The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
Statement by the President
3:42 P.M. EDT
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
3:42 P.M. EDT
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
Oval Office
12:40 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I've asked for Prime Minister Singh's indulgence to begin my remarks on the issue of Syria. As many of you are now aware, yesterday the United States and Russia were able to hammer out an agreement, partnering with the other members of the P5 and the Security Council, around Syria eliminating its chemical weapons and ultimately having them destroyed by the international community.
This is something that we have long sought. And the fact that we now have a framework that will be voted on, perhaps as soon as today, perhaps over the weekend or Monday, that would be legally binding, that would be verifiable and enforceable, where there will be consequences for Syria's failure to meet what has been set forth in this resolution, I think is a potentially huge victory for the international community.
Realistically, it's doubtful that we would have arrived at this point had it not been for a credible threat of U.S. action in the aftermath of the horrific tragedy that took place on August 21st, where chemical weapons killed over 1,000 people, including more than 400 children. But I've always expressed a preference for resolving this diplomatically, and I appreciate all our international partners in working very hard over the past several days to make sure that we could arrive at a resolution that not only deters and prevents additional chemical use, but actually goes beyond what could have been accomplished through any military action, and that is the removal of chemical weapons -- one of the largest stockpiles in the world -- from Syria so that they can actually be destroyed.
I think it's also worth noting that in the Security Council resolution there is an explicit endorsement of the Geneva I process to try to deal with the underlying conflict in Syria and the need for a political transition there that can bring about peace and allow the millions of people who’ve been displaced and harmed by this conflict to return to their homes and try to rebuild their lives, and to rebuild a country that’s been shattered now by civil war.
So we are very hopeful about the prospects for what can be accomplished, but obviously there is a lot of work to be done. I think rightly, people have been concerned about whether Syria will follow through on the commitments that have been laid forth and I think there are legitimate concerns as to how technically we are going to be getting those chemical weapons out while there’s still fighting going on, on the ground.
Nevertheless, this represents potentially a significant step forward and I think indicates what I had hoped for when I spoke at the United Nations just this week -- that we have an international community that is not just gathering to talk but also is able to take concerted action on behalf of enforcing international norms and preserving everybody’s security, including those in the region and obviously the people of Syria themselves.
Now, I also want to say how glad I am to have Prime Minister Singh here today. He has been a great friend and partner to the United States and to me personally during his tenure as Prime Minister of India. And I think all of us recognize that as the world’s two largest democracies, countries that have for a very long time been invested in the peace and prosperity of their own people, that there is a natural convergence between the United States and India. Part of that has to do with the incredible people-to-people ties that exist. Indian-Americans make extraordinary contributions to the United States every single day -- businessmen, scientists, academics, now Miss America is of Indian-American descent, and I think it’s a signal of how close our countries are.
And what we’ve been able to do during the time that I’ve been President and certainly preceding me, throughout Prime Minister Singh’s tenure, is to try to make sure that our government-to-government cooperation matches the great affection and affinity that exists between the Indian and American peoples.
We’ve made enormous progress on the issue of civilian nuclear power and, in fact, have been able to achieve just in the last few days an agreement on the first commercial agreement between a U.S. company and India on civilian nuclear power.
We have a wide-ranging security cooperation in battling terrorism, and something that Prime Minister Singh obviously is deeply concerned about, given the impact of terrorism on India. All of us remember the horrible events that took place in Mumbai, but as recently as the last few days, India continues to suffer from terrorist attacks. And our hearts go out to the families that have been impacted.
We have enormous commercial ties between our two countries. And, in fact, bilateral trade between our two countries has gone up by 50 percent just over the last several years, indicating the degree of progress that has been made. And India, as a significant not just regional power but world power, has worked closely with us on a whole range of issues from climate change to how we can help feed the world, alleviate poverty, and deal with disease.
We also had an opportunity to discuss the tensions that continue to exist in the subcontinent. We both have a shared interest in making sure that Afghanistan continues on its path to a peaceful, democratic country, and both share an interest in making sure that we help Afghans stand up for the rights of all groups inside of Afghanistan, that the rights of women and minority groups are protected, and that the upcoming election happens in a way that maintains and continues to strengthen stability in that troubled country.
And we had a chance to discuss Pakistan and our shared interest in seeing a peaceful reduction of tensions on the subcontinent, and we want to very much thank Prime Minister Singh for what has been a consistent interest in improving cooperation between India and Pakistan.
So, across the board, Prime Minister Singh has been an outstanding partner. India continues to grow at an amazing rate, but as Prime Minister Singh indicates, obviously there are a lot of people in India that are still trapped in poverty. His primary priority has been to alleviate that poverty and give all the people of India opportunity. And we want to make sure that we’re strong partners in helping him to realize that vision, because we believe that if there’s a strong India that that’s good for the world and it’s ultimately good for the United States of America.
So, Mr. Prime Minister, welcome. And thank you so much for all your efforts to continue to strengthen ties between our two countries.
PRIME MINISTER SINGH: Mr. President, there is very little that I can add to your eloquent statement. I’ve always believed that India and America are indispensable partners. And during the time that I have been Prime Minister, and particularly during the time that President Obama and I have worked together, I think President Obama has made an outstanding contribution to strengthening, widening and deepening of our cooperation in diverse fields.
When I came to America in 2005, in addressing the United States Congress, I said there are partnerships based on principles and partnerships based on pragmatism. And I then said that in the case of Indo-American cooperation, both principles of our commitment to democracy, shared values, rule of law, and pragmatism both combine to make us strong, durable partners. And I’m very happy to say that in the last five years that I have worked together with President Obama that process has strengthened in every possible way.
India and America are working together to give our cooperation a new sense of purpose, widening and deepening in diverse directions. We are cooperating in expanding the frontiers of trade, investment and technology. Our bilateral trade today is $100 billion. American investments in India are $80 billion. And they are growing despite the slowdown in the global economy.
And outside the area of trade, technology and investment, we are exploring avenues of cooperation in new areas -- new areas like energy cooperation, clean coal technologies, energy-efficient technologies, cooperation in the field of environment, cooperation in the field of defense and security-related, cooperation with regard to intelligence gathering and counterterrorism. In all these areas, India needs the United States to be standing by our side. And I am very pleased to note that President Obama has imparted a powerful impetus to that process of our two countries being on the same page.
The President briefed me about his initiatives both with regard to Syria and with regard to Iran, and I complimented him for his vision, for his courage in giving diplomacy yet another chance. India fully supports these initiatives because 6 million Indians live in West Asia and the Middle East. They earn their livelihood there, which is an important part of sustaining our values of freedom. Therefore, anything that contributes to peace and stability in the Middle East, in Iran, in Syria, is something which is in the interest of the global economy; it is certainly in the interest of people in the region in which I and India is placed.
We also discussed our relations and our approach to dealing with Afghanistan and Pakistan. I explained to President Obama the difficulties that we face given the fact that the epicenter of terror still remains focused in Pakistan. And I look forward to meeting with President Nawaz Sharif, even though the expectations have to be toned down given the terror arm which is still active in our subcontinent.
Overall, I have come here to thank President Obama for all that he has done to strengthen, to widen and deepen cooperation between our two countries. I explained to the President that India is a poor country. Our basic task is to improve the standard of living of our people, to get rid of mass poverty, ignorance and disease, which still afflict millions and millions of our people. And in that struggle, we want America to stand by our side. And in the President, the United States has a leader who realizes and recognizes the contribution that a resurgent India can make not only to fighting poverty, but also to global peace and prosperity.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you so much.
END
12:53 P.M. EDT
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
Prince George’s Community College
Largo, Maryland
10:50 A.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, Maryland! (Applause.) Hello, PGCC! (Applause.) It’s good to be back in PG County. (Applause.)
Give it up for one of the hardest-working, most effective governors in the country, Governor Martin O’Malley. (Applause.)
Well, it is great to be with all of you here today --
AUDIENCE MEMBER: I love you!
THE PRESIDENT: I love you back. It’s wonderful being here. (Applause.)
We also have a few folks who work so hard on behalf of the people of Maryland every single day: Senator Ben Cardin is here. (Applause.) Congressman Steny Hoyer is here. (Applause.) And Congresswoman Donna Edwards is here. (Applause.)
And all of you are here. (Applause.) Sometimes you just need to escape Beltway politics for a little bit -- even if you're just a mile or two outside the Beltway.
Now, I know that a lot of you have seen some of the antics going on in Congress right now. (Laughter.) So I wanted to take a little bit of time today to speak with you -- the people who send us to serve -- about something that is critical to our families, critical to our businesses, critical to our economy. And that is the reforms that we are making to our health care system.
There’s been a lot of things said, a lot of misinformation, a lot of confusion. But there are few things more fundamental to the economic security of the middle class and everybody who’s trying to get into the middle class than health care.
For a long time, America was the only advanced economy in the world where health care was not a right, but a privilege. We spent more, we got less. We left tens of millions of Americans without the security of health insurance. By the time the financial crisis hit, most folks’ premiums had more than doubled in about a decade. About one in 10 Americans who got their health care through their employer lost that coverage. So the health care system was not working. And the rising costs of health care burdened businesses and became the biggest driver of our long-term deficits.
But this has always been about more than just statistics. Everywhere I went as I ran for President back in 2007, 2008, everyplace I've gone as President, I would hear stories from folks just like you of insurers that denied a child coverage because he had a preexisting condition like asthma; of cancer survivors that had to choose between their home or their health care; of small businesses who wanted to do the right thing by their employees but had seen their insurance premiums go up so high that they just couldn't do it anymore.
And these stories were personal for me, because I remember my mother worrying about how she was going to deal with her finances when she got very sick. I remember the fear Michelle and I felt when Sasha was a few months old and she got meningitis. And we raced to the hospital and they had to give her a spinal tap. And we didn’t know what was wrong and we were terrified, never felt so scared or helpless in all of my life. But we were fortunate enough to have good health insurance.
And I remember looking around that emergency room and thinking -- what about the parents who aren’t that lucky? What about the parents who get hit with a bill of $20,000 or $30,000 and they’ve got no idea how to pay for it? What about those parents whose kids have a chronic illness like asthma and have to keep on going back to the emergency room because they don't have a regular doctor, and the bills never stop coming? Who is going to stand up for them?
In the wealthiest nation on Earth, no one should go broke just because they get sick. (Applause.)
In the United States of America, health care is not a privilege for the fortunate few -- it is a right. And I knew that if we didn’t do something about our unfair and inefficient health care system, it would keep driving up our deficits, it would keep burdening our businesses, it would keep hurting our families, and it would keep holding back economic growth.
That's why we took on a broken health care system. That's why, with the help of folks like Steny and Ben and Donna, we got it through Congress. That’s why we’ve been implementing it. That’s why we are going to see it through. The Affordable Care Act is here. (Applause.)
I don’t have to tell you it was a challenge to get it done. (Laughter.) A lot of special interests who liked the system just the way it was fought us tooth and nail. Then Republicans decided it was good politics to fight it, even though the plan we proposed drew on a lot of Republican ideas.
But despite all the obstacles, the Affordable Care Act passed both houses of Congress. I signed it into law. (Applause.) The Supreme Court ruled it constitutional. (Applause.) Republicans in Congress have now voted more than 40 times to undermine or repeal it. Their candidate for president ran on a platform to repeal it. And at every step, they’ve been unsuccessful. (Applause.)
Now, five days from now -- five days from now -- on October 1st, millions of Americans who don’t have health insurance because they’ve been priced out of the market or because they’ve been denied access because of a preexisting condition, they will finally be able to buy quality, affordable health insurance. (Applause.) In five days. (Applause.)
Preexisting conditions, whether it’s back pain or allergies that were sticking you with sky-high premiums, those no longer will prevent you from getting affordable coverage that you need. That’s going to happen in five days.
Now, of course, the closer we’ve gotten to this date, the more irresponsible folks who are opposed to this law have become. Some of the same Republicans who warned three years ago that this law would be “Armageddon” -- that’s what they said -- “Armageddon” -- now they’re threatening steps that actually would badly hurt our entire economy -- not because of the Affordable Care Act but because of what they’re threatening to do.
Some have threatened a government shutdown if they can’t shut down this law. Others have actually threatened an economic shutdown by refusing to pay America’s bills if they can’t delay the law.
AUDIENCE: Booo --
THE PRESIDENT: That’s not going to happen as long as I’m President. (Applause.) The Affordable Care Act is here to stay. (Applause.)
And so today, I want to speak plainly, clearly, honestly, about what it means for you and for the people you care about.
Now, let’s start with the fact that even before the Affordable Care Act fully takes effect, about 85 percent of Americans already have health insurance -– either through their job, or through Medicare, or through the individual market. So if you’re one of these folks, it’s reasonable that you might worry whether health care reform is going to create changes that are a problem for you -- especially when you’re bombarded with all sorts of fear-mongering.
So the first thing you need to know is this: If you already have health care, you don’t have to do anything. In fact, for the past few years, since I signed the Affordable Care Act, a lot of you have been enjoying new benefits and protections that you didn’t before even if you didn’t know they were coming from Obamacare. (Applause.)
Let me just give you a few examples. Because of the Affordable Care Act, more than 100 million Americans have gotten free preventive care like mammograms and contraceptive care with no copays. (Applause.)
Because of the Affordable Care Act, 3 million young adults under age 26 have gained coverage by staying on their parents’ plan. (Applause.)
Because of the Affordable Care Act, millions of seniors on Medicare have saved hundreds of dollars on their prescription medicine. They’ve been getting their prescription drugs cheaper. (Applause.)
