11:40 A.M. EDT

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Good morning, everybody. President Lee, on behalf of the American people, it is my pleasure to welcome you to Washington -- "Hwang Yong Hamnida."

PRESIDENT LEE: Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: I'm looking forward to continuing our conversation over lunch, and I know that First Lady Michelle Obama is very much delighted to host your wife today, as well.

The Republic of Korea is one of America's closest allies. Our friendship has been forged through a history of shared sacrifice, and it is anchored in our shared democratic values. And, Mr. President, I'm pleased that the friendship between our countries has only grown stronger under your leadership.

We meet at a time of great challenges. On the Korean peninsula, North Korea has abandoned its own commitments and violated international law. Its nuclear and ballistic missile programs pose a grave threat to peace and security of Asia and to the world. In the face of these threats and provocations, the people of the Republic of Korea have shown a steadiness and a resolve that has earned the respect of the United States and of the world.

Today, President Lee and I reiterated our shared commitment to the complete denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. We have reaffirmed the endurance of our alliance, and America's commitment to the defense of the Republic of Korea. And we discussed the measures that we are taking with our partners in the region -- including Russia, China and Japan -- to make it clear to North Korea that it will not find security or respect through threats and illegal weapons.

That united international front has been on full display since North Korea's ballistic missile test in April, and was further galvanized by its recent nuclear test. On Friday, the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution that called for strong steps to block North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Now we must pursue a sustained and robust effort to implement this resolution together with our international partners. And in addition to the Korean peninsula, we are committed to a global effort to pursue the goal of a world without nuclear weapons -- an effort that I will be discussing later this summer in Moscow and at the G8.

So I want to be clear that there is another path available to North Korea -- a path that leads to peace and economic opportunity for the people of North Korea, including full integration into the community of nations. That destination can only be reached through peaceful negotiations that achieve the full and verifiable denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. That is the opportunity that exists for North Korea, and President Lee and I join with the international community in urging the North Koreans to take it.

President Lee and I also discussed our efforts to confront the global economic crisis. Earlier this year in London, we agreed upon bold and sustained action to jumpstart growth and to prevent a crisis like this from never happening again. Today, we reaffirmed this effort, as well as our commitment to resist protectionism and to continue our close collaboration in the run-up to the next meeting of the G20 in Pittsburgh.

In addition to taking immediate action to put our economies on the path to recovery, both President Lee and I want to build a foundation for new prosperity. In particular, we believe that the United States and the Republic of Korea can partner together on behalf of clean energy and sustainable growth, so that we're working together to build the jobs and the industries of the future.

Finally, I think it's important to note that we are releasing a joint statement laying out a shared vision for our alliance in the 21st century. Our friendship has often, understandably, focused on security issues, particularly in Northeast Asia. But we're also committed to a sustained strategic partnership with the Republic of Korea on the full range of global challenges that we're facing -- from economic development to our support for democracy and human rights; from nonproliferation to counterterrorism and peacekeeping.

The challenges of our young century can only be met through partnership, and the United States is honored to partner with the Korean people. We will be resolute in the defense of our security. We will collaborate on behalf of innovation and opportunity. And we will strengthen and deepen the friendship among our people. That's our commitment as friends and allies, and I look forward to working with President Lee on behalf of a more peaceful and prosperous future in Asia and around the world.

Thank you so much.

PRESIDENT LEE: Thank you.

(As translated.) Today, President Obama and I and -- the people of the United States have extended to us their warmest welcome, and I would like to thank them sincerely. President Obama and I met last time in April in London, during the sidelines of the G20, and today is our second meeting.

During my talks with President Obama, we had very substantive talks. We, of course, talked about the security situation surrounding the Korean peninsula, but also about the future of our Korea-U.S. alliance and our joint vision for this future. And of course we have agreed on the joint vision for the future, and I think this is a testament of our common commitment, because for the last 60 years since the Korean War, our relationship has been one of a strong security alliance and a partnership. Now, the future in this new era is about not only strengthening our mutual partnership but also working together side by side to tackle issues of global concern.

And on that regard, I am extremely pleased to note that today is a meaningful and very significant day for Korea-U.S. alliance of really upgrading to a new plateau of our relationship and partnership. I take this opportunity to sincerely thank the great people of America for their selfless sacrifice in defending my country and its people, and on behalf of the Korean people, thank you.

As reiterated by President Obama, we agreed that under no circumstance are we going to allow North Korea to possess nuclear weapons. We also agreed to robustly implement U.N. Security Council Resolution 1874, and of course all parties will faithfully take part in implementing this resolution.

Also, we agreed that based on the firm cooperation between the U.S. and Korea, the five countries taking part in the six-party talks will discuss new measures and policies that will effectively persuade North Korea to irrevocably dismantle all their nuclear weapons programs. President Obama reaffirmed this firm commitment to ensuring the security of South Korea through extended deterrence, which includes the nuclear umbrella, and this has given the South Korean people a greater sense of security.

President Obama and I also talked about the KORUS FTA and welcomed the initiation of working-level consultations to make progress on the issues surrounding the KORUS FTA and agreed to make joint efforts to chart our way forward on the agreement.

I also took time to invite President Obama to visit South Korea. And I also conveyed to him our warmest gratitude on behalf of the Korean people to the people of America. Once again, I'm very pleased to note that he and I engaged in very constructive discussions, and I'm very pleased with the results.

Once again, I thank President Obama and the people of the United States. Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Okay, we've got time for a couple of questions. Scott Wilson at the Post.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. North Korea has said it should be recognized as a nuclear power and has set that as a precondition for normal relations with the United States and with other nations. Given its belligerent response to the recent sanctions and the ambitious nature of its nuclear program, does your administration -- is it coming to the realization that recognizing North Korea as a country that's going to have nuclear weapons for a long time is one way to go? And if so, what influences does that have on your policy options?

And to President Lee, do you believe your country is currently under threat of attack from the North given its recent rhetoric? Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: We have continually insisted that North Korea denuclearize. The Republic of Korea agrees with this position. Other allies like Japan agree with this position. China and Russia agree with this position. The United Nations Security Council reflects this view. We will pursue denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula vigorously.

So we have not come to a conclusion that North Korea will or should be a nuclear power. Given their past behavior, given the belligerent manner in which they are constantly threatening their neighbors, I don't think there's any question that that would be a destabilizing situation that would be a profound threat to not only the United States' security but world security.

North Korea also has a track record of proliferation that makes it unacceptable for them to be accepted as a nuclear power. They have not shown in the past any restraint in terms of exporting weapons to not only state actors but also non-state actors.

So what we've said is, is that there is a path for North Korea to take in which they are joining the world community, becoming integrated into the world economy, able to feed their own people, able to provide prosperity for their people. I know that the Republic of Korea welcomes that kind of neighbor. And obviously there's a strong historic bond between the Korean peoples that should be affirmed. But in order to take that path, North Korea has to make a decision and understand that prestige and security and prosperity are not going to come through the path of threatening neighbors and engaging in violations of international law.

PRESIDENT LEE: Right now, North Korea, there was a question about whether we fear an imminent attack by North Korea. Sixty years ago, North Korea invaded South Korea and they began a war. After that, there were numerous amount of threats leveled against South Korea ever since. However, South Korea, we have always been very firm in our response and always prepared. And of course this is based firmly on the firm cooperation and partnership and alliance between Korea and the United States. And North Koreans, when they look at the firm partnership and alliance that we have between our two countries, they will think twice about taking any measures that they will regret.

And again, this firm alliance that we have between the United States and Korea is going to prevent anything from happening. And of course North Korea may have -- may wish to do so, but of course they will not be able to do so.

