognized that the old tired politics of division and slash-and-burn weren’t serving the American people and the people of Virginia anymore. So he came in with a different message. He said, I'm going to figure out what works. I'm going to figure out how we can get parties to work together, to invest in education and make sure that every child in Virginia can get a great education. I'm going to figure out how we can start making the long-term investments that will make Virginia competitive in the global economy. And working together with a whole bunch of folks, he was able to put Virginia on the path of extraordinary growth
Then Tim Kaine comes in and builds on that legacy -- (applause) -- and even in tough times has continued to keep Virginia on an upward trajectory where it has been able to survive tough times -- better than most -- because of the long-term investments, the vision that Tim Kaine has maintained as governor of Virginia. He hasn’t been distracted by the petty politics and the trivial politics and the game-playing. He constantly asks himself each and every day, what do I need to do to make life a little bit better for the people of Virginia.
So now this great Commonwealth of Virginia has the opportunity to continue that tradition with somebody who has that same spirit of pragmatism, of cooperation, of listening to people even when other people don't agree with him, of civility, an ability to focus not on the short-term politics of an issue but the long-term that will make a difference. And that is Creigh Deeds. And I know that the people of Virginia are going to continue that tradition. (Applause.)
Now, I'll admit I'm a little biased because I was a state senator for eight years, and lo and behold, Creigh Deeds has been a senator for eight years. (Applause.) He has some wonderful daughters; I've got wonderful daughters. (Applause.) He's got kind of a funny name -- (laughter) -- I've got kind of a funny name. (Laughter.) So there's some things that just create a bond between the two of us. (Laughter.)
But the reason I'm standing here is because when I look at his record as a prosecutor, when I look at the way that he was able to marshal support for things like Megan’s Law and Amber Alerts that have practical consequences in making sure that our children are safe; when I think about the way he was able to partner with Mark Warner and Tim Kaine in order to create strong investments in education even when they were confronting a fiscal crisis -- doing it in a responsible way that didn’t undermine the long-term growth of Virginia; when I look at the way he conducts himself in his campaign, speaking truth to power, but always doing it in a way that reminds us that we have to bring people together instead of driving them apart -- I know he is the right person for Virginia. And you know it, too. That's why you're supporting him. (Applause.)
But, look, let's be honest. This is going to be a tough race. This is not going to be -- Tim and I, as we were walking in, we said, we don't like doing easy -- we never -- we don't do things easy. (Laughter.) We like kind of squeaking it out to create more excitement, enthusiasm, and give reporters something better to write about. We don't believe in blowout victories. (Laughter.)
AUDIENCE MEMBER: -- your second term! (Laughter and applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: But this is going to be a tough race. It's going to be a tough race because Virginia, although it has been moving in the right direction, is still a purple state. It still has traditions that make a lot of people independent, a lot of people suspicious of ideologies on other -- either side. That's part of what's going to make this tough. And it's also going to be tough because the economic environment is tough. I don't think any of us can deny it, Virginia has weathered this economic storm better than most states. But unemployment is still high. People are still losing their homes. Folks are still looking at their 401(k) and wondering whether it's going to bounce back.
And so in that kind of environment, wherever the incumbent party is, it's always going to have some challenges. Even if people, when they really stop to think about it, recognize that this is mostly a mess that was inherited, people are still going to, rightly, hold the party in power responsible. What's your plan? What's your agenda? How are you going to move the state forward? And that's right and proper, because we can't spend all our time looking backwards or making excuses. Our job is to look forward and to determine how are we going to, regardless of what cards we're dealt, how are we going to make sure that families here in Virginia and all across America are able to succeed.
Now, I think that we have the best case to make that having brought this economy back from the brink, having inherited an unprecedented crisis, still we are now on the path where markets have stabilized, the banks are no longer in meltdown mode; we're starting to see housing for the first time increase in prices in three years; that we're starting to see a kind of resurgence of optimism that in this environment, if we are willing to make the investments in the new foundation for long-term growth, then we're going to succeed.
And the kinds of things that we need for that new foundation are exactly the kinds of things that Creigh is talking about -- (applause) -- making sure that we continue to invest in early childhood education and everything that's necessary for our children to succeed in math and science; making sure that they can finance their college educations, because we know that whoever trains their children best today, that's going to be the country that's able to compete tomorrow.