Because of the Affordable Care Act, just this year, 8.5 million families actually got an average of $100 back from their insurance companies because the insurance companies spent too much on things like overhead, and not enough on actual Medicare -- medical care. (Applause.)
Because of the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies can no longer put lifetime limits on the care your family needs, or discriminate against children with preexisting conditions. And starting on January 1st, they won’t be able to charge women more for their insurance just because they're women. (Applause.) That's a good thing.
So tens of millions of Americans are already better off because of the benefits and protections provided by the Affordable Care Act. Like I said, they may not know why that rebate check came in the mail. (Laughter.) They may not notice that they're not having to copay for some preventive care that they received. But they're getting those benefits. That's already happening. That's already in place today. It’s been going on for several years.
Those are the benefits of Obamacare -- the law that Republicans want to repeal. Although it’s interesting -- when you ask Republicans whether they’d repeal the benefits I just mentioned, when you say to them, well, do you think it’s the right thing to do to let young people stay on their parents’ plans so they can keep insurance, or do you want to prevent seniors from getting more discounts on their prescription drugs, then they’ll say, no, no, no, we like those. Those things are okay. (Laughter.) So they don't like Obamacare in theory, but some of the component parts, at least those that poll well, they don't mind.
But that's already in place. Now, here’s the second thing you need to know. If you’re one of over 40 million Americans who don’t have health insurance –- including hundreds of thousands of folks right here in Maryland –- starting on Tuesday, five days from now, you’ll finally have the same chance to buy quality, affordable health care as everybody else.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thanks, Mr. President! (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: And I want to break this down for you. I want you to know exactly how it works. The major reason why people don’t have health insurance is either they don’t have a job, or they do have a job but their employer doesn’t offer health insurance, or they’re self-employed. If you’ve ever tried to buy health insurance on your own, you know it is really, really expensive.
AUDIENCE: Yes!
THE PRESIDENT: It’s even worse if you have a preexisting condition –- and up to half of all Americans have a preexisting condition. See, the reason it's really expensive if you're buying it on your own is because you're not part of a big group, you're not part of a group plan. And what groups do is they spread risk between sick and healthy people, between older and younger people. And groups -- because insurance companies want the business of groups -- that’s a lot of customers -- they'll negotiate a better deal with a group than they will with an individual.
So if you're on your own, you're out there trying to negotiate with an insurance company, they're looking and they're saying, well, you take it or leave it, I'm going to charge you a whole lot of money. And if you've got a preexisting condition, they'll say, we don’t even want to insure you because we think you might get sick later on and we don’t really want to pay, we just want to take in premiums.
So if you're not part of a group, you're either uninsurable, or you need to spend a small fortune on insurance that oftentimes is not very good. That’s what's happening right now. The Affordable Care Act was designed to solve that problem. And here’s how we do it.
Starting on Tuesday, every American can visit HealthCare.gov to find out what’s called the insurance marketplace for your state. Here in Maryland, I actually think it's called MarylandHealthConnection.gov. (Applause.) MarylandHealthConnection.gov. But if you go to HealthCare.gov, you can look and they'll tell you where to go. They'll link to your state.
Now, this is real simple. It’s a website where you can compare and purchase affordable health insurance plans, side-by-side, the same way you shop for a plane ticket on Kayak -- (laughter) -- same way you shop for a TV on Amazon. You just go on and you start looking, and here are all the options.
It’s buying insurance on the private market, but because now you’re part of a big group plan -- everybody in Maryland is all logging in and taking a look at the prices -- you’ve got new choices. Now you've got new competition, because insurers want your business. And that means you will have cheaper prices. (Applause.)
So you enter in some basic information about yourself, what level of coverage you’re looking for. After that, you’ll be presented with a list of quality, affordable plans that are available in your area. It will say clearly what each plan covers, what each plan costs. The price will be right there. It will be fully transparent.
Before this law, only a handful of states required insurance companies to offer you instant price quotes, but because of this law, insurers in all 50 states will have to offer you instant price quotes. And so if you’ve ever tried to buy insurance on your own, I promise you this is a lot easier. It's like booking a hotel or a plane ticket.
And here's another thing about these new plans. If you’re one of those folks who has a preexisting condition, these plans have to offer you coverage. They can't use your medical history to charge you more than anybody else. If you couldn’t afford coverage for your child because he had asthma, he's covered. If you couldn’t afford coverage because you were told heartburn was a preexisting condition, you're covered. (Laughter.) If you’re one of the 45 million Americans with a mental illness, you are covered.
If you’re a young adult or entrepreneur striking out on your own, you’re covered. (Applause.) If you’re a young couple who previously had insurance that didn’t include maternity benefits and now suddenly you need some maternity benefits, you’re covered. (Applause.) If you lose your job and your health care with it, you’re covered. (Applause.)
So all those things that would deny you coverage in the past, that were the cruelties of a broken health care system, on January 1st, when these plans take effect --
AUDIENCE MEMBER: October 1st.
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, no, no -- hold on. (Laughter.) Hold on. I know what I'm talking about. You sign up starting on Tuesday. (Laughter.) The plan will take effect on January 1st. And when these plans take effect, all those things change forever.
Now, what about choice and cost? In states where the federal government helps run these marketplaces, the average American will have more than 50 different plans to choose from, with different levels of coverage. And because insurance companies are competing against one another for your business, a lot of Americans will pay significantly less for their insurance than they do now. Premiums are going to be different in different parts of the country, depending on how much coverage you buy. But 95 percent of uninsured Americans will see their premiums cost less than was expected. And many families, including more than two-thirds of all young adults who buy health care through these online marketplaces, are also going to be eligible for tax credits that bring down the cost down even further. (Applause.)
So let me be specific. Right here in Maryland, average 25-year-old -- have we got any 25-year-olds here? (Applause.) All right, so we've got a few. Some of you raised your hand -- I'm not sure you're -- (laughter.)
Here in Maryland, average 25-year-old making $25,000 a year could end up getting covered for as little as $80 a month -- $80 a month. (Applause.) Here in Maryland, a family of four making $60,000 a year could get covered for as little as $164 a month.
It’s the same story across the country. In Texas, average 27-year-old making $25,000 could get covered for as little as $83 a month. In Florida, a family of four making $50,000 could get covered for as little as $104 a month.
And keep in mind the government didn’t set these prices. The insurance companies -- they proposed these prices because they want to get in with these big groups, with all these new customers. The insurance companies are saying these marketplaces, this law, will work. They're putting money on the line because they think it will work. Competition, choice, transparency -- all these things are keeping costs down.
Knowing you can offer your family the security of health care -- that’s priceless. Now you can do it for the cost of your cable bill. Probably less than your cellphone bill. (Laughter and applause.) Think about that. Good health insurance for the price of your cellphone bill, or less.
And let’s say you’re a young woman, you just turned -- I’m interested in this, because I got two daughters, right? Let’s say you just turned 26. Let’s say you can’t stay on your parents’ plan anymore. If you buy health care through the marketplace, your plan has to cover free checkups, flu shots, contraceptive care. So you might end up getting more health care each month than you’re paying for the premiums.
All told, nearly 6 in 10 Americans without health insurance today will be able to get covered for $100 or less. It would actually be 8 in 10 if every governor were working as hard as Governor O’Malley to make the Affordable Care Act work for their citizens. (Applause.)
Unfortunately, we’ve still got a few Republican governors who are so opposed to the very idea of the law -- or at least they’re doing it for politics -- that they haven’t lifted a finger to help cover more people. Some of them have actually tried to harm the law before it takes effect.
But a lot of Republican governors are putting politics aside and doing the right thing. (Applause.) And they deserve congratulations for that. It wasn’t easy for them. But you’ve got conservative governors in Ohio, in Michigan, in Pennsylvania and Arizona -- about eight Republican governors in all, they’ve decided to expand Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act to cover more people in their states. And millions of Americans without insurance will get coverage through these programs.
So that’s what the Affordable Care Act is. That’s what all the fuss is about. We’re giving more benefits and protections for folks who already have health insurance, and we created a new market -- basically a big group plan -- for folks without health insurance so that they get a better deal, and then we’re providing tax credits to help folks afford it.
You would think that would not be so controversial. (Laughter.) You would think people would say, okay, let’s go ahead and let’s do this so everybody has health insurance coverage. The result is more choice, more competition, real health care security.
And one question people ask: How is it possible to do all this and keep costs down? Well, part of what we did was build into the law all sorts of measures to assure that the growth of health care costs would start slowing down. And it has. See, under the old system, doctors and hospitals, they were rewarded not for the quality of care, but for the quantity of care. They’d get paid for the number of procedures they did instead of whether they were working or not. Now, there are penalties for hospitals with high readmission rates. And last year, surprisingly enough, for the first time ever, hospital readmission rates for Medicare patients actually fell. (Applause.) Right? That means fewer taxpayer dollars go to providers that don’t serve their patients well.
Over the past five years, we’ve more than doubled the adoption of electronic health records for physicians. So that means they can track what’s going on better and make fewer mistakes. New technology startup companies are coming up with new inventions to monitor patient health, prevent infections. There’s innovation going on all across the country. As a consequence, today, Medicare costs per enrollee are rising at the slowest rate in years. Employer-based health care costs are growing at about one-third the rate of a decade ago.
All told, since I signed the Affordable Care Act into law, we have seen the slowest growth in health care costs on record. (Applause.)
So let’s think about this. If you got health insurance, you’re getting better protections, better benefits. If you don't have health insurance, you're now getting to be part of a group plan. And health care costs overall are rising much more slowly than they did before we signed the law. So far, so good. So what’s all the fuss about? What is it that everybody -- what is that these Republicans are just so mad about?
AUDIENCE: Booo --
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, no, look, I want to be honest. There are parts of the bill that some folks don’t like. To help pay for the program, the wealthiest Americans –- families who make more than $250,000 a year -– will have to pay a little bit more. Extremely costly health insurance plans will no longer qualify for unlimited tax breaks. And most people who can afford health insurance now have to take responsibility to buy health insurance, or pay a penalty. (Applause.)
Right? Now, the reason we do that is, when uninsured people who can afford to get health insurance don’t, and then they get sick or they get hit by a car, and they show up at the emergency room, who do you think pays for that?
AUDIENCE: We do.
THE PRESIDENT: You do, in the form of higher premiums. Because the hospitals, they've got to get their money back somehow. So if they're treating somebody who doesn’t have health insurance, they jack up premiums for everybody who does have health insurance. It’s like a hidden tax of $1,000 per family every year who has got health insurance. So we're saying that’s not fair. If you can afford to get health insurance, don’t dump the costs on us. The law also requires employers with more than 50 employees to either provide health insurance for your workers or pay a penalty.
Now, some folks say, well, that’s not fair. But if you are an employer, you can afford to provide health insurance, you don’t, your employees get sick, they go to the emergency room or they end up on Medicaid because you're not doing what you're doing -- you should be doing -- why is it everybody else should be bearing those costs?
Now, there are some folks who disagree with me on this. They say that violates people's liberty, telling them they've got to get health insurance. Well, I disagree. So did Congress when it passed this bill into law. It is unfair for folks to game the system and make the rest of us pay for it. (Applause.) It's unfair for responsible employers who are doing the right thing, giving their employees health insurance, to get undercut by some operator that’s not providing health insurance for their employees. That puts the employer who's doing the right thing at a disadvantage, right?
So this idea that you've got responsibilities -- everybody -- that’s what Massachusetts did when they passed their health care plan a few years ago. And, by the way, today, in Massachusetts, almost everybody is covered and the system works pretty well. (Applause.)
All right, let me just wrap up by saying this: Like any law, like any big product launch, there are going to be some glitches as this thing unfolds. Folks in different parts of the country will have different experiences. It's going to be smoother in places like Maryland where governors are working to implement it rather than fight it. (Applause.) But somewhere around the country, there's going to be a computer glitch and the website's not working quite the way it's supposed to, or something happens where there's some error made somewhere -- that will happen. That happens whenever you roll out a new program. And I guarantee you, the opponents of the law, they'll have their cameras ready to document anything that doesn’t go completely right, and they'll send it to the news folks and they'll say, look at this, this thing is not working.
But most of the stories you'll hear about how Obamacare just can't work is just not based on facts. Every time they have predicted something not working, it's worked. (Applause.) I mean, they said that these rates would come in real high and everybody's premiums would be sky high. And it turns out, lo and behold, actually, the prices came in lower than we expected -- lower than I predicted. That’s how well competition and choice work. (Applause.)
They said this would be a disaster in terms of jobs. There's no widespread evidence that the Affordable Care Act is hurting jobs. One of John McCain's former economic advisors admitted just this week -- and I'm quoting here -- “I was expecting to see it. I was looking for it," but "it’s not there.” It’s not there. (Applause.)
The reason is reforming health care is going to help the economy over the long term. Not only will it help lower costs for businesses, not only will it help families, it will free up entrepreneurship in this country. Because if you’ve got a great idea for your own business but you’ve never tried it because your spouse had a preexisting condition and you didn't want to lose your employer-based coverage, you've got the ability now to get your own coverage. That's security. That’s freedom.
So we’re now only five days away from finishing the job.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Five days away.
THE PRESIDENT: Five days. (Applause.) Starting on Tuesday, you can sign up. But you don't have to sign up on Tuesday. You've got six months to enroll in these new plans. You can go to the website; you can check it out; you can see if what I'm saying is true. (Laughter.) You can sign up next week. You can sign up next month. You can sign up two months from now, three months from now. But you can sign up.
Tell your friends, tell your classmates, tell your family members about the new health care choices. Talk to folks at your church, in your classroom. You’re going to a football game, basketball game -- talk to them. Tell them what the law means.