Q (As translated.) A question going out to President Lee. North Korea recently said that they will not return to the six-party talks. They have denounced the U.N. Security Council resolution and said they will not give up their nuclear weapons program. Can you, sir, talk about whether you talked about how you plan to proceed forward, and did you talk about this with President Obama?

And of course the continuing threat emanating from North Korea -- a South Korean worker has been and is still detained by the North Koreans. What are your thoughts about the maintenance of the Kaesong industrial complex, and did you talk about -- President Obama, or were there any concerns from the Americans about the Kaesong industrial complex?

PRESIDENT LEE: North Korea has been resisting and they've reacted aggressively to the new U.N. Security Council resolution, which is quite expected. And of course the North Koreans may react by firing another round of missiles or taking actions. We can also expect that from them, as well. However, North Koreans must understand that they will not be able to gain compensation by provoking a crisis. This has been a pattern in the past, but this will no longer be. The firm U.S.-Korea cooperation and alliance will not allow that. And the recent Security Council resolution is not simply about words; it is about taking follow-up action and vigorously implementing the U.N. Security Council resolution. And we'll make sure that we fully implement the U.N. Security Council resolution.

Like I said, the North Koreans must understand that their past behavior will not stand. And of course not only the U.S.-Korea close partnership, but Japan, China, and the rest of the international community will take part in this effort. And now the North Koreans will come to understand that this is different, that they will not be able to repeat the past or their past tactics and strategies. I urge the North Koreans to fully give up their nuclear weapons programs and ambitions, and to become a responsible member of the international community.

With regards to the Kaesong industrial complex, the North Korean authorities are demanding unacceptable demands, and we will not accept such demands being laid out by the North Koreans. Of course the South Korean government is very much for maintaining the Kaesong complex because the Kaesong industrial complex is a channel of dialogue between the two Koreas. And also, another fact that we must not overlook is the fact that there are 40,000 North Korean workers currently working in Kaesong industrial complex. If the Kaesong industrial complex were to close, these 40,000 North Korean workers will lose their jobs.

And therefore I ask that -- I urge the North Koreans not to make any unacceptable demands because we cannot really know what will happen if they continue on this path.

And also the North Koreans have been detaining a South Korean worker. They haven't been giving us any explanation, and also we know that there are two American journalists being currently held by the North Koreans. I urge the North Koreans to release not only the two American journalists but also the South Korean worker -- without any conditions, to release them as soon as possible. The international community is asking the North Koreans to take that path. And once again, I urge in the strongest terms that they release these two American journalists, as well as the Korean worker being held.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. Since it's such a pleasant day, I was hoping you'd consent to let me ask two questions. The first one, on reports that there's a new policy on intercepting North Korean ships at sea, if you could say anything about that. And are you concerned that that could provoke North Korea to new levels, higher levels of hostility?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, this is not simply a U.S. policy; this is a international policy. This was part of what the Security Council resolution calls for, is the interdiction of arms shipments. How that's going to be implemented, how we approach cooperation between various countries to enforce this, is something that the United States, South Korea, China, Russia, all relevant actors -- Japan -- all relevant actors will be discussing in the months to come.

But I want to emphasize something that President Lee said. There's been a pattern in the past where North Korea behaves in a belligerent fashion, and if it waits long enough is then rewarded with foodstuffs and fuel and concessionary loans and a whole range of benefits. And I think that's the pattern that they've come to expect.

The message we're sending -- and when I say "we," not simply the United States and the Republic of Korea, but I think the international community -- is we are going to break that pattern. We are more than willing to engage in negotiations to get North Korea on a path of peaceful coexistence with its neighbors, and we want to encourage their prosperity. But belligerent, provocative behavior that threatens neighbors will be met with significant, serious enforcement of sanctions that are in place.

And I think it may not have been fully acknowledged the degree to which we have seen much tougher sanctions voted out unanimously in fairly rapid order over the last several weeks. And I expect that that signals the degree to which we're serious about enforcement.

Q And secondly, Mr. President, tomorrow you're going to be rolling out your financial regulation plan. And I know you're not going to want to step all over what you're going to say tomorrow. However, we do know from your advisors that you plan to recommend the creation of a new agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency. So you'll have the CFPA, you've got the Fed, the SEC, the FDIC and on and on; it's like alphabet soup. Why did you decide not to consolidate agencies, but instead to add to the agencies? Isn't too many agencies part of the problem?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: You're right, I don't want to step on my announcement tomorrow. So let me just speak in broad principles, and then tomorrow you'll have a chance to ask questions of the administration about exactly what we've proposed.

The broad principle is that a lack of oversight, a series of regulatory gaps allowed financial institutions -- not just banks, but non-bank institutions -- to engage in wild risk-taking that didn't simply imperil those institutions but imperiled the United States economy and had a profound recessionary effect on the world economy. We have to make sure that we've got a updated regulatory system that hasn't been significantly changed since the 1930s to deal with enormous global capital flows and a range of new instruments and risk-taking that has been very dangerous for the American people.

We are going to put forward a very strong set of regulatory measures that we think can prevent this kind of crisis from happening again. We expect that Congress will work swiftly to get these laws in place. I want to sign them, and we want to get them up and running.

And I think when you see the overall approach that we're taking, you'll see that we have not, in fact, added a whole host of regulatory agencies. In fact, there's going to be streamlining, consolidation, and additional overlap so that you don't find people falling through the gaps, whether it's on the consumer protection side, the investor protection side, the systemic risk that we need to make sure is avoided on all those issues that's going to be a much more effectively integrated system than previously.

But it's going to be, as usual, a heavy lift, because there are going to be people who want to keep on taking these risks, counting on U.S. taxpayers to bail them out if their bets go bad. And you'll hear a lot of chatter about, we don't need more regulation; government needs to get off our backs. There's a short memory, unfortunately, and I think that's what some of the special interests and lobbyists are going to be counting on, that somehow we've forgotten the disaster that arose out of their reckless behavior. And I'm going to keep on reminding them so we make sure that we get something in place that prevents this kind of situation from happening again.

Q (As translated.) Question going out to President Obama. You spoke about how the two leaders, you agreed to move forward the KORUS FTA. However, in certain segments of -- here in the United States, there are calls that are resistant to the KORUS FTA because of automobile issues and others. And of course there are calls for proponents of the KORUS FTA. When do you expect to submit the KORUS FTA? Are you willing to submit it sometime this year?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: One of the things that President Lee and I discussed in London, not just bilaterally but with other world leaders, is the importance at a time when the global economy has been devastated by recession that we do not resort to protectionist measures; that we continue to affirm the importance of free trade between countries in order to increase everyone's prosperity.

Now, as you know, trade negotiations are always difficult between any country because, although over time trade can increase prosperity for all, in the short term, various industries want to know how is this going to affect them.

In Korea there are issues of beef imports. In the United States there are questions about whether there's sufficient reciprocity with respect to cars. These are all understandable, legitimate issues for negotiation. What I've done is to affirm to President Lee that we want to work constructively with the Republic of Korea in a systematic way to clear some of these barriers that are preventing free trade from occurring between our two countries.

Once we have resolved some of the substantive issues, then there's going to be the issue of political timing and when that should be presented to Congress. But I don't want to put the cart before the horse -- I don't know if that's an expression in Korean. But we want to make sure that we have the -- a agreement that I feel confident is good for the American people, that President Lee feels confident is good for the Korean people, before we start trying to time when we would present it. But I am committed to moving forward on a path that will increase commercial ties that are already very strong between our two countries.