Making sure that we are tapping into a new clean-energy economy -- (applause) -- that is focused on harnessing the innovation and the dynamism of the American people; and making sure that we're creating a business environment in which small businesses and large businesses are rewarded for success; making sure that we've got a transportation infrastructure that works for people to get to and from work, but also allows businesses to succeed. (Applause.)
Those are the kinds of measures and steps that Creigh has stood for since he first entered into politics. That's what's going to help guide this economy into the future, into the 21st century.
So the key right now for all of us is making sure that we fight through the doubts, we fight through the cynicism; we hit the ground -- I want to make sure that everybody who was as activated around my campaign just a few months ago is not sitting back and suddenly saying their work is done. (Applause.) I need everybody who was in Virginia and helped give us a big win during the primary and helped give us a historic win in the general election -- that everybody is working just as hard, knocking on doors, making phone calls, talking to their friends, talking to their neighbors. (Applause.)
We have just started to change this country, and we need a partner like Creigh Deeds to finish the work that we just began. (Applause.)
Thank you very much, Virginia. Love you. (Applause.)
END
6:36 P.M. EDT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                            August 7, 2009
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT RALLY FOR STATE SENATOR CREIGH DEEDS
August 6, 2009
Hilton McLean Tysons Corner
Tysons Corner, Virginia
7:02 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, Virginia! (Applause.) Are you fired up? (Applause.) Are you ready to go? (Applause.) It is good to be in Virginia -- (applause) -- a place that has been good to me. (Applause.) First of all, it's just good to be next to a guy who spends every single day thinking about your future, thinking about your children's future and the future of this commonwealth; one of my best friends; somebody who is dedicated to the kind of public service that I so deeply believe in -- please give it up for your Governor, Tim Kaine. (Applause.)
I think some of you know that Tim was the first statewide official outside of Illinois to endorse me. (Applause.) In Richmond, Virginia. I called him up just a few weeks after I'd announced, and he was kind of new so he didn't know any better. (Laughter.) So he said, yeah, sure, I'll endorse you. (Laughter.) I think his wife, Anne, had something to do with it also. And he has stood with me ever since, on every tough battle that we've had. And so I am just grateful for him. He was there when people couldn't even pronounce my name. (Laughter.)
AUDIENCE: Obama! Obama! Obama! Obama!
THE PRESIDENT: Now, part of the reason I like being in Virginia is because there is a tradition here that has been developing, starting with your former governor and now outstanding senator, Mark Warner. (Applause.) A tradition that -- it starts off with the basic idea that we're all in this together. Mark Warner came in at a time when the fashionable politics was the nasty kind of politics, the slash-and-burn politics, the arguing and arguing without everything -- ever getting anything done kind of politics. And Mark Warner said, you know what, we can try something different. What we're going to do is we're going to be pragmatic instead of ideological. We are going to try to bring people together rather than push them apart. (Applause.) We are going to make sure that we listen to other people's ideas. We're going to bring labor and business together. (Applause.) We're going to make sure that we don't have a southern Virginia and a northern Virginia, we've got one commonwealth of Virginia. (Applause.)
And so what he was able to do was to shape a kind of politics here in the commonwealth that has resulted in one of the best-managed states in the country; a state that was able to make investments in education even as it was dealing with a fiscal crisis; a state that has now been able to navigate some of the toughest economic times that we've seen in the history of the country because of that foundation of civility and practicality and hard work.
Tim Kaine embodied that tradition. And he has now continued it during his term in office. (Applause.) That's not just a stroke of good luck here in the state of Virginia. It's because you stood up and chose that kind of politics. (Applause.) You decided to take the better way, and now you’ve got the chance to keep moving forward by electing somebody who is cut from the same cloth, somebody who has that same vision for the commonwealth -- Creigh Deeds. (Applause.)
Now, I admit I'm a little biased here. I'm a little biased. First of all, Creigh Deeds and I both have some wonderful daughters. Creigh Deeds and I both served in the state senate. I served for eight years, and he's now served for eight years. Creigh Deeds and I both have -- let's face it -- sort of funny names. (Laughter.) Still trying to figure out the spelling of Creigh. (Laughter.) But that's not the reason I'm here tonight. It's not just because of my personal bias.