And over the next few months, state and local leaders from across the country are going to hold events to help get the word out. Go out there and join them. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius is in Texas right now, working with folks on the ground to make sure this law works for Texas families. All across the country, people are getting ready. All kinds of people are working hand-in-hand because we’re all in this together -- that’s when America is at its best. That’s what this country is all about.
But we need you to spread the word. But you don't have to take my word for it. If you talk to somebody who says, well, I don't know, I was watching FOX News and they said this was horrible -- (laughter) -- you can say, you know what, don't take my word for it, go on the website. See for yourself what the prices are. See for yourself what the choices are. Then make up your own mind.
That's all I'm asking. Make up your own mind. I promise you, if you go on the website and it turns out you're going to save $100, $200, $300 a month on your insurance, or you'll be able to buy insurance for the first time, even if you didn't vote for me -- (laughter) -- I’ll bet you’ll sign up for that health care plan. (Applause.)
So you don’t need to listen to the politicians. You don’t need to listen to me. Just go check it out for yourself. Make up your own mind whether this works for you.
Look, part of the reason I need your help to make this law work is because there are so many people out there working to make it fail. One of the biggest newspapers in the country recently published an editorial I thought was pretty good. They said, the Republicans in Congress are poisoning Obamacare, then trying to claim it’s sick. (Laughter.) That’s exactly what’s been happening.
I mean, they have tried to put up every conceivable roadblock. They cut funding for efforts to educate people about what’s in the law. Some of them said if their constituents called them, we won’t even try to explain to them what’s in the law. They actually opened up an investigation into people who try to help churches and charities understand how to help people sign up for the law.
Some of the tea party’s biggest donors -- some of the wealthiest men in America -- are funding a cynical ad campaign trying to convince young people not to buy health care at all. I mean, think about it. These are billionaires several times over. You know they’ve got good health care.
AUDIENCE: Right! (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: But they are actually spending money on television, trying to convince young people that if you’ve got the choice between getting affordable health care or going without health care, you should choose not having any health care. Now, do you think if you get sick or you get hurt, and you get stuck with a massive bill, these same folks, they’re going to help you out?
AUDIENCE: No!
THE PRESIDENT: Are they going to pay for your health care?
AUDIENCE: No!
THE PRESIDENT: It is interesting, though, how over the last couple years, the Republican Party has just spun itself up around this issue. And the fact is the Republicans’ biggest fear at this point is not that the Affordable Care Act will fail. What they’re worried about is it’s going to succeed. (Applause.) I mean, think about it. If it was as bad as they said it was going to be, then they could just go ahead and let it happen and then everybody would hate it so much, and then everybody would vote to repeal it, and that would be the end of it.
So what is it that they’re so scared about?
AUDIENCE MEMBER: You! (Laughter and applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: They have made such a big political issue out of this, trying to scare everybody with lies about “death panels” and “killing granny” -- (laughter) -- right? “Armageddon.” So if it actually works, they’ll look pretty bad. If it actually works, that will mean that everything they were saying really wasn’t true and they were just playing politics.
AUDIENCE: That's right!
THE PRESIDENT: Just the other day, one Republican in Congress said we need to shut this thing down before the marketplaces open and people get to see that they’ll be getting coverage and getting these subsidies because -- and I’m going to quote him here -- he said, “It’s going to prove almost impossible to undo Obamacare.” (Laughter.) Right? So in other words, we’ve got to shut this thing down before people find out that they like it. (Laughter and applause.) That’s a strange argument. Don’t you think that’s a strange argument?
AUDIENCE: Yes!
THE PRESIDENT: And the closer we get, the more desperate they get. I mean, over the last few weeks the rhetoric has just been cranked up to a place I’ve never seen before. One congressman said that Obamacare is “the most dangerous piece of legislation ever passed.” (Laughter.) Ever. In the history of America, this is the most dangerous piece of legislation. (Laughter.) Creating a marketplace so people can buy group insurance plans -- the most dangerous ever.
You had a state representative somewhere say that it’s “as destructive to personal and individual liberty as the Fugitive Slave Act.”
AUDIENCE: Booo --
THE PRESIDENT: Think about that. Affordable health care is worse than a law that let slave owners get their runaway slaves back.
AUDIENCE: No!
THE PRESIDENT: I mean, these are quotes. I’m not making this stuff up. And here’s one more that I’ve heard -- I like this one -- we have to -- and I’m quoting here -- “We have to repeal this failure before it literally kills women, kills children, kills senior citizens.” Now, I have to say -- that one was from six months ago -- I just want to point out we still have women -- (laughter) -- we still have children, we still have senior citizens. (Applause.)
All this would be funny if it wasn’t so crazy. And a lot of it is just hot air. A lot of it is just politics. I understand that. But now the tea party Republicans have taken it to a whole new level because they’re threatening either to shut down the government, or shut down the entire economy by refusing to let America pay its bills for the first time in history -- unless I agree to gut a law that will help millions of people.
AUDIENCE: Booo --
THE PRESIDENT: Think about this. Shutting down the government just because you don’t like a law that was passed and found constitutional, and because you don’t like the idea of giving people new access to affordable health care -- what kind of idea is that?
Think about how that would impact Maryland. This is an area where lots of people would be badly hurt by a government shutdown. A lot of people around here wake up and go to serve their country every single day in the federal government -- civilians who work at military bases, analysts, scientists, janitors, people who process new veterans’ and survivors’ benefit claims. They’d all have to stay home and not get paid. And we all know it would badly damage the economy.
Whatever effect Obamacare might have on the economy is far less than even a few days of government shutdown. (Applause.) I mean, even if you believe that Obamacare somehow was going to hurt the economy, it won't hurt the economy as bad as a government shutdown. And by the way, the evidence is that it’s not going to hurt the economy. Obamacare is going to help the economy. And it’s going to help families and help businesses. (Applause.)
As for not letting America pay its bills, I have to say, no Congress before this one has ever – ever -- in history been irresponsible enough to threaten default, to threaten an economic shutdown, to suggest America not pay its bills, just to try to blackmail a President into giving them some concessions on issues that have nothing to do with a budget.
I mean, this is the United States of America. We’re not a deadbeat nation. We don't run out on our tab. We don't not pay our note. We are the world’s bedrock economy, the world’s currency of choice. The entire world looks to us to make sure that the world economy is stable. You don't mess with that. (Applause.) You don’t mess with that.
And that's why I will not negotiate on anything when it comes to the full faith and credit of the United States of America. (Applause.)
We’re not going to submit to this kind of total irresponsibility. Congress needs to pay our bills on time. Congress needs to pass a budget on time. Congress needs to put an end to governing from crisis to crisis. (Applause.)
Our focus as a country should be on creating new jobs and growing our economy, and helping young people learn, and restoring security for hardworking, middle-class families. (Applause.)
This is not about the fortunes of any one party. This is not about politics. This is about the future of our country. If Republicans do not like the law, they can go through the regular channels and processes to try to change it. That's why we have elections. So they can go through the normal processes and procedures of a democracy, but you do not threaten the full faith and credit of the United States of America. (Applause.)
And, meanwhile, we're going to keep implementing the law.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: It's the law!
THE PRESIDENT: It's the law. And like I said, there are going to be some glitches along the way. Every law has hiccups when it’s first starting off. People forget, by the way, Medicare Part D -- passed by my predecessor, George Bush, passed by a Republican House of Representatives -- the prescription drug bill passed into law 10 years ago was even more unpopular than the Affordable Care Act before it took into effect. Everybody was saying what a disaster it was going to be. The difference was Democrats worked with Republicans to make it work even better. (Applause.) Steny remembers this. Even though Democrats weren't happy that the law wasn’t paid for and was going to add hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficit, and we weren't negotiating a better deal with the drug companies, everybody worked -- once it was the law -- to try to make it work. And today, about 90 percent of seniors like their prescription drug coverage.
So we may not get that same level of cooperation from Republicans right now. But the good news is I believe eventually they’ll come around. Because Medicare and Social Security faced the same kind of criticism. Before Medicare came into law, one Republican warned that “one of these days, you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it once was like in America when men were free.” That was Ronald Reagan. And eventually, Ronald Reagan came around to Medicare and thought it was pretty good, and actually helped make it better.
So that’s what's going to happen with the Affordable Care Act. And once it's working really well, I guarantee you they will not call it Obamacare. (Laughter and applause.)
Here is a prediction for you: A few years from now, when people are using this to get coverage and everybody is feeling pretty good about all the choices and competition that they've got, there are going to be a whole bunch of folks who say, yes, I always thought this provision was excellent. (Laughter.) I voted for that thing. You watch. (Laughter.) It will not be called Obamacare. (Laughter.)
But I’m always willing to work with anybody from either party. If you’ve got a serious idea for making the Affordable Care Act better, or making our broader health care system better, I'm happy to work with you -- because that’s what the majority of the American people want. They don’t want posturing; they want governing. They don’t want politics; they want us to work together to make the lives of ordinary Americans a little bit better, a little bit more secure. (Applause.)
So, Maryland, I’m asking for your help. (Applause.) I need your help. (Applause.) We may have some very well-funded opponents. We may have some very talkative opponents. But you're going to be the best, most credible messengers to spread the word about this law and all the benefits that the American people stand to get and have earned.
So tell your friends, tell your family. Get covered. Get on that website. Answer the questions of folks who don’t know what this is all about. Point them to HealthCare.gov. Teach them how to use the website. Make sure they sign up. Let's help our fellow Americans get covered. (Applause.)
Then let's keep on working to rebuild the middle class. (Applause.) Let's go and focus on creating more good-paying jobs. Let's build more ladders of opportunity for everybody willing to work hard. (Applause.) Let's make sure the United States of America keeps being a place where you can make it if you try.
Thank you, everybody. God bless you. God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)
END
11:42 A.M. EDT
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
Waldorf Astoria Hotel
New York, New York
8:11 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. Hello! Hello! (Applause.) Hello. Hello, everybody. Please have a seat. Thank you. Well, now, first of all, I had a chance to take pictures with everybody, and I have to say this has to be one of the best-looking crews I've ever been with. (Applause.)
I do admit that being upstaged by a magician is something that I try to avoid. (Laughter.) Somebody told me that the face-painting guy is coming in soon. (Laughter.)
But it really is wonderful just to have a chance to be with families. And obviously Malia and Sasha are starting to get a little bit older, but I still remember when they were this huggable. (Laughter.) And I got a couple hugs from some of you, so I very much appreciate that. That made me feel good.
We've got some special guests here today. First of all, your next mayor of New York City -- (applause) -- Bill de Blasio is here. (Applause.) We are thrilled with Bill. His son, Dante, who has the same hairdo I had back in 1978 -- (laughter and applause.) Although I have to confess, my afro was never that good. (Laughter.) It was a little unbalanced.
But we could not be prouder of the campaign Bill ran, the way he gave voice to the values that make us Democrats. And we are confident that he is going to continue to move New York in a direction where everybody has a chance to get ahead. And so we're very proud of him and look forward to seeing him do a great job as the mayor of New York City. (Applause.)
We also have here your outstanding representative, Carolyn Maloney, is here. So give Carolyn a big round of applause. (Applause.) And all of you are here.
Now, some of you may be aware I gave a really long speech at the U.N. today, so I'm going to keep my remarks fairly brief -- also because some of you said you still had homework to do and were trying to get me to sign a note excusing you -- (laughter) -- but we think you will get home in time to do your homework.
We live in such a challenging time. Internationally, we have crises like Syria, the challenge of making sure that Iran’s nuclear program is not weaponized in a way that threatens the region. Here domestically, at home, although we're now growing again, we've got a lot of people out there who are having trouble finding work, are having difficulty making ends meet. We have environmental challenges that we're concerned about for the next generation. We continue to battle on behalf of equality for all people.
And so sometimes I think people tend to feel a little overwhelmed by what they read in the newspapers -- except he doesn’t feel overwhelmed at all. (Laughter.) He’s fine because he had some candy and is going to be up really late tonight. (Laughter.) Yay! (Laughter.)
But the good news is that when you look at the country and the direction we're moving in, what you see is a country that’s becoming more tolerant, a country that's becoming more inclusive, a country that understands there’s no contradiction between growing the economy and conserving this planet for the next generation. We see a nation that in a few weeks is finally going to be in a position to make sure that every single person in America can get affordable health care when they need it. (Applause.)
What you see is people all across the country from every walk of life who believe in this country deeply and understand that the contributions they make every day in working hard, looking after their families, treating people with respect, giving back to their community, volunteering in their places of worship -- that that’s what perfects our Union over time; that it’s not always flashy, but it’s making a difference each and every day.
And sometimes people ask me, how come you don't get more discouraged with some of the nonsense you see out of Washington -- and other than you getting gray hair you seem like you're okay. (Laughter.) And the reason is, is because I get a chance to see all of you, and I see your families and I see your contributions, and I know why I fight for the things I fight for, because I want to make sure that the values that all of you stand for and that you're passing on to your kids, that those are the values that this whole country lives by.
But I can't do it alone. The truth is, is that we could be doing a lot more. The country could be growing faster. We could be putting more people to work. We could be rebuilding our roads and our bridges and our infrastructure. We could be putting in place early-childhood education for every family in America. (Applause.) We could be cutting our deficits in sensible ways, not in ways that impede our growth. We could be caring for those who are vulnerable. We could be opening up more opportunity. We could be doing so much more if we had a Congress that was focused on you and not focused on politics day-to-day. (Applause.)
And the only way that is going to happen is if we've got a strong DNC, and if we are able to get our message out at a time when folks who want to look backwards and roll back the clock and don't really have a lot of regard for people who are struggling -- if we're able to counteract their message with a message of hope.