Okay. Thank you very much, everybody.

Q Iran?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: It was only -- let's see -- I think seven hours ago or eight hours ago when I -- I have said before that I have deep concerns about the election. And I think that the world has deep concerns about the election. You've seen in Iran some initial reaction from the Supreme Leader that indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns about the election.

Now, it's not productive, given the history of U.S.-Iranian relations, to be seen as meddling -- the U.S. President meddling in Iranian elections. What I will repeat and what I said yesterday is that when I see violence directed at peaceful protestors, when I see peaceful dissent being suppressed, wherever that takes place, it is of concern to me and it's of concern to the American people. That is not how governments should interact with their people.

And my hope is, is that the Iranian people will make the right steps in order for them to be able to express their voices, to express their aspirations. I do believe that something has happened in Iran where there is a questioning of the kinds of antagonistic postures towards the international community that have taken place in the past, and that there are people who want to see greater openness and greater debate and want to see greater democracy. How that plays out over the next several days and several weeks is something ultimately for the Iranian people to decide. But I stand strongly with the universal principle that people's voices should be heard and not suppressed.

Okay? All right. Thank you, guys.

END
12:07 P.M. EDT

2:46 P.M. EDT

MRS. OBAMA:  Hey!  Good afternoon everyone.  Please be seated.  We just want to keep you on your toes.  If you're looking that way and I come in that way, then you're completely confused, right?  Keep you on your toes.  Well, welcome to the White House as we kick off the Music Series:  The Jazz Studio.  How has it been for you all?  It's been good?  (Applause.)

Well, I want to just thank a few people.  I want to thank Jazz at Lincoln Center, the Thelonious Monk Jazz Institute and the Duke Ellington Jazz Festival for making today possible and for keeping jazz alive.  So let's give everyone a round of applause.  (Applause.)  

Today's event exemplifies what I think the White House, the People's House, should be about.  This is a place to honor America's past, celebrate its present and create its future.  And that's why all of you all are here today.  It's about you, the future.  And what better example of this is -- than jazz, America's indigenous art form. 

Globally recognized as America's music, originating in the great city of New Orleans just a century ago through the African American experience, today jazz is performed and listened to by people of all ethnicities, backgrounds, ages and creeds.  Indeed, jazz is considered by many to be America's greatest artistic gift to the world.

The understanding and appreciation of jazz is integral to understanding and appreciating American history and culture.  It's an outstanding artistic model of individual expression and democratic expression, as well.  And there's probably no better example of democracy than a jazz ensemble:  individual freedom, but with responsibility to the group.

It's essential that we preserve, develop and expand this treasured art form for our future generations by recognizing and elevating the importance of our jazz education programs in every single school across America.

The budding jazz -- young jazz musicians from across the country who are with us today, all you young talents, are the future guardians of the music.  We salute you and your teachers.  We are counting on you to keep the music vital and evolving for generations to come.  And as jazz has been demonstrating every night for more than a hundred years, when we work together there's nothing that we can't do.

So I'm through talking.  Now we get to the fun part.  We can hear some music.  So I hope you guys enjoy your time here together.  I hope you get to see some of this White House.  I heard a few of you were skipping on your way up to the White House.  I hope you keep skipping and having fun here.  I brought my own family with me today because I want to keep them alive and aware of all kinds of music other than hip hop.  (Laughter.)  So it's so important for me to have you here that I brought them here, as well. 

And jazz has been a part of my life since I was a little girl.  My mother's father, who we call "South Side," before there was room-to-room speakers he had a speaker in every house, in every room in his house, and he played it 24 hours a day at -- on the highest volume he could put it on.  And that's how I grew up in my household.  At Christmas, birthdays, Easter, it didn't matter, there was jazz playing in our household. 

So it means so much to me to be able to bring that music here to the White House and to have you all celebrating with us.  So have a good time.  Thanks so much.  (Applause.)
                                                             
END
2:51 P.M. EDT

DR. BIDEN: Good morning. Thank you for inviting me for such an important day. And I want to say thank you to the Mayor and to Chuck and to all the elected officials.

And to Dr. Peruggi — and Marty — as the granddaughter of Dominic Giacoppa, I like that name too. Thanks to President Peruggi — your decades of work on behalf of higher education have been vital to the field and have helped turn Kingsborough into one of the top community colleges in America. I congratulate you.

And, today, I congratulate all of you. All of you graduates, all of your proud mothers and fathers, husbands and wives, sons and daughters. You did it! And I think you all deserve a round of applause.

The truth is — I feel right at home on a community college campus. I have been an educator for 28 years and have spent the last 16 at a community college. In fact, I continue to teach English at a college in Northern Virginia, not too far from the White House. There was never a question in my mind when we moved to Washington that I would continue to teach.

People often ask me why I choose to teach at a community college. Well — the answer is simple: It’s the students. It’s you. Because I know who you are:

You are Grace Simmons, who after 16 years as a lab technician lost her job and came here to Kingsborough College for retraining. You are graduating today, Grace, with a nursing degree, and I understand you have a job offer waiting at Lutheran Medical Center. Good for you!

You are Taheem Lomax. Stand up, Taheem. Taheem came to Kingsborough as the first in his family to go to college. He became one of 10 students to win a scholarship to study in Austria — the first time you ever left Brooklyn. Now you are transferring into a four-year college and pursuing your dream of starting a non-profit to help children around the world.

You are Jaqueline Carter-Cutting — born in Guyana and moved to the US in 2000. After being laid off from your job as a flight attendant in October of 2001, you joined the US Army Reserves. You were injured while serving abroad — and then you returned here to Kingsborough for your nursing degree. Graduating alongside you today is your daughter, Sherifah Carter.

You all came to this college at many different stages in life, and, today, after hard work and sacrifice, long hours and sleepless nights, you all walk across the same stage, having accomplished something no one can ever take away from you.

I am a community college teacher not simply because I hope to inspire you — but because you inspire me.

Every year, I meet students who have doubts, who are unsure of their destinies, unaware of the abilities they possess. And every year, around this time, I see those same students, in caps and gowns, walk across a stage and receive a diploma, knowing that, yes, they cast those doubts aside, and, yes, they did what they set out to do.

It’s a feeling you can get at most universities, but it’s especially strong at community colleges — where the gap between what is imagined at the beginning and what is achieved at the end can be so wide.

Just watching you close those gaps is exactly why I am a community college professor. I often say that my students are my heroes, and I am not exaggerating. You are all heroes. And today we celebrate your heroism.

The education you receive here at Kingsborough goes so far beyond the four corners of a diploma. So far outside the pages of an English textbook or the walls of a research lab.

What you have learned here is nothing so much as the confidence it takes to succeed, the knowledge that, hey, I set out to do this, and I did it, and now I can do so much more.

Years from now, you may not be able to recite the lines of poetry from your English textbooks; you may not be able to do the complex math problems you finally conquered — but you will be able to say, "No matter what is put in front of me, I can do it."

Over the last 16 years, I have seen firsthand the power of community colleges to change lives. And now the good news is — now we have a president, Barack Obama, who sees the same thing.

The President’s goal is for the United States to once again have the highest proportion of college graduates by the year 2020 — he knows community colleges will play a major part in achieving this goal. He also knows that community colleges are critical to the administration’s efforts to promote access to job training or additional education for unemployed Americans.

We know that community colleges have been meeting these critical needs for decades. This is nothing new to you. 

Community colleges are leaders in creating training programs for green jobs, for manufacturing, and for targeted areas like Kingsborough’s own marine technology program.