This is a man who's spent his life working to do right by his family, and the last two decades working to do right by the people of Virginia. (Applause.) As a prosecutor, as a delegate, as a state senator, he has worked tirelessly to advance this commonwealth that he's loved his whole life.
He wrote Megan's Law, advocated for the Amber Alert program to protect our children. (Applause.) He's worked to preserve open space and protect the environment. (Applause.) When Virginia faced that financial crisis a few years back, he was on Mark Warner's team up to make sure that you reformed the budget and controlled spending. And even in the face of that crisis, record investments in education, laying a foundation for Virginia's growth.
Creigh will continue the progress that has been made in this great commonwealth. He will continue to make that progress -- especially when it comes to education. You heard the commitment to education that he made today. (Applause.) And I know he will follow through because that's been the key to our lives. Growing up, neither one of us had much. But we had mothers who loved us, and pushed us; who instilled a belief that education was the best shot that we were going to have at life. (Applause.) We are living proof that education is the single best investment we can make in our future and our children's future. And the people of Virginia understand that. (Applause.)
That's why he's going to invest in pre-kindergarten programs, and support our teachers, and expand access to higher education -- he knows the smartest workforce is going to attract the best jobs. (Applause.) And I want to partner with Creigh Deeds because we're going to make some commitments at the national level. I've already made sure that we strengthen and improve our education system from the cradle to graduation; from college through career -- so that by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. (Applause.) And we're going to have them right here in Virginia.
Smart decisions. Sound investments. A civility to our politics. That's why Virginia has become the nation's number-one state to do business in. That's why Virginia is going to come out of the other side of this recession stronger and better-prepared than before -- because of the forward-thinking leadership of Mark Warner and Tim Kaine and Creigh Deeds. (Applause.)
Now, we have to be honest, though. Even though Virginia is weathering this recession, this storm, better than most states -- primarily because of this Democratic leadership -- I know that too many families in Virginia are still hurting. Unemployment is still over 7 percent. Folks here are still losing their homes or being crushed by health premiums that have doubled over the past nine years. But without the steps we've taken, our troubled economy and the pain it's inflicting on Virginia's families would be a lot worse. (Applause.)
I'm always amused when I hear some folks, some critics, start talking about, well, look at the mess that the economy is in. (Laughter.) They seem to have some selective memory. (Applause.) It didn’t just happen somehow. (Laughter.) When my administration took office about six months ago, we faced the worst recession since the Great Depression. We were losing an average of 700,000 jobs a month. It was nearly impossible to take out a home loan, or a car loan, or a student loan, or loans for small business to make payroll and keep the doors open. And economists all across the ideological spectrum, left and right, were saying we might be tipping over into a Great Depression.
At the time, there were some who thought that doing nothing was an option. Remember that?
AUDIENCE: Yes!
THE PRESIDENT: I disagreed. I thought we had to act -- boldly and firmly. (Applause.) And so we took steps to arrest our housing crisis and avert the collapse of our financial system. Less than one month after taking office, we enacted the most sweeping recovery package in history -- and, by the way, we did it without earmarks and the pork-barrel projects that the previous administration had loaded up with. (Applause.)
Now, there's been a lot of misinformation out there about the recovery plan. I hope you don't mind, Virginia, I just want to set the record straight. (Applause.) This is very simple stuff here. The Recovery Act is made up of three parts. The first part, about one-third of the Recovery Act is a middle-class tax cut for 95 percent of working Americans -- (applause) -- a tax cut. And by the way, that's exactly what I promised you when I was running for President of the United States. (Applause.)
So when you hear the naysayers and the critics saying this plan isn't money well-spent, just remember one-third of it is going right into your pockets. (Applause.) That seems like well-spent money to me. (Applause.)
Another third -- all right, so one-third tax cuts. Sometimes I see folks outside with signs, don't raise my taxes. I haven’t raised your taxes. (Laughter.) I've lowered your taxes. That's point number one.
Another third was relief for people and states who had fallen on hard times because of the economic crisis. So we expanded unemployment benefits to help folks who had lost their jobs and we're looking for work. (Applause.) That's made a difference for about 150,000 Virginians. We made health insurance cheaper for families who rely on COBRA after they've lost a job and they're out there looking for a job. We made it 65 percent cheaper. (Applause.) That's you right there. That's you right there.