We can't beat a message of fear if that message isn't delivered, if it’s not projected, if it’s not reaching people. And at a time when folks naturally feel cynical about Washington and politics and the possibilities of change, the only way that we're going to battle back against that kind of cynicism is if all of you get involved. And that's what you're doing here today. (Applause.)
So I am thankful to all of you. I intend to work as hard as I can to make sure that we're doing everything we can on behalf of working families and building a middle class, but I'm also going to be working as hard as I can to make sure that we have a Congress that is able in my last two years as President to get as much done as we got done in our first two years, and making sure that America is the country that we all know it can be.
So, God bless all of you. Thanks for showing up. (Applause.) Appreciate it. Remember to do your homework, those of you who didn’t do it. All right? Thank you. (Applause.) God bless you. (Applause.)
END
8:19 P.M. EDT
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
Sheraton New York Hotel and Towers
New York, New York
5:02 P.M. EDT
MRS. CLINTON: Good afternoon, everyone. (Applause.) Well, thank you. Thank you very much. I have the great pleasure to introduce our next two speakers, who are about to have a conversation concerning health care. And I thought hard about how to introduce these two men. (Laughter.)
And the more I thought about it, the more I realized how much they have in common. They are both left-handed. (Laughter.) They both love golf, a game that does not often reciprocate the love they put into it. (Laughter.) They both are fanatic sports fans and go to great lengths to be in front of the TV or on the side of the court or the field. They both are master politicians. Each of them has only lost one election. (Laughter.) They are both Democrats. They have fabulous daughters. (Laughter.) They each married far above themselves. (Laughter and applause.) And they each love our country.
And so please join me in welcoming Number 42 and Number 44, Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama. (Applause.)
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Mr. President. (Laughter.)
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Are you interviewing me?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: That would be bad. I've been talking a lot today.
PRESIDENT CLINTON: I want to thank you for giving Hillary a job. That was a good thing you did. (Laughter.) Thank you for coming.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, it is wonderful to be back. And let me start just by saying to all the people who have for years now supported the incredible efforts of CGI, thank you. Because wherever we travel, all across the globe, we see the impact that it's making every single day. And we're very proud of what you all do.
And let me say that we still miss our former Secretary of State. (Applause.) And I should add that there's nothing she said that was not true, particularly the part about us marrying up. (Laughter.)
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well, that brings me to my first health care comment. This is going to be a conversation about domestic and international health, and America's role in it. But I want to begin by telling you that I think the First Lady has done a great job in this fight against childhood obesity.
We have been honored at our foundation to be asked to represent her effort in 18,000 schools where we've lowered the calories in drinks being served in schools by 90 percent. But she has been great on that one. The other thing I think is that I was a little upset -- and, as you know, called one of your administration members when you got to Africa -- when I read an article that said that you didn't have a big initiative in Africa. And I said -- I can't say exactly what I said -- (laughter) -- but I said that is inaccurate. (Laughter.) That's the sanitized version of what I said. (Laughter.)
Because when the President took office, our program, begun under President Bush, PEPFAR, was giving antiretroviral medicine to 1.7 million people. Because of an agreement that I made with President Bush to use generic drugs that were approved by the FDA, about half our drugs were being purchased in that way. Under President Obama, we've gone to 99 percent. We are treating more than 5.1 million, three times as many for less money. (Applause.)
That is a stunning legacy -- so that more money has been put into malaria medicine, bed nets, so you saved a lot of money and saved more lives while doing it. And I'm very proud of that. And I want to thank you for it. It's important. (Applause.)
Now, maybe at the end of this conversation we can get back to some of your current global health initiatives. But let's talk a little about the health care law, because we're about to begin on October 1st open enrollment for six months. And I'd like to give you a chance, first of all, to tell them why -- when you took office, we were teetering on the brink of a depression. You had to avert it. You had to start the recovery again. Why in the midst of all this grief did you also take on this complex issue? Many people were saying, why doesn't he just focus on the economy and leave this alone? So tell us why you did it.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, I think it's important to remember that health care is the economy. A massive part of our economy. And so the idea that somehow we can separate out the two is a fallacy.
Second of all, the effort for us to deal with a multifaceted health care crisis has been going on for decades. And the person who just introduced us, as well as you, early in your presidency, had as much to do with helping to shape the conversation as anybody.
The fact is that we have been, up until recently, the only advanced industrialized nation on Earth that permits large numbers of its people to languish without health insurance. Not only is there the cruelty of people who are unable to get health insurance having to use the emergency room as their doctor or their health service, but -- we’re also more efficient than anybody else and so when we talk about, for example, our deficit -- you know this better than anybody -- the reason that we have not only current deficits but also projected long-term deficits -- the structural deficit that we have is primarily based on the fact that we have a hugely inefficient, wildly expensive health care system that does not produce better outcomes.
And if we spent the same amount of money on health care that Canada or France or Great Britain did, or Japan, or any other industrialized country, with the same outcomes or better outcomes, that essentially would remove our structural deficit, which would then free up dollars for us to invest in early-childhood education and infrastructure and medical research and all the other things that can make sure that we’re competitive and growing rapidly over the long term.
So my view when I came into office was we’ve got an immediate crisis -- we’ve got to get the economy growing. But what we also have to do is to start tackling some of these structural problems that had been building up for years. And one of the biggest structural problems was health care. It’s what accounts for our deficit. It’s what accounts for our debt. It causes pain and misery to millions of people all across the country. It is a huge burden on our businesses.
I was out at a Ford plant out in Missouri, making the F series out there, and this is a big stamping plant. Ford is now the biggest seller in the United States. We took that lead back from the Japanese automakers. But we are still burdened by the fact that every U.S. automobile that is manufactured requires a couple of thousand dollars in added health care costs that our foreign competitors don’t have to pay.
So this has everything to do with the economy, in addition to what I consider to be the moral imperative that a mom should not have to go bankrupt if her son or daughter gets sick; that a family who’s dealing with a layoff and is already struggling to pay the bills shouldn’t also be wondering whether they’re one illness away from losing their home. And I think most Americans agree with that. (Applause.)
PRESIDENT CLINTON: So first of all, folks, for those of you who are from the United States, that’s about as good an overview as you’re ever going to hear of what this economic issue is. But you remember the President said our structural deficit would disappear if we had a comparable health care system in terms of cost to the French and Germans that are consistently rated the highest. It’s about a trillion dollars a year, and somewhere around 44 percent of that money is government-funded money. So you just run the numbers. Think -- over half of our deficit has already disappeared because of economic growth and the revenues you raised and the spending we cut. And you pretty much get rid of the rest of it if we just had a comparably expensive system to any other country.
Before you took office, we lost a car company that wanted to locate in Michigan that went instead to Canada, and they announced -- they said, look, we’re a car company that provides health care benefits to an employee, were not a health care company that sells cars to cover our bills. We have to go to Canada. And it was one of the few companies willing to go on record and say this. So thank you for doing it.
So let’s talk about this. What does this open enrollment mean? How are people going to get involved? When you have universal enrollment you can manage your costs better and cut inflation down.
I'll give the President a chance to talk about all the good stuff that's happened, but I just want you to know one thing. In the last three years, just as we started doing this, inflation in health care costs has dropped to 4 percent for three years in a row for the first time in 50 years. Fifty years. (Applause.) Before that, the costs were going up at three times the rate of inflation for a decade.
So now what? What are you going to do on October 1st? Tell them how this has got to work.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, let me give folks just a little bit of background about what’s already in place and then what happens on October 1st.
When we passed the Affordable Care Act, there were a number of components to it. A big part of it was essentially providing a Patient’s Bill of Rights that Americans and advocates have been fighting for for decades. So what we wanted to do was make sure if you already have health insurance that you get a fair deal, that you're being treated well by your insurers.
So we eliminated, prohibited insurance companies from imposing lifetime limits, which oftentimes if a family member really got sick, they thought they were covered until suddenly they hit that limit and now they’re out hundreds of thousands of dollars with no way of paying.
We said to insurance companies, you’ve got to use at least 80 percent of your premium that you're receiving on actual health care -- not on administrative costs and CEO bonuses. And if you don't, you’ve got to rebate anything that you spent back to the consumer. So there are millions of Americans who’ve received rebates. They may not know that they got it because of the Affordable Care Act -- or “Obamacare” -- but they’re pretty happy to get those rebates back, because it made sure that the insurance companies were treating folks fairly.
We said that any young person who doesn’t have health insurance can stay on their parent’s health insurance until they’re 26 years old. And as a consequence, what we’ve seen is steadily the rate of uninsured for young people dropping over the last three years since the bill passed and obviously providing a lot of relief to a lot of parents out there because a lot of young people, as they’ve been entering into the job market at a time when jobs are tough to get and oftentimes benefits are slim, this is providing enormous security until they get more firmly established in the labor market.
We provided additional discounts for prescription drugs for seniors under the Medicare program. And so seniors have saved billions of dollars when it comes to their prescription drugs.
So there have been over the last three years a whole array of consumer protections and savings for consumers that result directly from the law that we passed. And for those who say that they want to repeal it, typically when you ask them about, what are all these various benefits, they say, well, that one is good, and that one is pretty good, and we’d keep that. And you pretty much go down the list, and there’s not too much people object to.
You will recall also at the time that part of the way that we paid for the health care bill was we said Medicare is wasting a lot of money without making seniors healthier. And there was a lot of hue and cry about how we were taking money out of Medicare -- well, it turns out that we were right, that we could change how doctors and hospitals and providers were operating, rewarding them for outcomes, as opposed to simply how many procedures that they did. You started seeing practices change among millions of providers across the country. Medicare rates have actually slowed in terms of inflation. Seniors have saved money. Folks are healthier. And some of those savings we’ve been able to use to make sure that people who don't have health insurance get health insurance.
Now, this brings me to October 1st. The one part of the Affordable Care Act that required several years to set up, but a critical part, was how do we provide health insurance for individuals who don't get health insurance through the job? It’s a historical accident that in this country health care is attached to employers. And part of the problem is if you’re out there shopping for health insurance on your own, you're not part of a big pool, well, there’s no aggregation of risk taking place for the insurers. So they're basically going to say, let’s see, you're 50 years old. You got high blood pressure. And we just look at the actuarial tables and we figure you’re going to get sick, so we’re going to charge you $1,500 a month for health insurance, which the average person has no way of affording -- because there’s no pooling of risk.
So what we said was we need to set up a mechanism to pool people who currently don't have health insurance so that they have the same purchasing power, the same leverage that a big companies does when they're negotiating with the insurance company.
And essentially what we’ve done is we’ve created what we’re calling marketplaces in every state across the country where consumers are now able to be part of a big pool. Insurers have to bid, essentially compete for the business of that pool. And what we now have set up are these marketplaces that provide high-quality health care at affordable prices, giving people choices so that they can get the health insurance that they need and they want. And the premiums are significantly lower than what they were able to previously get.
I’ll take the example of New York State. The insurers put in their bids to participate in these marketplaces. It turns out that their rates are up to 50 percent lower than what was available previously if you just went on the open market and you tried to get health insurance. (Applause.) Fifty percent lower in this state. California -- it’s about 33 percent lower. In my home state of Illinois, they just announced it’s about 25 percent lower.
So just by pooling and creating competition so that insurers have to go after people’s business the way they go after a group plan, we have drastically reduced premiums and costs. On top of that, what we’re now doing is we’re saying if with the better deal that you got you still can’t afford it, we’re going to give you tax credits to essentially subsidize your purchase of health insurance.
And here’s the net result. We’ll be continuing to roll out what the actual prices are going to end up being, but I can tell you right now that in many states across the country, if you’re, say, a 27-year-old young woman, don’t have health insurance, you get on that exchange, you’re going to be able to purchase high-quality health insurance for less than the cost of your cellphone bill. And because all the insurers who participate are required to, for example, provide free preventive care, free contraceptive care, that young woman, she may make up what she’s spending on premiums just on her monthly use of health care.
So this is going to be a good deal for those who don’t have health insurance. Those who already have health insurance get better health insurance. And the best part of the whole thing is, because of these changes we initiated in terms of how we’re paying providers, health care costs have grown, as you pointed out, Mr. President, at the slowest rate in 50 years. We are bending the cost curve and getting at the problems that are creating our deficits in Medicare and Medicaid. (Applause.)
PRESIDENT CLINTON: I should point out that, so far, in most states, one of the good things that at least I didn’t know whether it would happen is when we began this in the United States, more than 80 percent of the American states had only one or two companies providing health insurance who had more than 80 percent of the market. So there was, in effect, no price competition. So what I was terrified of was we’d open these things and there would only be one company show up and bid, and this whole thing, we’d be having an academic conversation. Instead, it’s actually led to the establishment of more companies doing more bidding.
And I think part of it is they have greater confidence that they can deliver health care at a more modest cost. So, so far, it’s good. But I think it’s important for you to the tell the people why we’re doing all this outreach -- because this only works, for example, if young people show up. And even if they buy their cheapest plan, then they claim their tax credits, so it won’t cost them much -- 100 bucks a month or so. We got to have them in the pools, because otherwise all these projected low costs cannot be held if older people with preexisting conditions are disproportionately represented in any given state. You've got to have everybody lined up.
So explain what kind of -- all the work you've been doing on the outreach for the opening on October.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I think President Clinton makes a really important point. And the way pools work, any pool, is essentially those of us who are healthy subsidize somebody who is sick at any given time. We do that because we anticipate, well, at some point we'll get sick and hope the healthy person is in our pool so those costs and those risks get spread. That's what insurance is all about.