I have always said community colleges are one of America’s best-kept secrets — and now we have a president and an administration who are highlighting their contribution, bringing more students to colleges like Kingsborough, so they, too, can gain the skills and the confidence they need to succeed in a new era.

The education gained on campuses just like this will provide the knowledge that will power the 21st century. You’re not just here amassing knowledge; you’re sparking a quest for discovery that will last a lifetime.

Some of you will go on to four-year universities; some to graduate school; and some into the workforce. No matter where you go — let your education continue. Keep your eyes open to the world around you. And always see in others what they are capable of being and becoming.

See it. Pass it on. You need to inspire them. Show them the good that can come from a great education. Show them what they’re capable of. Show them, above all else, that they can do it too!

Thank you. Congratulations, graduates.

###
 

12:07 P.M. CDT

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Green Bay. (Applause.) It's good to see you. Thank you. It is great to be back in Green Bay. (Applause.) We are hoping that both the Packers and the Bears do better this year. (Applause.) Come on, we can bring everybody together.

I want to make just a few acknowledgments; we've got some wonderful special guests here today. First of all, can everybody please give Laura a huge round of applause for sharing her story? (Applause.) I want to thank our hosts, Principal Brian Davis and his beautiful family, and Superintendent Gregg Maass, please gives them a big round of applause. (Applause.) Your outstanding governor, Jim Doyle, is here; give him a big round of applause. (Applause.) Lieutenant Governor Barbara Lawton is here, give Barbara a big round of applause. (Applause.) Congressman Steve Kagen is here, Congressman. (Applause.) Your own Mayor, Jim Schmitt. (Applause.) And Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett is here as well. (Applause.)

I want to thank all the tribal leaders of Wisconsin who are with us here today. (Applause.) And they couldn't be with us, but I want to acknowledge the great leadership that you're getting in the United States Senate from Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold, give them a big round of applause. (Applause.)

This is a town hall meeting, but if you don't mind I want to make a few comments at the outset, sort of to frame the discussion, and then we'll get to the fun part and you guys can bombard me with questions.

As I said, I want to thank Southwest High School for hosting us. (Applause.) I especially want to thank Laura for sharing her story. It takes courage to do that and it takes even more courage to battle a disease like cancer with such grace and determination, and I know her family is here and they're working and fighting with her every inch of the way.

Laura’s story is incredibly moving. But sadly, it's not unique. Every day in this country, more and more Americans are forced to worry about not just getting well, but whether they can afford to get well. Millions more wonder if they can afford the routine care necessary to stay well. Even for those who have health insurance, rising premiums are straining family budgets to the breaking point -- premiums that have doubled over the last nine years, and have grown at a rate three times faster than wages. Let me repeat that: Health care premiums have gone up three times faster than wages have gone up. So desperately needed procedures and treatments are put off because the price is too high. And all it takes is a single illness to wipe out a lifetime of savings.

Now, employers aren’t faring any better. The cost of health care has helped leave big corporations like GM and Chrysler at a competitive disadvantage with their foreign counterparts. For small businesses, it’s even worse. One month, they’re forced to cut back on health care benefits. The next month, they've got to drop coverage. The month after that, they have no choice but to start laying off workers.

For the government, the growing cost of Medicare and Medicaid is the biggest threat to our federal deficit, bigger than Social Security, bigger than all the investments that we've made so far. So if you're worried about spending and you're worried about deficits, you need to be worried about the cost of health care.

We have the most expensive health care system in the world, bar none. We spend almost 50 percent more per person on health care than the next most expensive nation -- 50 percent more. But here's the thing, Green Bay: We're not any healthier for it; we don't necessarily have better outcomes. Even within our own country, there are a lot of the places where we spend less on health care, but actually have higher quality than places where we spend more. And it turns out Green Bay is a good example. Right here in Green Bay, you get more quality out of fewer health care dollars than many other communities across this country. (Applause.) That's something to be proud of. I want to repeat that: You spend less; you have higher quality here in Green Bay than in many parts of the country. But across the country, spending on health care keeps on going up and up and up -- day after day, year after year.

I know that there are millions of Americans who are happy, who are content with their health care coverage -- they like their plan, they value their relationship with their doctor. And no matter how we reform health care, I intend to keep this promise: If you like your doctor, you'll be able to keep your doctor; if you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan. (Applause.)

So don't let people scare you. If you like what you've got, we're not going to make you change. But in order to preserve what's best about our health care system, we have to fix what doesn't work. For we've reached the point where doing nothing about the cost of health care is no longer an option. The status quo is unsustainable. If we don't act, and act soon to bring down costs, it will jeopardize everybody's health care. If we don't act, every American will feel the consequences in higher premiums -- which, by the way, means lower take-home pay, because it's not as if those costs are all borne by your employer; that's money that could have gone to giving you a raise -- in lost jobs and shuttered businesses, in a rising number of uninsured and a rising debt that our children and their children will be paying off for decades. If we do nothing, within a decade we will be spending one out of every $5 we earn on health care. And in 30 years, we'll be spending one out of every $3 we earn on health care. And that's untenable. It's unacceptable. I will not allow it as President of the United States. (Applause.)

Health care reform is not something I just cooked up when I took office. Sometimes I hear people say, he's taking on too much, why is he -- I'm not doing this because I don't have enough to do. (Laughter.) We need health care reform because it's central to our economic future. It's central to our long-term prosperity as a nation. In past years and decades there may have been some disagreement on this point, but not anymore. Today, we've already built an unprecedented coalition of people who are ready to reform our health care system: physicians and health insurers; businesses and workers; Democrats and Republicans.

A few weeks ago, some of these groups committed to doing something that would've been unthinkable just a few years ago: They promised to work together to cut national health care spending by $2 trillion over the next decade. And that will bring down costs. It will bring down premiums. That's exactly the kind of cooperation we need.

But the question now is how do we finish the job? How do we permanently bring down costs and make quality, affordable health care available to every single American? And my view is that reform should be guided by a simple principle: We will fix what's broken and we build on what works. (Applause.)

In some cases there's broad agreement on the steps we should take. So in our Recovery Act that we already passed -- hey, buddy -- my guy in the cap, he was waving at me. (Laughter and applause.) In the Recovery Act, we've already made investments in health IT -- that's information technologies -- and electronic medical records that will reduce medical errors, save lives, save money, and still ensure privacy. We also need to invest in prevention and wellness programs to help Americans live longer and healthier lives. (Applause.)

But the real cost savings will come from changing the incentives of a system that automatically equates expensive care with better care. We've got to move from addressing -- we've got to address flaws that increase profits but don't actually increase the quality of care for patients.

We have to ask why places like Geisinger Health systems in rural Pennsylvania, or Intermountain Health in Salt Lake City, or communities like Green Bay can offer high-quality care at costs well below average, but other places in America can't. We need to identify the best practices across the country, learn from the successes, and then duplicate those successes everywhere else.

And we should change the warped incentives that reward doctors and hospitals based on how many tests and procedures they do -- (applause) -- even if those tests and procedures aren't necessary or result from medical mistakes. Doctors didn't get into the medical profession to be bean counters or paper pushers. They're not interested in spending all their time acting like lawyers or business executives. They became doctors to heal people, and that's what we have to free them to be able to do.

We also have to provide Americans who can't afford health insurance more affordable options. That's a economic imperative but it's also a moral imperative, because we know that when somebody doesn't have health insurance, they're forced to get treatment at the ER, and all of us end up paying for it. The average family pays a thousand dollars in extra premiums to pay for people going to the emergency room who don't have health insurance. So you're already subsidizing other folks; it's just you're subsidizing the most expensive care. You'd be better off subsidizing to make sure they were getting regular checkups. We're already paying for it. It's just it's hidden in your premiums.