I've got some testimony. I've got an "Amen" corner right here. (Applause.)
We helped states facing historic budget shortfalls, which prevented layoffs and protected essential services. In Virginia, that means 13,000 folks who are still working in our schools, more than 300 deputy sheriffs who are still keeping communities safe, state colleges and universities like the UVA and Virginia Tech that haven't had to raise tuition -- (applause) -- because of the recovery package. (Applause.)
So I just want to know -- these critics, I want to make sure, are they opposed to the tax cuts that went into your pockets? Are they opposed to making sure that we're not cutting back on vital services and giving states some relief? That's two-thirds of the Recovery Act.
Now, the last third is making the vital investments that are putting people back to work today to create a stronger economy tomorrow -- (applause) -- the largest new investment of infrastructure in America since Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System back in the 1950s. Around here, that means upgrading the Lake Barton Dam, improving the Fairfax County Parkway, building new roads across Northern Virginia to ease congestion and make your lives a little better. (Applause.)
So step by step, we are moving forward. The American people understand the recession was years in the making. It didn’t just start last month. That bank crisis didn’t happen on my watch. (Applause.) Let's get the history straight. (Applause.)
AUDIENCE: Obama! Obama! Obama!
THE PRESIDENT: And then we start getting into the whole issue of spending. Now, let me tell you, Virginia has a history of prudent fiscal policy. That's what Tim Kaine has been about, and that's what Mark Warner has been about, and that's what Creigh Deeds is going to be about. (Applause.)
So now you've got folks on the other side of the aisle pointing at the federal budget and somehow trying to put that at our feet. Well, let's look at the history. When I walked in, we had a $1.3 trillion deficit. That was gift-wrapped and waiting for me when I walked in the Oval Office. (Laughter.) Without my policies we'd have an even higher deficit going forward. The one exception is the recovery package that we had to do in order to get this economy moving again. (Applause.)
So you can't go out there and charge up the credit card, go on an all kinds of things shopping spree that didn’t grow the economy, hand over the bill to us, and then say, why haven’t you paid it off yet. (Applause.) I got that bill from you. (Laughter.) So we've got some work to do. I don't mind, by the way, being responsible; I expect to be held responsible for these issues because I'm the President. (Applause.) But I don't want the folks who created the mess -- I don't want the folks who created the mess do a lot of talking. I want them just to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess. (Applause.) I don't mind cleaning up after them, but don't do a lot of talking. (Applause.)
Am I wrong, Virginia?
AUDIENCE: No!
THE PRESIDENT: So I'm convinced that the actions we've taken in the first six months have helped stop our economic freefall. (Applause.) We're losing jobs at half the rate we were at the beginning of this year. Our financial system is no longer on the verge of collapse. The market is up. Housing prices are up for the first time in nearly three years. We may just be seeing the very beginnings of the end of this recession.
But if we're going to move from recovery to prosperity, we need to rebuild our economy stronger than before. Because even before this crisis hit, we had an economy that was failing to create the kinds of good jobs with rising incomes for middle class families that is the bedrock of America. There was a lot of money being made at the very top, but it wasn’t an economy that was built to compete in the 21st century -- one where we spend more on health care than any nation but aren't any healthier. That's not sensible. Where we've been slow to invest in clean energy technologies that have created new jobs and new industries in other countries; where we watched our graduation rates lag behind too much of the world. That's not a recipe for success.
That's why, even as we work to rescue our economy from this crisis, we're now laying the new foundation for the country to thrive in the 21st century. (Applause.) We are going to prepare every child, everywhere in America, to compete and win with a world-class education. We're going to invest in the clean energy jobs of the future and train our workers for those jobs. We're going to finally protect consumers and bring down the health care costs that are driving this nation into debt. We're going to pass reform to ensure that a health care system doesn't just work for insurance companies, but for all the people of Virginia and all the people of the United States. (Applause.)
AUDIENCE: Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can!
THE PRESIDENT: Yes we can.