And what happens is if you don't have pools that are a cross-section of society, then people who are already sick or more likely to get sick, they'll all rush out and buy insurance. People who are healthy, they say, you know what, I won't bother. And you get what's called adverse selection. Essentially what happens is that the premiums start going higher and higher because the risks aren't spread broadly enough across the population.
So you want to get a good cross-section in every pool. That's why big companies have an easier time getting good rates for their employees than small companies, because if you only have five employees and one person is stricken with breast cancer, let's say, your rates potentially shoot up. But if it's a thousand employees, then it gets spread out.
So on October 1st, open enrollment begins. All these folks can start signing up for the marketplace. And what we want to make sure of is that everybody, in every category, in every age group, understands why health insurance is important, understands why they should sign up, understands the choices that are going to be available to them. They're going to be able to go to a computer, tap on the web page and they're going to be able to shop just like you shopped for an airline ticket or a flat-screen TV, and see what's the best price for you, what's the plan that's best suited for you, and go ahead and sign up right there and then.
And that the open enrollment period will last from October 1st until the end of March and so there will be six months for folks to sign up. Normally, this would be pretty straightforward. A lot of people don't have health insurance. A lot of people realize they should get health insurance. But let's face it, it's been a little political, this whole Obamacare thing. (Laughter.) And so what you’ve had is an unprecedented effort that you’ve seen ramp up over the last month or so in which those who have opposed the idea of universal health care in the first place and have fought this thing tooth and nail through Congress and through the courts and so forth have been trying to scare and discourage people from getting a good deal. And some of you may have seen some of the commercials out there that are a little whacky.
And the main message we have -- and we’re using social media, we’re talking to churches, we’re talking to various civic groups -- and what we’re saying to people is, look, just go to the website yourself. Go to healthcare.gov; take a look at whether this is a good deal or not and make your own decision about whether this is good for you. Because what we are confident about is that when people look and see that they can get high-quality, affordable health care for less than their cell phone bill, they’re going to sign up. They are going to sign up.
And part of what I think the resistance that we’ve seen ramp up particularly over the last couple of months is all about is the opponents of health care reform know they’re going to sign up. In fact, one of the major opponents, when asked, well, why is it that you’d potentially shut down the government at this point just to block Obamacare, he basically fessed up. He said, well, once consumers get hooked on having health insurance and subsidies, then they won’t want to give it up. (Laughter.) I mean, that’s -- you can look at the transcript. This is one of the major opponents of health care reform. It is an odd logic. Essentially they’re saying people will like this thing too much and then it will be really hard to roll back.
So it is very important that people just know what’s out there, what’s available to them, and let people make up their own minds as to whether it makes sense or not.
Now, one last thing I want to say, because I do think sometimes -- people come up to me and they say, well, if this is such a good deal, how come the polls show that it’s not popular? Well, one of the things you and I both know is that when you come to health care, there’s no more personal and intimate decision for people. I mean, this is something that people really care about. And frankly, the devil you know is always better than the devil you don’t know. And that’s what “Harry and Louise” was all about back in the ‘90s, right? It was scaring people with the prospect of change.
And so part of our goal here is just to make sure people have good information. And there has been billions of dollars spent making people scared and worried about this stuff. And rather than trying to disabuse people of every single bit of misinformation that’s been out there, what we’re saying is just look for yourself. Take a look at it and you will discover that this is a good deal for you.
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well, first of all, I completely agree with that. I think we’ve got to just drive people to the websites. The states that are participating -- the Supreme Court decision that upheld the health care law said that states didn’t have to set up these marketplaces if they didn’t want to, but if they didn’t the federal government would set it up. They also said that states didn’t have to expand Medicaid coverage to help people whose incomes are up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level buy health insurance.
There are some states, believe it or not, that want the marketplace but don't want the Medicaid. And that's going to lead to a cruel result, and there’s nothing the President can do and it’s not his fault. That's what the Supreme Court said. So we can have this bizarre situation where, let’s say, a business with 60 employees can -- or an individual going into the individual market will get the benefit of tax credits for everybody with incomes of 138 percent of the federal poverty level or above, but they won't get it for people who are between 100 and 138 percent. So lower-income people who desperately need the health insurance -- we would have the cruelest of all situations in those states. And there’s nothing the President can do about it because of the Supreme Court decision. So we have to persuade the states to come on. But more and more states with Republican governors, Republican legislatures are doing it.
Tell them about Arkansas, because we're doing well down there. (Laughter.)
PRESIDENT OBAMA: A little hometown bias, there’s nothing wrong with that. (Laughter.) A couple of things that are happening that I think are very interesting. First of all, look, I'm sympathetic to some of these Republican governors who are under a lot of pressure because the whole issue of whether you're for Obamacare or not has become a litmus test in the other party. So some of them, politically it’s been tough; sometimes state legislatures that refuse to allow governors to go ahead and implement.
But as you indicated, what we've seen is that when Republican governors take a look at the deal they’re getting where, in addition to these exchanges, we're also providing a much more significant match, much more federal money to provide health insurance -- from the state’s perspective, they’re not paying; the federal government is picking up the tab -- and this is helping them because people are no longer going to the emergency room and they now have good health care, they’re now getting preventive care. You're seeing some Republican governors step up and saying, I may not like Obamacare, but I’m going to go ahead and make sure that my people are benefiting from this plan. So that's one good thing that's happening.
The second thing that's happening is there are a couple of states -- Arkansas is a good example; Kentucky is another good example; Idaho, interesting example -- these are states where I just got beat. I mean, I do not have a big constituency in these states. (Laughter.) Well, I take that back. You know what, 40 percent is still a lot of people -- but I’m losing by 20 percent in these states. But the governors were still able to say we’re going to set up our own state exchanges, their own marketplaces. And each state is just using their own name for it.
So I had a meet -- I had a conference, a video conference with all the state directors of all the marketplaces, and I’m talking to the director in Kentucky and Idaho. And in Kentucky, it’s called like, Kentucky Connect. And in Idaho, it’s called the Idaho Health Care Exchange. And there’s a story that came out of Kentucky where some folks were signing people up at a county fair somewhere. Some guy goes up and he starts looking at the rates and decides he’s going to sign up. And he turns to his friend and said, this is a great deal. This is a lot better than Obamacare. (Laughter.) Right? Which is fine. (Laughter.) Because we -- I don't have pride of authorship on this thing. I just want the thing to work.
And Arkansas just came out with its rates, and as has been true in virtually every single state, not only are premiums lower than they were, they're a lot lower than even the most optimistic predictions were about how low they would be.
And once these marketplaces are up and running, it turns out that what has traditionally been a pretty conservative principle, which is competition and choice work, well, in the insurance market, competition and choice work. And what we’re seeing is that people are going to be able to get the kind of health care that they have never been able to get before. States are going to benefit from it because they're going to save money.
And one thing that all of you -- there are probably very few people in this room who don't have health insurance, although if you don't, you should sign up starting on October 1st. (Laughter.) One of the things that many people don't realize is that the subsidy that all of you provide for the uninsured is about $1,000 per family. You pay $1,000 -- everybody here who has got health insurance pays about $1,000 more for your families' insurance than you otherwise would have, because hospitals are mandated, they are required to provide service to anybody who shows up. And so what happens is when you've got 15 percent of the population without health insurance, they end up showing up at the emergency room typically at a point when they're much sicker than if they had been getting regular checkups and preventive care. So you pay for the most expensive care there is, because hospitals have got to recoup that money somewhere.
And the way they do it is to charge higher prices. And people who have health insurance end up picking it up. So part of what will help reduce the increase in health care costs is making sure that that hidden subsidy no longer exists.
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Let's talk a little bit about business, because we're out of time, but I think it's really important. As you pointed out, most people who have insurance work for a living, or somebody in their family does, and they get their insurance through their workplace. The law says that all employers have to participate if they have 50 employees or more. Many employers with fewer than 50 employees already voluntarily provide some health insurance.
Both the companies with 50 or more and the companies with fewer than 50 are somewhat concerned. And the employees that have to be insured are those who work 30 hours a week or more. So there were many people who speculated that when this law came into place that it would add to the cost and there would be a lot more part-time workers instead of full-time workers. I'll save the President the time in the interview on this -- so far, that's not true. The overwhelming number of people who have been hired coming out of this recession have been -- they have been hired at lower wages, but they have been full-time employees.
There has not been an increase in the percentage of our employment in part-time work. There has been an increase in relatively lower-wage new jobs. But that means they need health insurance even more. So explain very briefly to them how this is going to work, how private employers are helped to buy their insurance and the requirements.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, if you're a large employer or an employer with more than 50 employees, you’re already providing health insurance, you don’t have to do anything other than just make sure that you can show that you’re providing health insurance.
And there was a lot of news recently about how we delayed the so-called employer mandate for a year -- because under the law, what it says is if you have more than 50 employees, you’re not providing health insurance to your employees, then you’re going to pay a penalty to help pay for the fact that we, the taxpayers, are going to have to provide your employees with health insurance -- which, by the way, is only fair.
A lot of the controversy around the Affordable Care Act had to do with these so-called mandates, both an employer mandate and an individual mandate. And the employer mandate says, if you don’t meet your responsibilities by your employees, and they end up getting Medicaid or they’re ending up in the emergency room, you’re basically dumping those costs onto society. That’s not fair. So we’re going to charge you a couple thousand dollars to help pay for health care for those employees.
To the individuals, what we said was we’re going to make health insurance so affordable, so cheap for you, so heavily subsidized if you’re not making a lot of money, that if you’re not getting health insurance then it’s because you just decided you don’t want to, you don’t need to. And in that circumstance, what happens when you get hit by a bus, heaven forbid, or somebody in your family gets sick, and you hadn’t had them covered? Well, we’re going to end up having to pay for you anyway because we’re not going to just let somebody bleed in front of the emergency room. So what we’ve said is you’ve got to take responsibility, and so there’s a small penalty if you don’t get health insurance.
This is where a lot of the controversy and unpopularity came in, because people generally don’t like to be told, “you’ve got to get health insurance,” and employers don’t like be told, “you’ve got to give your employees health insurance.” But, as a society, what we cannot do is to say, you have no responsibilities whatsoever, but you’ve got guaranteed coverage.
And this raises the whole issue of preexisting conditions, which we haven’t talked a lot about but is really important. One of the central components of this law, one of the main perversities of the health care system before this law passed was there were millions of people around the country who, if you had gotten sick before, if you had had a heart attack, if you had had cancer, if you had diabetes; let’s say, when it first happened you had a job, you got cured; then you lose your job or you’re trying to change jobs or you’re trying to start a business, you try to go out and get health insurance, the health insurance company not only could deny you but had every incentive to deny you. Because, basically, they’d rather have healthy people who are paying premiums and never asking for a payout. They don’t want somebody who actuarially they can anticipate might get sick.
And so, keep in mind that a huge percentage of our society has some sort of preexisting condition, and they can be locked out. You can do everything right, work hard, build a strong middle-class life, but if you’ve been sick and then you lose your job or something happens, you may suddenly be locked out of the insurance market, or the premiums may be so high that only somebody fabulously rich could afford it.
So what we said is, all right, you know what, insurance companies, you can no longer bar somebody from getting health insurance just because they’ve got a preexisting condition. But the only way that works is if everybody had a requirement to get health insurance. Because think about what happens if you don’t have that rule. Well, all of us -- not all of us, but a lot of us who were trying to figure out how to save some money would say, well, I’m not going to worry about it until I get sick, and then right when I’m diagnosed with something that’s going to be expensive I’ll go to the insurance company and say, you can’t prevent me from getting health insurance just because I’ve got a preexisting condition. So they could potentially game the system and it wouldn’t work.
So now what we’ve done is said you’ve got to provide health insurance to anybody, all comers -- that’s the deal. The flipside of it is everybody has got some responsibility and we’ll help you pay for it to get health insurance. And that's where a lot of the misunderstandings, the frustrations about health care reform came in.
I should add, by the way, that this was the same proposition that was set up in Massachusetts under a governor named Mitt Romney that's working really well. Ninety-nine percent of the people in Massachusetts have coverage. And that same principle was, ironically, considered a very smart Republican conservative principle. But it was the right one. The economics of it are true.
So, just to finish up the question, when it comes to businesses, if you're already providing health insurance for your employees, that's great. You don't have do much other than just make sure that you show us that you’ve got health insurance for your employees.
If you have more than 50 employees, and you’re not providing health insurance for them, you now have the opportunity to join a pool of small businesses to get a better price and a better deal on health insurance. You're eligible for tax credits in providing health insurance to your employees. Up to 35 percent of the premiums for each employee will be a tax benefit -- a tax credit from the federal government. But if you still aren’t providing health insurance for your employees after that, then we’re going to go ahead and penalize you for it.
And I can understand why some businesses wouldn’t want to pay for it. If they're not currently providing health insurance for their employees, what that means is that they’d rather have those additional profits than make sure that their employees are getting a fair deal.
In some cases, they may be operating under some very small margins. But keep in mind, since people are -- companies are exempted, the average small business with five employees, mom-and-pop shop, 10 employees, they're not under that requirement. So I’m not that sympathetic to a company, typically, if it’s got more than 50 employees and generating some significant revenue, we’re making it affordable for them to provide health insurance for their employees. They should do the right thing. (Applause.)
PRESIDENT CLINTON: I agree with that. We have to close, but I think there’s one last issue we ought to deal with. The most important thing obviously is just to get people enrolled in this. We’ll work through it as we go along.