So what we're working on is the creation of something called the Health Insurance Exchange, which would allow you to one-stop shop for a health care plan, compare benefits and prices, choose the plan that's best for you. If you're happy with your plan, you keep it. None of these plans, though, would be able to deny coverage on the basis of pre-existing conditions. (Applause.)

Every plan should include an affordable, basic benefits package. And if you can't afford one of these plans, we should provide assistance to make sure that you can. (Applause.) I also strongly believe that one of the options in the Exchange should be a public insurance option. (Applause.) And the reason is not because we want a government takeover of health care -- I've already said if you've got a private plan that works for you, that's great. But we want some competition. If the private insurance companies have to compete with a public option, it'll keep them honest and it'll help keep their prices down. (Applause.)

Now, covering more Americans is obviously going to require some money up front. We'll save money when they stop going to the emergency room and getting regular checkups, but it's going to cost some money up front. Helping families lower their costs, there's going to be a cost to this. And it comes at a time when we don't have a lot of extra money to spend, let's be honest. When I came in we had a $1.3 trillion deficit. And with the economic recession that we're going through, tax revenues are down -- I was talking to Governor Doyle -- tax revenues are down, more people are seeking help from the state. So we've got a lot of pressure on our budget.

So that's why I've already promised that reform cannot add to our deficit over the next 10 years. And to make that happen, we've already identified hundreds of billions of dollars worth of savings in our budget -- savings that will come from steps like reducing Medicare overpayments to insurance companies and rooting out waste and fraud and abuse in both Medicare and Medicaid. And I'll be outlining hundreds of billions of dollars more in savings in the days to come. And I'll be honest, even with these savings, reform will require some additional up front resources. And that's why I've proposed that we scale back how much the highest-income Americans can deduct on their taxes back -- take it back to the rate that existed under the Reagan years, and we could use some of that money to help finance health care reform. (Applause.)

In all these reforms, our goal is simple: the highest-quality health care at the lowest-possible cost. Let me repeat what I said before: We want to fix what's broken, build on what works. As Congress moves forward on health care legislation in the coming weeks there are going to be different ideas and disagreements about how to achieve this goal. And I welcome all ideas; we've got to have a good debate. What I will not welcome, what I will not accept is endless delay or a denial that reform needs to happen. (Applause.)

Because when it comes to health care, this country can't continue on its current path. I know there are some who will say that it's too expensive. I know some people say it's too complicated. But I can assure you: The cost of doing nothing is going to be a lot higher in the years to come. Our deficits will be higher. Our premiums will keep going up. Our wages will be lower. Our jobs will be fewer. Our businesses will suffer.

So to those who criticize our efforts, I ask them, "What's the alternative?" What else do we say to all the families who spend more on health care than on housing or on food? What do we tell those businesses that are choosing between closing their doors and letting their workers go? What do we say to Americans like Laura, a woman who has worked all her life; whose husband has worked; whose family has done everything right; a brave and proud woman whose child's school recently took up a penny drive to help pay her medical bills? What do we tell them? (Applause.)

Here's what I'm going to tell them: that after decades of inaction, we have finally decided to fix what's broken about health care in America. (Applause.) We have finally decided it's time to give every American quality health care at an affordable cost. (Applause.) We have decided to invest in reforms that will bring costs down now. (Applause.) We've decided to bring costs down now and in the future. And we've decided to change the system so that our doctors and health care providers are free to do what they trained and studied and worked so hard to do: to make people well again. That's what we can do in this country right now, at this moment.

So I don't want to accept "no" for an answer. We need to get this down, but I'm going to need your help. That's why I want your thoughts, your questions on this and any other issues.

Thank you very much, Green Bay. God bless you. Thank you. (Applause.)

Okay. Here's what we're going to do. I've got about 15, 20 minutes. Everybody sit down. (Laughter.) And here's how we're going to work it. There are no prearranged questions here. You just raise your hand. I haven't pre-selected anybody. I'm going to go girl-boy-girl-boy --(laughter) -- so that I'm not accused of bias in any way, all right. And I won't be able to get to every single question, but I'll try to get to as many as possible.

So there are microphones in the audience. If you can wait until the microphone comes to you, and that way everybody will be able to hear your question. Stand up and introduce yourself as well, that would be helpful.

This young lady right here, right here, since you're near a microphone. There you go.

Q Good afternoon, Mr. President. I am Paulette Garren (phonetic). As a self-employed individual, I spend approximately $8,000 annually on my health insurance premium, and it's a $2,000 deductible -- no dental, no vision, no prescription coverage. As my business is declining because of the economy we have, I am now in a situation where I'm taking savings to help pay for food and housing, because I also still don't want to lose my health insurance. And I will be frank and honest with you: I am a supporter of a single-payer system over any other system, because I do -- (applause) -- thank you -- I do believe that it will meet your three criteria and be the most economically feasible plan that we have.

When you were speaking, you mentioned that if we go with a public and a private option, that the public option will keep the private insurers honest. My concern is that we will end up in a situation like we have with Medicare, where Medicare is basically a subsidy of private insurance companies, because folks are able to buy Medicare Advantage. It seems to me that we would take that same scenario and increase it outward for the entire country. And that is why I still support single payer, and I know that at one point you did. And I would ask that it still be on the table for consideration, and thank you so much for your time. (Applause.)

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you for the great question.

Let me just talk about some of the different options that are out there, because sometimes there's been confusion in the press and the public, and people use, you know, politics in talking about the issue. There are some folks who say, "socialized medicine." You hear that all the time, "socialized medicine." Well, socialized medicine would mean that the government would basically run all of health care. They would hire the doctors, they would run the hospitals. They would just run the whole thing. Great Britain has a system of socialized medicine.

Nobody is talking about doing that, all right? So when you hear people saying, "socialized medicine," understand I don't know anybody in Washington who is proposing that, certainly not me.

Socialized medicine is different from a single-payer plan. Now, the way a single-payer plan works is that you still have private doctors, private hospitals, providers, et cetera, but everything is reimbursed through a single payer; usually, the government. So Medicare would be an example of a single-payer plan. Doctors don't work for Medicare, but Medicare reimburses for services that are provided to seniors who are on Medicare.

There have been proposals to have, essentially, Medicare for all, a single-payer plan for all Americans, and -- that person likes it. (Laughter.) And there are some appealing things to a single-payer plan, and there are some countries where that's worked very well.

Here is the thing: We're not starting from scratch. We've already got -- because of all kinds of historical reasons, we have primarily an employer-based system that uses private insurers alongside a Medicare plan for people above a certain age; and then you've got Medicaid for folks who are very poor and don't have access to health care. So we've got sort of a patchwork system. And it was my belief and continues to be my belief that whatever we might do if we were just starting from scratch, that it was important in order to get it done politically, but also to minimize disruptions to families that we start with what we have, as opposed to try to completely scrap the system and start all over again.

And so what my attitude was if you've got an employer-based system -- and a lot of people still get their health insurance through their jobs -- obviously, you're self-employed, so there's a different category, but the majority of people still get their health insurance through their employer. Rather than completely disrupt things for them, my attitude is let them keep the health insurance that they've got, the doctors that they have -- there's still a role for private insurance -- but number one, let's have insurance reform so that you can't eliminate people for preexisting conditions -- (applause) -- so that there's none of the cherry picking that's going on to try to just get the healthiest people insured and get rid of the sick people. So you've got to set up some rules for how insurance companies operate.