There are those out there who want us to go down the same old path -- the path where we just throw up our hands and say, "We can't do anything about education. It's too hard. We can't do anything about health care -- it's too tough." A path where our children fall behind, our workers lose out, they watch jobs being shipped overseas; our health care costs keep rising, our oil dependency keeps on growing. All we do is just then bicker and point fingers.
Well, that's not the future I accept for the United States of America. That's not the future that Creigh Deeds accepts for the future of Virginia. (Applause.) That's not what you want for your children and your grandchildren. We're setting a new course for this nation. It's the one that Mark Warner and Tim Kaine and Creigh Deeds have already begun blazing right here in Virginia.
They know that leadership is more than just about managing crises. It's about making smart decisions for the future, even in the toughest times. That's what Creigh Deeds will do. And that's why every single one of you is going to have to do the work to put him into office, to carry on that tradition of leadership, to bring about a brighter future for generations of Virginians. (Applause.)
We did not come this far by lowering our sights or scaling back our dreams. That's not the American way. It's not about looking backwards, it's about looking forward. (Applause.) We didn't become the greatest nation on Earth because we just stood still in the face of great challenges, shrugged our shoulders, and said "no, we can't." We are Americans. We're a forward-looking people. We stare down challenges. We've always faced the future not with fear, but with determination; not with doubt, but with hope. We've always taken great chances and reached for new horizons, and remade the world around us. (Applause.)
Last year, Virginia, you helped lead a movement of Americans who believed that their voices could make a difference -- (applause) -- a movement of young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Latino, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled, not disabled -- everybody was involved. (Applause.) It didn’t come from Washington -- it came from the bottom up. (Applause.) That's what we need to do in this race. That's what Creigh Deeds is committed to. That's what this election is all about. (Applause.)
I need every one of you to knock on doors and make phone calls, and get fired up once again so that we can go towards the future, confident with Creigh Deeds leading the great commonwealth of Virginia.
Thank you very much, everybody. God bless you. (Applause.)
END
7:26 P.M. EDT
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
_________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                                      August 6, 2009

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
ON THE CONFIRMATION OF JUDGE SONIA SOTOMAYOR

Diplomatic Reception Room
3:38 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. Well, I am pleased and deeply gratified that the Senate has voted to confirm Judge Sonia Sotomayor as our nation’s 111th Supreme Court justice.
I want to thank the Senate Judiciary Committee, particularly its Chairman, Senator Leahy -- as well as its Ranking Member, Senator Sessions -- for giving Judge Sotomayor a thorough and civil hearing. And I thank them for doing so in a timely manner so that she can be fully prepared to take her seat when the Court’s work begins this September.
The members of our Supreme Court are granted life tenure and are charged with the vital and difficult task of applying principles set forth at our founding to the questions and controversies of our time. Over the past 10 weeks, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the full Senate have assessed Judge Sotomayor’s fitness for this work. They've scrutinized her record as a prosecutor, as a litigator, and as a judge. They've gauged her respect for the proper role of each branch of our government, her commitment to faithfully apply the law to the facts at hand, and her determination to protect our core constitutional rights and freedoms.
And with this historic vote, the Senate has affirmed that Judge Sotomayor has the intellect, the temperament, the history, the integrity and the independence of mind to ably serve on our nation’s highest court.
This is a role that the Senate has played for more than two centuries, helping to ensure that "equal justice under the law" is not merely a phrase inscribed above our courthouse door, but a description of what happens every single day inside the courtroom. It's a promise that, whether you’re a mighty corporation or an ordinary American, you will receive a full and fair hearing. And in the end, the outcome of your case will be determined by nothing more or less than the strength of your argument and the dictates of the law.
These core American ideals -- justice, equality, and opportunity -- are the very ideals that have made Judge Sotomayor’s own uniquely American journey possible. They're ideals she's fought for throughout her career, and the ideals the Senate has upheld today in breaking yet another barrier and moving us yet another step closer to a more perfect union.
Like so many other aspects of this nation, I'm filled with pride in this achievement and great confidence that Judge Sotomayor will make an outstanding Supreme Court justice. This is a wonderful day for Judge Sotomayor and her family, but I also think it's a wonderful day for America.
Thank you very much, everybody.
Q Are you happy with the 68 votes, sir?
THE PRESIDENT: I'm very happy.
END
3:41 P.M. EDT