But you just heard the President say that so far in virtually every state, the actual prices of the insurance are coming in quite a bit lower than they were originally estimated to. With the original price estimates and with the government obligated to provide subsidies -- which costs money on the budget, right? -- it was, nonetheless, estimated that in the first 10 years, this would keep the national debt $110 billion lower than it otherwise would have been, which means if we come in at even less, we can bring the debt down more, or we can subsidize more small businesses and get more small businesses into this loop.
A lot of people come up to me and say, now, you sound like the people you used to criticize who say we could cut taxes all day long, increase spending and balance the budget. Don't give me that; this sounds too good to be true. So I think before you leave, you should tell people how we can spend more -- not so much in direct spending, but in tax credits -- and still wind up reducing overall federal spending by $110 billion during this decade.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, a couple of things just in terms of how this whole thing got paid for. First of all, I think it’s really important to point out here that the total cost of the Affordable Care Act to provide health insurance for every American out there at an affordable rate is costing about the same amount over the course of 10 years as the cost of the prescription drug bill that President Bush passed -- except that wasn’t paid for. We felt obliged to actually pay for it and not just add to the deficit. (Applause.)
So what we did -- it’s paid for by a combination of things. We did raise taxes on some things. We, for example, said that for high-end income individuals, you can pay a slightly higher Medicare rate -- Medicare tax. So we bumped that up a little bit. We said that for employers who are currently providing a so-called Cadillac health care plan, where there are so many bells and whistles, there’s no incentive to actually spend wisely when it comes to health care -- we’re actually going to penalize you for that -- not only to raise a little bit of money, but also to say you're encouraging the worst aspects of a health care system where you spend a lot of money, you don't get better outcomes.
I mentioned to you Medicare. We basically said -- there’s a program in Medicare called Medicare Advantage that provides some additional options for Medicare recipients above and beyond standard Medicare. And it’s very popular with a lot of seniors. You get eyeglasses and other benefits. But it turned out that it was so uncompetitive that we were providing tens of billions of dollars of subsidies to the insurance companies under this Medicare Advantage Plan without getting better outcomes, health outcomes for seniors.
So what we said was we'll keep Medicare Advantage and we'll give them a small premium if they're providing better services for seniors, but we're going to make you compete for it a little bit. And we're going to save tens of billions of dollars in the process, and that will go into paying for the Affordable Care Act.
So the bottom line is, through these various mechanisms we raised enough money to pay for providing health insurance for those who don't have it, to provide these tax credits in the marketplace, and at the same time, because we're driving down costs, we actually end up saving a little money. It is a net reduction of our deficit.
The irony of those who are talking about repealing Obamacare because it's so wildly expensive is if they actually repealed the law, it would add to the deficit. It would add to the deficit.
Now, there have been a couple of Republicans in the House who have been smart enough to say, we're going to repeal all the benefits so that 25, 30 million people don't get health insurance, but we're going to keep the taxes that Obama raised, we just won't talk about that. And then, that way we can say we reduced the deficit. But obviously, you're doing some funny business there with the budget.
But, look, nothing is free. The bottom line, though, is do we want to continue to live in a society where we've got the most inefficient health care system on Earth, leaving millions of people exposed to the possibilities that they could lose everything because they get sick? Or we've got little children and families going to the emergency room once a week because they've got asthma and other preventable diseases, because their families aren't linked up with a primary care physician who is providing them regular care? Where the costs to society for reduced productivity, illnesses, et cetera, all burden our businesses? Is that the kind of society we aspire to?
And I think the answer is no. And the notion that we would resist, or at least some would resist as fiercely as they have, make this their number-one agenda, perpetuating a system in which millions of people across the country, hardworking Americans don't have access to health care I think is wrong. (Applause.)
PRESIDENT CLINTON: We have to close. But I will close with a story. I told you all this morning that the employee that our health access program lost in the Kenya mall shooting was a Dutch nurse. And we spend a lot of time in the Netherlands; we get a lot of support there. Oxi is one of the biggest insurance companies in Europe. They're one of our partners here. I went to celebrate their 200th anniversary with them. They started as a fire insurance company with 39 farmers, 200 years ago.
And we were out there in this big farm field in a tent in the shadow of a 13th century church and a big Dutch windmill. And I asked the chairman of the company, I said, do you write health insurance? Because in the Netherlands there's no Medicare and no Medicaid, everybody is on an individual mandate and you just subsidize people based on their incomes.
He said, yes, I write it; we all do. And he looked at me and he said, but we don't make any money on it. And he said, we shouldn't. This guy is running a huge -- can you imagine somebody saying that in America? (Laughter.) He said, we shouldn't. If I can't make money on this business doing traditional insurance business, I've got no business in the work. He said, look, health care is a public good and you've got to find a way to finance it for everybody. (Applause.) And he said, it's just an intermediary function that somebody has to handle. But in the end, it's how it's delivered, how it's priced, and how healthy you can keep your people.
So the First Lady is trying to keep us all healthier, and you're trying to change the delivery and the pricing. And you have to cover everybody to do it. I think this is a big step forward for America. This will, over the next decade, not only make us healthier, but it will free up in the private sector largely funds that can then be reinvested in other areas of economic growth, and give us a much more well-balanced economy. But, first, we've got to get everybody to sign up.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Everybody, sign up. Go to healthcare.gov. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
END
5:52 P.M. EDT
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
Conference Building-United Nations
New York, New York
3:06 P.M. EDT
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I want to thank President Abbas for this opportunity to speak to him once again. The last time that we had an extensive discussion was in Ramallah during my visit to both Israel and the West Bank. And at that time I said to both sides that I remain deeply committed, and the United States remains deeply committed to bringing about a just and lasting peace to a conflict that has been going on too long.
And I want to say that President Abbas I think has consistently rejected violence, has recognized the need for peace, and I’m grateful to him for his efforts.
The position of the United States has been clear. The border of Israel and Palestine should be based on 1967 lines with mutually agreed-to swaps so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states with robust security provisions so that Israel retains the ability to defend itself, by itself, against any threats.
And I am very pleased that President Abbas has been willing to enter into negotiations. Sitting directly at the table, we’ve seen Palestinian and Israeli representatives discuss some of the most difficult issues that have been roadblocks to peace for too long.
None of us are under any illusion that this would be easy. As I said in my speech this morning, it has already entailed significant political risk by President Abbas, as well as Prime Minister Netanyahu. But I think the reason that they’ve been willing to take those risks is they realize this is the best way, the only way, for us to achieve what should be our goal: two states living side-by-side in peace and security. It’s right for Palestinian children. It’s right for Israeli children.
And having leaders who are willing to look out into the future and take risks on behalf of that better history is something that the United States intends to support as strongly as possible. And I’m urging all my counterparts, heads of state here at the United Nations to support this effort as well.
Last point I would make -- the Palestinian Authority has been a critical mechanism to improve governance and increase transparency in the West Bank. Obviously, the Palestinian Authority operates under significant constraints, including resource constraints. But we think it's very important that we continue to support efforts that have been made by the Authority, for example, to improve internal security and professionalize security forces inside the Authority. And that, I think, lays also an important foundation for the kind of economic development and governance that will be critical for an independent Palestinian state.
So, Mr. President, thank you for taking the time to be with me here today. And I look forward to our discussions.
PRESIDENT ABBAS: (As interpreted.) Thank you very much, Mr. President, for hosting us here and agreeing to meet with us to discuss very critical issues related to the peace process in the Middle East.
And we still -- and our people still remember very proudly the historical visit that you paid to the Palestinian Territories, after which we launched peace negotiations with your support and help, and also with the involvement of Mr. Kerry. And we appreciate all the support that the U.S. is extending to the Palestinian people to build the institutions of the future Palestinian state, which hopefully will materialize very soon with your support and continued assistance.
And as we have said in the past, and we can continue to reiterate, that we are fully committed to the peace process so that we can reach a final settlement that ultimately will lead to the creation of an independent Palestinian state that would live side-by-side in peace and security with Israel.
And as you have indicated, Mr. President, we have no illusions that peace will be easy or simple. And we have to overcome several difficulties, but we realize that peace in the Middle East is not just important for the Palestinians and Israelis, it’s important for the entire region and the world.
We appreciate your support for the continuation of the negotiations, and we will exert every effort possible to make sure that they will succeed and to take advantage of this historical opportunity. We understand there will be difficulties, but we will do our utmost best to overcome them.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you, everybody.
END
3:13 P.M. EDT
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
Conference Building
United Nations
11:42 A.M. EDT
PRESIDENT OBAMA: It’s a great pleasure to have the time to meet with President Sleiman of Lebanon. He has shown extraordinary leadership through a very challenging period for not only Lebanon, but also for the region. I appreciate his courage and determination to maintain Lebanon’s unity and stability, and he has the full support of the United States in his efforts to uphold Lebanon’s sovereignty and independence.
I commend the President’s efforts in insisting that all parties in Lebanon refrain from engaging in the Syrian conflict. The United States strongly rejects Hezbollah’s deep involvement in the Syrian conflict, which at this point has displaced millions of people and threatens to destabilize the region. We are pleased that there may be progress in getting rid of Syria’s chemical weapons, which I think would be important for the security not only of the Syrian people but also for neighbors like Lebanon. And we will continue, as I said in my speech this morning, to press for a resolution of the Syrian conflict so that the rights of all Syrians are upheld, including Christians.
The Lebanese people have been tremendously generous during this difficult period, welcoming hundreds of thousands of refugees from Syria into their homes and their villages. The United States is providing over $254 million in humanitarian assistance to assist refugees in Lebanon in communities that are hosting them. And as you heard me say today, I think it’s very important for the international community to step up to do even more.
The United States also strongly supports the role of the Lebanese Armed Forces in maintaining Lebanon’s stability. And today we're announcing an additional $8.7 million that will provide needed equipment in support of the Lebanese Armed Forces’ internal stability and border security missions.
So, Mr. President, thank you for your strong efforts in maintaining unity and stability in Lebanon. You should feel confident that the United States will work very hard not only with you but also in encouraging the international community to provide the support that Lebanon needs at this difficult time, and to deal with the spillover of the crisis in Syria. And thank you for taking the time to meet with me today.
PRESIDENT SLEIMAN: (As translated.) At the outset, I would like to thank President Obama for fixing this meeting that I consider very important in this period that Lebanon and the Middle East are going through. It is indeed a very difficult period because Lebanon lives in between various conflicts and crises that are now posing a threat to all of us.
First we began with the Israeli conflict, which has led to the displacement of hundreds of Palestinian refugees towards Lebanon, and today we are facing the Syrian crisis, which also has led to the displacement of around one million Syrians until now -- that amount now to one-fourth of the Lebanese population.
The United States of America has provided continuous support to Lebanon. It has supported the political process. It has supported the Lebanese Armed Forces. And today we have heard President Obama declare the allocation of $8.7 million additional for the Lebanese army, aside from the assistance provided by the United States to support the refugees in order to enable us to host them, and, of course, the United States’ contribution to the adoption of the presidential declaration by the Security Council on the 10th of July, which constitutes a road map for the support of Lebanon on all levels.
At the eve of the international meeting for the International Support Group for Lebanon scheduled for tomorrow, the 25th of September, we do hope that the United States will have a great contribution to this meeting in order to provide further political and economic support for Lebanon, as well as support for the Lebanese Armed Forces and the necessary support to assimilate or to take in the Syrian refugees.
Of course, taking in the Syrian refugees depends on Lebanon sharing the financial burdens of taking them in, as well as their numeral burdens, so we're thinking of implicating or involving the states in hosting some numbers of these refugees. This, of course, requires to consider how they can be relocated and hosted in some safe zones inside Syria if further tension occurs, and working also on returning some of these refugees to Syria, to some safe zones, through the U.N. organization. Of course, Syria has plenty of vast spaces away from the conflict, where they can be relocated. And here we have to mention that the area of Syria is 18 times that of Lebanon.
At the political level, the Lebanese constitution, which was based on the Ta'if Accord, has set up a safety net, a political safety net in Lebanon, which helped it to get over all the crises. At this point of time, during this period, we need an international escort through an international safety net to spare us all the repercussions of the crises and conflicts going on around Lebanon.
This political process has to be pursued in Lebanon by putting into application the Baabda Declaration. The Baabda Declaration is the agreement reached by all the members of the National Dialogue Committee. And it sets out not to interfere in the Syrian affairs by all the Lebanese parties. Of course, we are working and striving in order to implement all the provisions of this declaration by all the Lebanese parties.
On the other hand, we wish that the necessary impetus would be given to support the Lebanese Armed Forces to the five-year capabilities building plan in order to enable it to undertake all its mission regarding the defense exclusively of the Lebanese territories and countering the terrorist operations which have reached out to all the world. And Lebanon, of course, can be a victim of these actions, terrorist actions, as a result of the extension of extremism and terrorism in the region.
Of course, all these issues, they come in the frame of the expected solution in the region, and first of all, the solution for Syria. We hope that the American-Russian agreement about chemical weapons will mark the beginning of the process of finding a political solution that will ensure democracy in Syria as well as peace and security in its neighboring countries.
Of course, we have to talk about the ongoing negotiations under U.S. patronage between the Palestinians and the Israelis about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. We hope that these negotiations will be a step towards comprehensive negotiations aiming at reaching a just and comprehensive solution for the Middle East according to the terms of reference of the Madrid Conference, the international resolutions and the Arab Peace Initiative. Of course, these negotiations, they affect the neighboring countries, and especially Lebanon, which have a pending fight in this context that relates to the settlement of the Palestinian refugees. Lebanon cannot accept the settlement of these refugees on its territory, according to the Arab Peace Initiative.
In all cases, we hope that attention will be given to the security of the Arab region. This region is characterized by culture and civilization and diversity. It is the cradle of the divine religions, and we hope that it will be taken as a strategic objective for peace in the Middle East and in the world.