Number two, that for people who are self-employed, for small businesses, for others, they should have an option that they can go to if they can't get insurance through the private marketplace. That's why I've said that I think a public option would make sense. What that then does is it gives people a choice. If they're happy with what they've got, if they're employed by somebody who provides them with good health care, you can keep it, you don't have to do anything. But if you don't have health insurance, then you have an option available to you.

Now, how this debate is evolving in Washington, unfortunately sometimes kind of falls into the usual politic. So what you've heard is some folks on the other side saying, "I'm opposed to a public option because that's going to lead to government running your health care system." Now, I don't know how clearly I can say this, but let me try to repeat it: If you've got health insurance that you're happy with through the private sector, then we're not going to force you to do anything. All we're saying is for the 46 million people who don't have health insurance, or for people who've got health insurance, like you, who are self-employed but the premiums and the deductibles are so high that you almost never get prevention services -- you've put off going to a doctor until you're really sick because of the out-of-pocket expenses -- let's change some of those incentives so that we get more people getting prevention, more people getting health care to keep them healthy, as opposed to just treating them when they get sick.

And I think that we can come up with a sensible, common sense way that's not disruptive, that still has room for insurance companies and the private sector, but that does not put people in the position where they are potentially bankrupt every time they get sick.

Now, how this debate is going to evolve over the next eight weeks -- I'm very open-minded. And if people can show me, here's a good idea and here's how we can get it done and it's not something I've thought of -- I'm happy to steal people's ideas. (Laughter.) I'm not ideologically driven one way or another about it. (Applause.)

The one thing that I do think is critically important, though, is for self-employed people -- because there are a lot of self-employed people here and a lot of small business people -- they don't have the ability to pool their health insurance risk. And what that means is part of the reason that -- typically if you work for a big company, you get a better deal on health insurance than if you're just working for a small company is because there's a bigger pool. And that means that -- each of us have a certain risk of getting sick, but if that's spread around, everybody's premiums can be lowered because the total risk for everybody is somewhat lower.

If you're self-employed, you don't have access to that same pool. And part of what we have to do -- and that's where a public plan potentially comes in, or at least some mechanism to allow you to join a big pool. That will help drive down your costs immediately: your out-of-pocket costs for premiums, lower your deductibles. And what I'd like to see, as I said, is that every plan includes not only prohibitions against discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions, but also every plan should have incentives for people to use preventive services and wellness programs so that they can stay healthier.

You are somebody who I think could be directly impacted and directly helped if Congress gets this thing done and gets it on my desk, I hope, by sometime in October of this year. (Applause.)

Okay, it's a guy's turn. It's a guy's turn. This gentleman in the suit.

Q Welcome to Green Bay, Mr. President. It's an honor to have you here.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, sir.

Q My name is John Corpus (phonetic). I am fortunate enough to be here with my 10-year-old daughter who is missing her last day of school for this. I hope she doesn't get in trouble.

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, no. (Laughter.) Do you need me to write a note?

Q I'll take you up on that actually, Mr. President. (Laughter and applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: All right, go ahead. I'll start writing it now. What’s her name?

Q John Corpus.

THE PRESIDENT: No, her. (Laughter.)

Q Well, considering I have some people here from work that are very interested in --

THE PRESIDENT: No, no, I'm serious. What's your daughter's name?

Q Her name is Kennedy.

THE PRESIDENT: Kennedy. All right, that's a cool name. (Laughter.)

Q That's a very cool name, thank you.

THE PRESIDENT: All right, I'm going to write to Kennedy's teacher. (Laughter.) Okay, go ahead, I'm listening to your question.

Q Thank you, sir. I work in the health system and we work with employers; we work with payers, brokers, everybody to try to lower costs for employers. We have retail health clinics, walk-in clinics, regular primary clinics and emergency departments. And everybody is trying to do something now, but all I'm hearing is about what's going to happen long term.

And my question is: What is a time line that we have set up for this? What do you see happening, especially in the area of working with employers to either offer more insurance, or, for the uninsured, being able to get them something now?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, look, we're not going to be able -- whatever reforms we set up, it will probably take a couple of years to get it in place. Here you go, Kennedy. There you go. (Laughter and applause.)

So whatever reforms we pass, it's going to take a couple of years to get all the reforms and all the systems in place. There are some things that I think we should be able to do fairly quickly. For example, the pre-existing condition issue, some of the insurance reform issues I think we should be able to get in place more rapidly.

The thing that I think we're going to have to spend the most time thinking about and really get right -- and you probably know more about this than I do, because you're working with a lot of these employers and insurers and so forth -- is how do we change the medical delivery systems that can either drive costs way up and decrease quality or drive cost down and improve quality?

Let me describe to you what's happening, part of the reason that Green Bay is doing a better job than some other parts of the country. There are places where doctors typically work together as teams. And they start off asking themselves, "How can we provide the best possible care for this patient?" And because they're coordinating, they don't order a bunch of duplicative tests. And the primary care physician who initially sees the patient is in contact with all the specialists so that in one meeting they can consult with each other and make a series of decisions. And then they don't over-prescribe, and they make decisions about how quickly you can get somebody out of a hospital, because oftentimes being in a hospital actually increases the incidence of infection, for example. So there's a whole series of decisions that can be made that improve quality, increase coordination, but actually lower costs.

Now, the problem is more and more what our health care system is doing is it's incentivizing each doctor individually to say, "How many tests can I perform? Because the more tests I perform, the more I get paid." And it may not even be a conscious decision on the part of the doctor; it's just that the medical system starts getting in bad habits. And it's driven from a business mentality instead of a mentality of, how do we make patients better? (Applause.)

And so what you've got is a situation where, for example, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, is famous for some of the best quality and some of the lowest cost. People are healthier coming out of there, they do great. And then you've got places -- there's a town in McAllen, Texas, where costs are actually a third higher than they are at Mayo, but the outcomes are worse.

So the key for us is to figure out, how do we take all the good ideas in the Mayo Clinic and spread them all across the country so that that becomes the dominant culture for providing health care? That's going to take some time. It involves changing how we reimburse doctors. It involves doctors forming teams and working in a more cooperative way. And that's kind of a slow, laborious process.

So here's the bottom line: If we pass health care reform this year, my expectation would be that immediately, families are going to see some relief on some issues, but we will not have the whole system perfectly set up probably until, say, four or five years from now. And I think that's a realistic time frame.

But if we wait -- if we said, well, you know, since we're not going to get it right, right away, let's put this off until two or four or five years from now -- it's never going to happen. That's what's been going on for the last 50 years now -- people have said, we can't do it right now. And as a consequence, it never gets done. Now is the time to do it, all right? (Applause.)

Okay, it's a girl's turn. I see a lady right there.

Q Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. You've talked a little bit about the government plan and the competition with other insurance companies, and we all know that in the insurance business everything is about managing risk. And I guess I'd like to know what your vision is for how we would better manage the risk, especially if there is going to be a government program. What's your philosophy about primary care or the role of primary care? Do you subscribe to the medical home theory? How do you engage patients in this model so that that risk can be better managed and we can ultimately result in a population that has better health at a lower cost?

THE PRESIDENT: You sound very knowledgeable. Are you in the health care system?

Q Yes, I am. My name is Chris Waleski (phonetic) and I'm with (inaudible).

THE PRESIDENT: Well, look, in some ways you answered your own question because I think that the more we are incentivizing high quality primary care, prevention, wellness, management of chronic illnesses, the one things that it turns out is that about 20 percent of the patients account for 80 percent of the care and the costs of the health care system. And if we can get somebody first of all who is overweight to lose weight so that they don't become diabetic, we save tons of money. Even after they've become diabetic, if we are working with them to manage their regiment of treatments in a steady way, then it might cost us $150 when you prorate the costs for a counselor to call the diabetic on a regular basis to make sure they're taking their meds, and as a consequence, we don't pay $30,000 for a foot amputation. (Applause.)

So there are all sorts of ways that I think that we want to improve care, and that helps us manage risk.

Now, people are still going to get sick, and they are still going to be really catastrophic costs. And there have been a lot of ideas floated around in Congress, are there ways that we can help to underwrite some of the catastrophic care that takes place that would help lower premiums.

I'm open to a whole range of these ideas, and one of the things, one of the approaches that I've tried to take is to not just put down my plan and say, "It's my way or the highway." First of all, one of the things it turns out is Congress doesn't really like you to just tell them exactly what to do. (Laughter.) Steve Kagen can testify to that. (Laughter.) So it's always better to -- always better to be in a collaborative mode, and to listen.

But part of the reason is it's not just the politics of it, it's also because these are genuinely complicated issues, and nobody has all the right answers. So what we have to do is to find the 80 percent of stuff that everybody agrees on, things like electronic medical records that can eliminate errors in hospitals, because right now nurses can't read the doctors' handwriting. But if it comes out on a PDA that they're reading, then they're more likely to be accurate. And reducing paperwork -- everybody agrees, there's no reason why you should have to fill out five, six, eight forms every time you go to see a doctor. Everybody knows that. (Applause.) Huge amounts of wasted money. Electronic billing, and billing that you can understand -- everybody knows that's something that needs to be done. (Applause.)

So there are things that can be done that Republican, Democrat, liberal, conservative, we all know need to happen. The challenge is going to revolve around, how do we deal with the 20 percent of the stuff where people disagree?

This whole issue of the public plan is a good example, by the way. I mean, right now, a number of my Republican friends have said, we can't support anything with a public option. It's not clear that it's based on any evidence as much as it is their thinking; their fear that somehow, once you have a public plan, that government will take over the entire health care system. I'm trying to be fair in presenting what their basic concern is. And that's going to be a significant debate. And what we're trying to explain is, is that all we're trying to make sure of is that there is an option out there for people where the public -- where the free market fails. And we've got to admit that the free market has not worked perfectly when it comes to health care, because you've got a lot of people -- (applause) -- who are really getting hurt: 46 million uninsured, a whole bunch of more people who are underinsured who are seeing their premiums and deductibles rise. So I think a lot of the questions you're asking, those details are exactly what we're trying to work out.

This next eight weeks is going to be critical, though. And you need to be really paying attention and putting pressure on your members of Congress to say, there's no excuses. If we don't get it done this year, we're probably not going to get it done. And understand, even if you're happy with your health care right now, if you look at the trends, remember what I said: Your premiums are going up three times faster than your wages and your incomes. So just kind of extrapolate, think about what does that mean for you five years from now or 10 years from now? If nothing changes, then you, essentially, are going to be going more -- deeper and deeper into your pocket to keep the health care that you've got. And at some point your employers may decide, we just can't afford it. And there are a lot of people where that's happened, where their employers suddenly say, either you can't afford it or you've got to pay a much bigger share of your health care.

So don't think that somehow just by standing still, just because you're doing okay now, that you're going to be doing good five years from now. We've got to catch the problem now before it overwhelms our entire economy. (Applause.)

It's a guy's turn. It's a guy's turn. (Applause.) This gentleman right here, right there in the blue shirt. There you go.

Q I don't know if I need a microphone or not --

THE PRESIDENT: You got a good voice, but we still want to give you a microphone. Hold on a second. Where's my mic people? Here we go.

Q My name is Matt Stein. I'm a teacher. I've been in education for almost 20 years. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Matt. Where do you teach? Where do you teach?

Q I teach at North Central Area schools in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Outstanding. (Applause.)

Q UP, baby? (Laughter.)

Q UP power, UPers. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: Is that what you call yourselves, UPers?

Q Yes. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: Okay, that's cool. (Applause.) All right.

Q Proudly, we call ourselves UPers. (Laughter.)

One of the things that I've learned in education in the last 20 years is that the system is not broken. And it bothers me when I hear politicians, and even my President, say that our educational system is broken. Not to insult you, but --

THE PRESIDENT: I don't feel insulted.

Q Good. This system works in cases. There are great things happening in Green Bay and Appleton and all over the UP. And there are things that can be reproduced. My question is: When will the focus be on reproducing those things -- smaller classrooms, creating communities in your classrooms -- and moving the focus away from single-day testing and test-driven outcomes? (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me -- first of all, thank you for teaching. My sister is a teacher, and I think there is no more noble a profession than helping to train the next generation of Americans. (Applause.)

I completely agree with you that there is a lot of good stuff going on in American education. The problem is, is that it's uneven. (Applause.) Well, let me put it this way. There are actually two problems. In some places it is completely broken. In some urban communities where you've got 50 percent of the kids dropping out, you only have one out of every 10 children who are graduating at grade level -- this system is broken for them.

Q Crime -- (inaudible).

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm going to get to that. We can't have too big of a debate here. You got your question. (Laughter.) Don't worry, though, I'm going to answer your question.

So there are some places where it really is completely broken. And there, yes, a lot of it has to do with poverty and families that are in bad shape. There are all kinds of reasons. And yet, even there, there are schools that work. So the question is, why is it that some schools are working and some schools aren't, and even in the worst circumstances, and why don't we duplicate what works in those schools so that all kids have a chance?

Now, in other places, Green Bay and Appleton and many communities throughout Wisconsin and Michigan, the average public school is actually doing a reasonably good job -- but can I still say that even if you factor out the urban schools, we are falling behind when it comes to math; our kids are falling behind when it comes to science. We have kind of settled into mediocrity when we compare ourselves to other advanced countries and wealthy countries. That's a problem because the reason that America over the last hundred years has consistently been the wealthiest nation is because we've also been the most educated nation.

It used to be by a pretty sizable factor we had the highest high school graduation rates, we had the highest college graduation rates, we had the highest number of Ph.D.s, the highest number of engineers and scientists. We used to be head and shoulders above other countries when it came to education. We aren't anymore. We're sort of in the middle of the pack now among wealthy, advanced, industrialized countries.

So even with the good schools, we've got to pick up the pace, because the world has gotten competitive. The Chinese, the Indians, they're coming at us and they're coming at us hard, and they're hungry, and they're really buckling down. And they watch -- their kids watch a lot less TV than our kids do, play a lot fewer video games, they're in the classroom a lot longer. (Applause.)

So here's the bottom line. We've got to improve, we've got to step up our game -- which brings me to the next point in your question, which is, how do we do that? I agree with you that if all we're doing is spreading around a lot of standardized tests and teaching to the test, that's not improving our education system. (Applause.)

There's a saying in Illinois I learned when I was down in a lot of rural communities. They said, "Just weighing a pig doesn't fatten it." (Applause.) You can weigh it all the time, but it's not making the hog fatter. So the point being, if we're all we're doing is testing and then teaching to the test, that doesn't assure that we're actually improving educational outcomes.

We do need to have accountability, however. We do need to measure progress with our kids. Maybe it's just one standardized test, plus portfolios of work that kids are doing, plus observing the classroom. There can be a whole range of assessments, but we do have to have some kind of accountability, number one.