Of course, this can be done by facilitating and preserving the presence of the constituents of these countries. I mean by that the civilization constituents which are deeply rooted in these countries. These are the minorities. We have to preserve a free and active presence of these minorities not only by catering for their physiological and security needs, but also by involving them in political activity of the country where they live, regardless of their numbers, but taking into account the civilization that these minorities represent.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you, everybody.
END
12:04 P.M. EDT
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
United Nations
New York, New York
1:37 P.M. EDT
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Ladies and gentlemen, as is always the case with these lunches, I exceeded my time this morning, and so you've heard enough from me. (Laughter.) But as President of the host country, I do simply want to say thank you to all of you and express my appreciation for Secretary Ban for his principled leadership as well as the extraordinary hard work of his team.
Mr. Secretary-General, you continue to provide the moral vision that we seek from the United Nations as well as a practical sense of how we can achieve that vision. And so on behalf of all of us, we want to say thank you very much.
I also want to salute all who help sustain our United Nations, often unseen and unheralded. This includes the dedicated U.N. inspectors in Damascus who set out into battlefield conditions. They braved sniper fire. They worked diligently with great professionalism. They uncovered the truth, and they have the thanks of the world. Meanwhile, we see thousands of peacekeepers in blue helmets standing watch around the world from Haiti to the DRC to Cyprus, so that people in countries recovering from conflict and strife can have the chance to build a more hopeful life.
After the Yalta Conference, shortly before the United Nations was founded, President Roosevelt spoke of what it would take to achieve a lasting and durable peace. "The structure of world peace," he said, "cannot be the work of one man or one party or one nation. It cannot be an American peace or a British, a Russian, a French, or a Chinese peace. It cannot be a peace of large nations or of small nations. It must be a peace which rests on the cooperative effort of the whole world." These words are more true today than ever, whether it's preventing the spread of deadly weapons, promoting democratic governance, or fighting daily battles against poverty and hunger and deprivation. International peace, development, and security will not be achieved by one nation or one group of nations. It must be the work of all of us.
So I want to propose a toast to our host and great friend, Secretary-General Ban, to all those here in New York and around the world who help sustain the United Nations, and to the spirit that we need the cooperative effort of the whole world. Cheers. Salud.
END
1:40 P.M. EDT
The White House
Office of the First Lady
The Studio Museum in Harlem
New York, New York
12:23 P.M. EDT
MRS. OBAMA: Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you so much. Thank you all. It's wonderful to see you all. Please, please rest. I am beyond thrilled to have you all here today.
I want to start by, of course, thanking Thelma, not just for her kind introduction, but for hosting us here today. For a museum of this size, it's quite a heavy lift to bring in the spouses from countries all over the world. So I am so grateful to Thelma and the entire staff here at the Studio Museum for making this visit possible, and for putting in so much work to make it such a wonderful success.
I also want to thank Marcus Samuelsson, who is the chef for today. He and his staff from a restaurant located here in Harlem, Red Rooster -- one of my favorites -- they will be preparing a very delicious and culturally exciting lunch for us. He couldn’t be here today, but in our gift -- the basket that I'm providing to each of you, there is a wonderful book of his recipes that he has signed for all of you, just to show his gratitude for all that you all do for this country and this world.
I also want to recognize Mrs. Ban, who is here today. She is one of my favorite people, and I'm just so grateful that you could be here today. And I have to, of course, thank and recognize all of the wonderful young people and performers who are a part of today's event. We are going to see some beautiful children from the Dance Theater of Harlem, who will perform for us. And as Thelma mentioned, all of the talented students who have provided the music today from the La Guardia Arts High School -- we should give them a round of applause. They did a wonderful job. (Applause.) So very talented. It is such a pleasure to be able to showcase young talent, and to give them this kind of forum to show their hard work.
But we're going to also have a very special treat -- one of my dear friends, who is a Tony and Grammy Award-winning star, Audra McDonald, who is going to sing. She has the voice of an angel, and she will be here to grace us with a performance, as well.
And finally, I truly want to thank all of you, our distinguished guests from across the globe. It is such a pleasure to be able to welcome you all here to this great American city, but more importantly, to this great American neighborhood.
Now, there’s a reason why I wanted to bring you all to Harlem today, and that is because this community, as Thelma mentioned, is infused with a kind of energy and passion that is quintessentially American, but that has also touched so many people around the world.
As you may know, in the early 20th century, Harlem was the cultural heart of the black community in the United States. And this neighborhood drew some of the greatest African American artists our country has ever known -- painters like Aaron Douglas. Writers like Langston Hughes and Zora Neale Hurston. Musicians like Louis Armstrong, Ella Fitzgerald, Duke Ellington.
Many of these men and women left the South just a couple of generations after the end of slavery. And they were desperate to find a place where they could explore their talents and express their ideas freely. This moment in history came to be known as the Harlem Renaissance, and together, the artists who lived in this neighborhood sought to define and articulate the African American experience.
And their art was truly a revelation for the African American community. Their paintings depicted black subjects. Their novels and plays featured black protagonists. Their music and dance brilliantly expressed the complexity of the black experience in America –- all of its struggles and triumphs, the tragedies and joys.
But the influence of these artists wasn’t just felt here in America. Ella Fitzgerald and Louis Armstrong lit up stages throughout Europe. Aaron Douglas’ art has been viewed by people across the globe. And young people from so many nations have been inspired by the poetry of Langston Hughes, particularly his famous poet -- poem “Dreams,” with its timeless words: “Hold fast to dreams, for if dreams die, life is a broken-winged bird that cannot fly.”
So in a way, this neighborhood is a thread that connects all of us here today, no matter where we’re from or what language we speak. And I think the same can be said for the exhibit we’re surrounded by today –- these works of art by Robert Pruitt that you see on the wall which highlight the strength and dignity of women.
While Mr. Pruitt is an American artist, I think that all of us as women can relate to the beauty and power of his work. And I think that all of us can agree on the importance of the subject he chose to focus on -- in fact, I know that many of you have devoted significant time and effort to improving the lives of women and girls in your countries. Now, this is an issue that I also care deeply about, especially when it comes to education.
Everywhere I go in the world, I meet so many wonderful young girls -- girls with so much promise, girls eager and desperate to learn, girls who just blossom when they get that one chance to go to school and to start scratching at the fulfillment of their potential. And when they get that chance
-- when both boys and girls have an equal opportunity to learn
-- we all know that’s not just good for our children, it’s also good for their families and it's good for their countries as well.
And that’s why, whenever I talk to young people, particularly here in the United States, I urge them to pour everything they have into their education -- everything. I tell them that no matter what challenges they face, no matter what their schools looks like, no matter what’s going on in their homes, it us up to them to get to school every day. It is up to them to pay attention in class. It's up to them to do their homework every night.
I remind them that it’s up to them to take responsibility for their education. And I tell them that ultimately, their success in school won’t just shape their futures, it will also shape the future of their country.
Because we all here know that when it comes to the pressing issues of our time –- whether it's climate change, or extremism from poverty to disease and global economic stability –- our young people will soon be leading the way. They will soon be building the businesses, and making the scientific discoveries, and writing the laws that will move our world forward for decades to come.
So we all need to keep pushing on their behalf. And I hope that today will be an opportunity for all of us to share ideas for how we can all give our children the bright futures they deserve.
So I want you all to take advantage of this wonderful opportunity that we have together. Don’t be shy. Make sure that you talk to the ladies at your table about the great work that you’re doing in your countries, because you are all doing some wonderfully powerful work. Ask others about what they’re doing in their countries.
We all have so much to offer one another, and so much to learn, and so much support we can gain from each other. And that is one of the reasons I so enjoy this time that I have with spouses from other nations. It is truly a privilege to spend time with such great women who are struggling with some of the same struggles that I feel; who have the same hopes and dreams for not just their families, but for their countries.
And it is always an honor for me to spend time with you. Many of you have become friends. And I hope for those of you I'm just getting to meet, that we will develop that relationship as well.
So please relax. You are at home here. It is my delight to share this wonderful museum with you, so enjoy. And once again, I'm going to start -- stop talking so that you all can start talking and enjoy this wonderful meal and the performance that will follow.
Thank you all. Have a safe journey back home. And enjoy this moment together. (Applause.)
END
12:33 P.M. EDT
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
United Nations
New York, New York
10:10 A.M. EDT
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Mr. President, Mr. Secretary General, fellow delegates, ladies and gentlemen: Each year we come together to reaffirm the founding vision of this institution. For most of recorded history, individual aspirations were subject to the whims of tyrants and empires. Divisions of race and religion and tribe were settled through the sword and the clash of armies. The idea that nations and peoples could come together in peace to solve their disputes and advance a common prosperity seemed unimaginable.
It took the awful carnage of two world wars to shift our thinking. The leaders who built the United Nations were not naïve; they did not think this body could eradicate all wars. But in the wake of millions dead and continents in rubble, and with the development of nuclear weapons that could annihilate a planet, they understood that humanity could not survive the course it was on. And so they gave us this institution, believing that it could allow us to resolve conflicts, enforce rules of behavior, and build habits of cooperation that would grow stronger over time.
For decades, the United Nations has in fact made a difference -- from helping to eradicate disease, to educating children, to brokering peace. But like every generation of leaders, we face new and profound challenges, and this body continues to be tested. The question is whether we possess the wisdom and the courage, as nation-states and members of an international community, to squarely meet those challenges; whether the United Nations can meet the tests of our time.
For much of my tenure as President, some of our most urgent challenges have revolved around an increasingly integrated global economy, and our efforts to recover from the worst economic crisis of our lifetime. Now, five years after the global economy collapsed, and thanks to coordinated efforts by the countries here today, jobs are being created, global financial systems have stabilized, and people are once again being lifted out of poverty. But this progress is fragile and unequal, and we still have work to do together to assure that our citizens can access the opportunities that they need to thrive in the 21st century.
Together, we’ve also worked to end a decade of war. Five years ago, nearly 180,000 Americans were serving in harm’s way, and the war in Iraq was the dominant issue in our relationship with the rest of the world. Today, all of our troops have left Iraq. Next year, an international coalition will end its war in Afghanistan, having achieved its mission of dismantling the core of al Qaeda that attacked us on 9/11.
For the United States, these new circumstances have also meant shifting away from a perpetual war footing. Beyond bringing our troops home, we have limited the use of drones so they target only those who pose a continuing, imminent threat to the United States where capture is not feasible, and there is a near certainty of no civilian casualties. We’re transferring detainees to other countries and trying terrorists in courts of law, while working diligently to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay. And just as we reviewed how we deploy our extraordinary military capabilities in a way that lives up to our ideals, we’ve begun to review the way that we gather intelligence, so that we properly balance the legitimate security concerns of our citizens and allies with the privacy concerns that all people share.
As a result of this work, and cooperation with allies and partners, the world is more stable than it was five years ago. But even a glance at today’s headlines indicates that dangers remain. In Kenya, we’ve seen terrorists target innocent civilians in a crowded shopping mall, and our hearts go out to the families of those who have been affected. In Pakistan, nearly 100 people were recently killed by suicide bombers outside a church. In Iraq, killings and car bombs continue to be a terrible part of life. And meanwhile, al Qaeda has splintered into regional networks and militias, which doesn't give them the capacity at this point to carry out attacks like 9/11, but does pose serious threats to governments and diplomats, businesses and civilians all across the globe.
Just as significantly, the convulsions in the Middle East and North Africa have laid bare deep divisions within societies, as an old order is upended and people grapple with what comes next. Peaceful movements have too often been answered by violence -- from those resisting change and from extremists trying to hijack change. Sectarian conflict has reemerged. And the potential spread of weapons of mass destruction continues to cast a shadow over the pursuit of peace.
Nowhere have we seen these trends converge more powerfully than in Syria. There, peaceful protests against an authoritarian regime were met with repression and slaughter. In the face of such carnage, many retreated to their sectarian identity -- Alawite and Sunni; Christian and Kurd -- and the situation spiraled into civil war.
The international community recognized the stakes early on, but our response has not matched the scale of the challenge. Aid cannot keep pace with the suffering of the wounded and displaced. A peace process is stillborn. America and others have worked to bolster the moderate opposition, but extremist groups have still taken root to exploit the crisis. Assad’s traditional allies have propped him up, citing principles of sovereignty to shield his regime. And on August 21st, the regime used chemical weapons in an attack that killed more than 1,000 people, including hundreds of children.
Now, the crisis in Syria, and the destabilization of the region, goes to the heart of broader challenges that the international community must now confront. How should we respond to conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa -- conflicts between countries, but also conflicts within them? How do we address the choice of standing callously by while children are subjected to nerve gas, or embroiling ourselves in someone else’s civil war? What is the role of force in resolving disputes that threaten the stability of the region and undermine all basic standards of civilized conduct? What is the role of the United Nations and international law in meeting cries for justice?
Today, I want to outline where the United States of America stands on these issues. With respect to Syria, we believe that as a starting point, the international community must enforce the ban on chemical weapons. When I stated my willingness to order a limited strike against the Assad regime in response to the brazen use of chemical weapons, I did not do so lightly. I did so because I believe it is in the security interest of the United States and in the interest of the world to meaningfully enforce a prohibition whose origins are older than the United Nations itself. The ban against the use of chemical weapons, even in war, has been agreed to by 98 percent of humanity. It is strengthened by the searing memories of soldiers suffocating in the trenches; Jews slaughtered in gas chambers; Iranians poisoned in the many tens of thousands.