Number two, we do have to upgrade the professional development for our teachers. (Applause.) I mean, we still have a lot of teachers who are -- we've got a lot of teachers who are well-meaning, but they're teaching science and they didn't major in science and they don't necessarily know science that well. And they certainly don't know how to make science interesting. So we've got to give them the chance to train and become better teachers. We've got to recruit more teachers, train them better, retain them better, match them up with master teachers who are doing excellent work so that they are upgrading their skills.

If after all that training, the teacher is still not very good, we've got to ask that teacher, probably, there are a lot of other professions out there; you should try one. (Applause.) I mean, I'm just being blunt, but we're going to have to pick up the pace.

Now, the key point I want to make is this: We should focus on what works, based on good data. And Arne Duncan, my Secretary of Education, this guy is just obsessed with improving our education system. He is focused a hundred percent on it, and he is completely committed to teachers. We think that teachers are the most important ingredient in good schools. We're going to do whatever works to help teachers do a better job -- (applause) -- we're going to eliminate those thing that don't help teachers do a good job. Some of it is going to require more money, so in our Recovery Act, we have more money for improving curriculums, teacher training, recruitment, a lot of these things. But you can't just put more money without reform, and so some of it is demanding more accountability and more reform.

There's one other ingredient, though, and that is parents. (Applause.) We've got to have parents putting more emphasis on education with our kids. That's how we're all going to be able to pick up our game. (Applause.)

So, all right, I've got time for one more question, and I'm going to go with this young lady right here who's got a picture of me, I guess. (Laughter.)

Q We're very strong supporters of you. We followed you at the campaign rally back in September. I took my five-month-old son. His name is Daniel Clay Stevens (phonetic), and he's enrolled in the Oneida Nation of Indians of Wisconsin. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: There you go.

Q And we were fortunate that you got to hold him. You actually called him "adorable" -- I don't know if you remember.

THE PRESIDENT: I'm sure he was. (Laughter.) I do.

Q I was just wondering if you'd be able to sign this for me.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I can sign that, yes. I'll ask -- I'll get one more question. I'll be happy to sign it. It's a young lady, sir. Everybody is pointing at this young lady, so she must be really important -- (laughter) -- or very popular.

Q Well, my name is Jean Marsch. I am the president of the Green Bay School Board, and I'm also a registered nurse and I work at Saint Vincent Hospital. (Applause.) My question centers on wellness and personal responsibility for one's health care. Could you talk about how your reforms would incorporate wellness and encouraging people to take more responsibility for their own health care? (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think it's a great question. For those of you who still have employer-based care, one of the things that we've been doing is meeting with companies who are really doing some innovative things to encourage their employees to get well. And some of it involved financial incentives. So these employers, they'll say, you know what, we provide for your health insurance, but if you quit smoking, you will see money in your pockets in the form of lower premiums. If you lose weight, you will see an incentive, money in your pocket. Then they set up gyms or a range for club memberships for their employees. Then what they do is they set up a computerized system so you can check your progress on an ongoing basis, just by logging on through the company.

So there are a whole range of steps that a lot of employers are taking to help encourage that, and what we want to do is to work with those employers to give every company an incentive to do the right thing with their employees.

Now, for those who don't have an employer-based system, or they're going through Medicare or Medicaid or what have you, any time that we can reimburse for preventive care -- getting a regular mammogram or a pap smear, or just having a regular checkup for colon cancer -- to the extent that we are encouraging reimbursements on those items, then hopefully people will utilize them more.

But I think that this is extraordinarily important. We can all take steps to become healthier. And there is nothing wrong with us giving a little bit of a nudge in moving people in the direction of healthier lifestyles.

But look, it's hard, and changing habits are hard, and it starts with our children, which is why, as a part of our overall health care reform we've also got to talk about, for example, our school lunch programs. (Applause.) And, you know, you're at the head of a school board, as well as a nurse, I know you're struggling with this. The cheapest way to feed all the kids is to have the frozen tater tots, and you get them out and heat them up, and then you've got pizza and fries. And then the soda companies, they all say, we'll put in a free soda machine in there so the kids can have as much soda as they want. And pretty soon our kids are seeing their rates of Type 2 diabetes skyrocket. They're not getting the exercise, because a lot of schools are running out of money when it comes to PE. Kids are sitting in front of the TV all day long.

Michelle and I always used to talk -- when we were kids, folks our age and over will remember this -- (laughter) -- basically, your folks, especially during the summer, you would leave at 8:00 a.m., and then maybe you came home for some lunch, and then you'd be gone until dark and you'd come back in. And that whole time you were out there running around. Well, kids aren't doing that. Now, some of it is safety issues, and that's why public safety is important; having playgrounds is important; having adults who are willing to volunteer for Little League and basketball leagues -- that's all important. But we've got to get our children into healthier habits. That in turn will lead to healthier adults.

And so government can't do all of this. I'm the first one to acknowledge this. That's why I'm always puzzled when people -- they go out there creating this bogeyman about how, you know, "Obama wants government-run" -- I don't want government to run stuff. Like I said, I've got enough stuff to do. (Laughter.) I've got North Korea, and I've got Iran. And I've got Afghanistan and Iraq. (Applause.) I don't know where people get this idea that I want to run stuff, or I want government to run stuff. I think it'd be great if the health care system was working perfectly and we didn't have to be involved at all. That would be wonderful. That's not how it's worked. We've got a 50-year experiment in that. It's not worked well.

So I actually think that if everybody has a pragmatic attitude about this problem, they say we're all going to have to do our part; families are going to have to do their part by being healthier; employers do their parts by encouraging their employers to be healthier; government doing its part by making sure that those people who are working very hard but still don't have health insurance or their premiums are getting too sky-high, that they're getting a hand up; insurance companies, drug companies doing their parts by not price gouging or trying to cut people out of the system; hospitals adopting best practices. If we're doing all those pieces, then we can start bending this cost curve down.

And that's one last point I want to make, because what you'll hear during this debate over the next several weeks is people will also say "The deficit and the debt are skyrocketing, and that's the reason why we can't afford to do health reform." So I just want to repeat the single biggest problem we have in terms of the debt and the deficit is health care, it's Medicare and Medicaid. (Applause.) That is -- when you hear all these projections about all these trillions of dollars and red ink going out as far as the eye can see -- almost all of that is because of the increase in Medicare and Medicaid costs that are going up much, much faster than inflation.

It's undoubtedly true that this economic crisis has hurt our budget situation, because again, a lot less money is coming in from corporate taxes, sales taxes, et cetera. So that reduces the amount of money coming out at the same time as we're having to put a lot more money out for food stamps and for unemployment insurance and all kinds of other help that people need when they get thrown out of their jobs; subsidizing COBRA so they can keep their health care. That's contributed to some of it.

Some of it is that I have proposed some investments in education and in energy and in health information technologies. But there was just an article in The New York Times yesterday that showed that all that stuff, everything that I've proposed -- my stimulus package, what we've done in terms of bailing out the financial system -- all that stuff, that accounts for maybe 7, 8 percent of what you've seen in terms of increased debt and deficit. The real problem is Medicaid and Medicare. That's the nightmare scenario. If we can bend the curve, the cost-curve down so that health care inflation is no more than ordinary inflation, it's matching up with the amount of increases that you're seeing on your paychecks in your wages and your incomes, then we're going to be okay. And if we don't get a handle on it, we're not going to be okay. It doesn't matter, you know, that we eliminate earmarks or do all that other stuff. That won't make any difference -- we'll still be consumed by huge debt for the next generation.

That's why it's so important, that's why we're going to get it done, that's why I need your help, Green Bay. Thank you, everybody. God bless you. (Applause.)

END
1:08 P.M. CDT