The evidence is overwhelming that the Assad regime used such weapons on August 21st. U.N. inspectors gave a clear accounting that advanced rockets fired large quantities of sarin gas at civilians. These rockets were fired from a regime-controlled neighborhood, and landed in opposition neighborhoods. It’s an insult to human reason -- and to the legitimacy of this institution -- to suggest that anyone other than the regime carried out this attack.
Now, I know that in the immediate aftermath of the attack there were those who questioned the legitimacy of even a limited strike in the absence of a clear mandate from the Security Council. But without a credible military threat, the Security Council had demonstrated no inclination to act at all. However, as I’ve discussed with President Putin for over a year, most recently in St. Petersburg, my preference has always been a diplomatic resolution to this issue. And in the past several weeks, the United States, Russia and our allies have reached an agreement to place Syria’s chemical weapons under international control, and then to destroy them.
The Syrian government took a first step by giving an accounting of its stockpiles. Now there must be a strong Security Council resolution to verify that the Assad regime is keeping its commitments, and there must be consequences if they fail to do so. If we cannot agree even on this, then it will show that the United Nations is incapable of enforcing the most basic of international laws. On the other hand, if we succeed, it will send a powerful message that the use of chemical weapons has no place in the 21st century, and that this body means what it says.
Agreement on chemical weapons should energize a larger diplomatic effort to reach a political settlement within Syria. I do not believe that military action -- by those within Syria, or by external powers -- can achieve a lasting peace. Nor do I believe that America or any nation should determine who will lead Syria; that is for the Syrian people to decide. Nevertheless, a leader who slaughtered his citizens and gassed children to death cannot regain the legitimacy to lead a badly fractured country. The notion that Syria can somehow return to a pre-war status quo is a fantasy.
It’s time for Russia and Iran to realize that insisting on Assad’s rule will lead directly to the outcome that they fear: an increasingly violent space for extremists to operate. In turn, those of us who continue to support the moderate opposition must persuade them that the Syrian people cannot afford a collapse of state institutions, and that a political settlement cannot be reached without addressing the legitimate fears and concerns of Alawites and other minorities.
We are committed to working this political track. And as we pursue a settlement, let’s remember this is not a zero-sum endeavor. We’re no longer in a Cold War. There’s no Great Game to be won, nor does America have any interest in Syria beyond the wellbeing of its people, the stability of its neighbors, the elimination of chemical weapons, and ensuring that it does not become a safe haven for terrorists.
I welcome the influence of all nations that can help bring about a peaceful resolution of Syria’s civil war. And as we move the Geneva process forward, I urge all nations here to step up to meet humanitarian needs in Syria and surrounding countries. America has committed over a billion dollars to this effort, and today I can announce that we will be providing an additional $340 million. No aid can take the place of a political resolution that gives the Syrian people the chance to rebuild their country, but it can help desperate people to survive.
What broader conclusions can be drawn from America’s policy toward Syria? I know there are those who have been frustrated by our unwillingness to use our military might to depose Assad, and believe that a failure to do so indicates a weakening of American resolve in the region. Others have suggested that my willingness to direct even limited military strikes to deter the further use of chemical weapons shows we’ve learned nothing from Iraq, and that America continues to seek control over the Middle East for our own purposes. In this way, the situation in Syria mirrors a contradiction that has persisted in the region for decades: the United States is chastised for meddling in the region, accused of having a hand in all manner of conspiracy; at the same time, the United States is blamed for failing to do enough to solve the region’s problems and for showing indifference toward suffering Muslim populations.
I realize some of this is inevitable, given America’s role in the world. But these contradictory attitudes have a practical impact on the American people’s support for our involvement in the region, and allow leaders in the region -- as well as the international community sometimes -- to avoid addressing difficult problems themselves.
So let me take this opportunity to outline what has been U.S. policy towards the Middle East and North Africa, and what will be my policy during the remainder of my presidency.
The United States of America is prepared to use all elements of our power, including military force, to secure our core interests in the region.
We will confront external aggression against our allies and partners, as we did in the Gulf War.
We will ensure the free flow of energy from the region to the world. Although America is steadily reducing our own dependence on imported oil, the world still depends on the region’s energy supply, and a severe disruption could destabilize the entire global economy.
We will dismantle terrorist networks that threaten our people. Wherever possible, we will build the capacity of our partners, respect the sovereignty of nations, and work to address the root causes of terror. But when it’s necessary to defend the United States against terrorist attack, we will take direct action.
And finally, we will not tolerate the development or use of weapons of mass destruction. Just as we consider the use of chemical weapons in Syria to be a threat to our own national security, we reject the development of nuclear weapons that could trigger a nuclear arms race in the region, and undermine the global nonproliferation regime.
Now, to say that these are America’s core interests is not to say that they are our only interests. We deeply believe it is in our interests to see a Middle East and North Africa that is peaceful and prosperous, and will continue to promote democracy and human rights and open markets, because we believe these practices achieve peace and prosperity. But I also believe that we can rarely achieve these objectives through unilateral American action, particularly through military action. Iraq shows us that democracy cannot simply be imposed by force. Rather, these objectives are best achieved when we partner with the international community and with the countries and peoples of the region.
So what does this mean going forward? In the near term, America’s diplomatic efforts will focus on two particular issues: Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons, and the Arab-Israeli conflict. While these issues are not the cause of all the region’s problems, they have been a major source of instability for far too long, and resolving them can help serve as a foundation for a broader peace.
The United States and Iran have been isolated from one another since the Islamic Revolution of 1979. This mistrust has deep roots. Iranians have long complained of a history of U.S. interference in their affairs and of America’s role in overthrowing an Iranian government during the Cold War. On the other hand, Americans see an Iranian government that has declared the United States an enemy and directly -- or through proxies -- taken American hostages, killed U.S. troops and civilians, and threatened our ally Israel with destruction.
I don’t believe this difficult history can be overcome overnight -- the suspicions run too deep. But I do believe that if we can resolve the issue of Iran’s nuclear program, that can serve as a major step down a long road towards a different relationship, one based on mutual interests and mutual respect.
Since I took office, I’ve made it clear in letters to the Supreme Leader in Iran and more recently to President Rouhani that America prefers to resolve our concerns over Iran’s nuclear program peacefully, although we are determined to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. We are not seeking regime change and we respect the right of the Iranian people to access peaceful nuclear energy. Instead, we insist that the Iranian government meet its responsibilities under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and U.N. Security Council resolutions.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Leader has issued a fatwa against the development of nuclear weapons, and President Rouhani has just recently reiterated that the Islamic Republic will never develop a nuclear weapon.
So these statements made by our respective governments should offer the basis for a meaningful agreement. We should be able to achieve a resolution that respects the rights of the Iranian people, while giving the world confidence that the Iranian program is peaceful. But to succeed, conciliatory words will have to be matched by actions that are transparent and verifiable. After all, it's the Iranian government’s choices that have led to the comprehensive sanctions that are currently in place. And this is not simply an issue between the United States and Iran. The world has seen Iran evade its responsibilities in the past and has an abiding interest in making sure that Iran meets its obligations in the future.
But I want to be clear we are encouraged that President Rouhani received from the Iranian people a mandate to pursue a more moderate course. And given President Rouhani’s stated commitment to reach an agreement, I am directing John Kerry to pursue this effort with the Iranian government in close cooperation with the European Union -- the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia and China.
The roadblocks may prove to be too great, but I firmly believe the diplomatic path must be tested. For while the status quo will only deepen Iran’s isolation, Iran’s genuine commitment to go down a different path will be good for the region and the world, and will help the Iranian people meet their extraordinary potential -- in commerce and culture; in science and education.
We are also determined to resolve a conflict that goes back even further than our differences with Iran, and that is the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis. I’ve made it clear that the United States will never compromise our commitment to Israel’s security, nor our support for its existence as a Jewish state. Earlier this year, in Jerusalem, I was inspired by young Israelis who stood up for the belief that peace was necessary, just, and possible. And I believe there’s a growing recognition within Israel that the occupation of the West Bank is tearing at the democratic fabric of the Jewish state. But the children of Israel have the right to live in a world where the nations assembled in this body fully recognize their country, and where we unequivocally reject those who fire rockets at their homes or incite others to hate them.
Likewise, the United States remains committed to the belief that the Palestinian people have a right to live with security and dignity in their own sovereign state. On the same trip, I had the opportunity to meet with young Palestinians in Ramallah whose ambition and incredible potential are matched by the pain they feel in having no firm place in the community of nations. They are understandably cynical that real progress will ever be made, and they’re frustrated by their families enduring the daily indignity of occupation. But they too recognize that two states is the only real path to peace -- because just as the Palestinian people must not be displaced, the state of Israel is here to stay.
So the time is now ripe for the entire international community to get behind the pursuit of peace. Already, Israeli and Palestinian leaders have demonstrated a willingness to take significant political risks. President Abbas has put aside efforts to short-cut the pursuit of peace and come to the negotiating table. Prime Minister Netanyahu has released Palestinian prisoners and reaffirmed his commitment to a Palestinian state. Current talks are focused on final status issues of borders and security, refugees and Jerusalem.
So now the rest of us must be willing to take risks as well. Friends of Israel, including the United States, must recognize that Israel’s security as a Jewish and democratic state depends upon the realization of a Palestinian state, and we should say so clearly. Arab states, and those who supported the Palestinians, must recognize that stability will only be served through a two-state solution and a secure Israel.
All of us must recognize that peace will be a powerful tool to defeat extremists throughout the region, and embolden those who are prepared to build a better future. And moreover, ties of trade and commerce between Israelis and Arabs could be an engine of growth and opportunity at a time when too many young people in the region are languishing without work. So let’s emerge from the familiar corners of blame and prejudice. Let’s support Israeli and Palestinian leaders who are prepared to walk the difficult road to peace.
Real breakthroughs on these two issues -- Iran’s nuclear program, and Israeli-Palestinian peace -- would have a profound and positive impact on the entire Middle East and North Africa. But the current convulsions arising out of the Arab Spring remind us that a just and lasting peace cannot be measured only by agreements between nations. It must also be measured by our ability to resolve conflict and promote justice within nations. And by that measure, it’s clear that all of us have a lot more work to do.
When peaceful transitions began in Tunisia and Egypt, the entire world was filled with hope. And although the United States -- like others -- was struck by the speed of transition, and although we did not -- and in fact could not -- dictate events, we chose to support those who called for change. And we did so based on the belief that while these transitions will be hard and take time, societies based upon democracy and openness and the dignity of the individual will ultimately be more stable, more prosperous, and more peaceful.
Over the last few years, particularly in Egypt, we’ve seen just how hard this transition will be. Mohamed Morsi was democratically elected, but proved unwilling or unable to govern in a way that was fully inclusive. The interim government that replaced him responded to the desires of millions of Egyptians who believed the revolution had taken a wrong turn, but it, too, has made decisions inconsistent with inclusive democracy -- through an emergency law, and restrictions on the press and civil society and opposition parties.
Of course, America has been attacked by all sides of this internal conflict, simultaneously accused of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, and engineering their removal of power. In fact, the United States has purposely avoided choosing sides. Our overriding interest throughout these past few years has been to encourage a government that legitimately reflects the will of the Egyptian people, and recognizes true democracy as requiring a respect for minority rights and the rule of law, freedom of speech and assembly, and a strong civil society.
That remains our interest today. And so, going forward, the United States will maintain a constructive relationship with the interim government that promotes core interests like the Camp David Accords and counterterrorism. We’ll continue support in areas like education that directly benefit the Egyptian people. But we have not proceeded with the delivery of certain military systems, and our support will depend upon Egypt’s progress in pursuing a more democratic path.
And our approach to Egypt reflects a larger point: The United States will at times work with governments that do not meet, at least in our view, the highest international expectations, but who work with us on our core interests. Nevertheless, we will not stop asserting principles that are consistent with our ideals, whether that means opposing the use of violence as a means of suppressing dissent, or supporting the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
We will reject the notion that these principles are simply Western exports, incompatible with Islam or the Arab World. We believe they are the birthright of every person. And while we recognize that our influence will at times be limited, although we will be wary of efforts to impose democracy through military force, and although we will at times be accused of hypocrisy and inconsistency, we will be engaged in the region for the long haul. For the hard work of forging freedom and democracy is the task of a generation.
And this includes efforts to resolve sectarian tensions that continue to surface in places like Iraq, Bahrain and Syria. We understand such longstanding issues cannot be solved by outsiders; they must be addressed by Muslim communities themselves. But we’ve seen grinding conflicts come to an end before -- most recently in Northern Ireland, where Catholics and Protestants finally recognized that an endless cycle of conflict was causing both communities to fall behind a fast-moving world. And so we believe those same sectarian conflicts can be overcome in the Middle East and North Africa.
To summarize, the United States has a hard-earned humility when it comes to our ability to determine events inside other countries. The notion of American empire may be useful propaganda, but it isn’t borne out by America’s current policy or by public opinion. Indeed, as recent debates within the United States over Syria clearly show, the danger for the world is not an America that is too eager to immerse itself in the affairs of other countries or to take on every problem in the region as its own. The danger for the world is that the United States, after a decade of war -- rightly concerned about issues back home, aware of the hostility that our engagement in the region has engendered throughout the Muslim world -- may disengage, creating a vacuum of leadership that no other nation is ready to fill.
I believe such disengagement would be a mistake. I believe America must remain engaged for our own security. But I also believe the world is better for it. Some may disagree, but I believe America is exceptional -- in part because we have shown a willingness through the sacrifice of blood and treasure to stand up not only for our own narrow self-interests, but for the interests of all.
I must be honest, though. We're far more likely to invest our energy in those countries that want to work with us, that invest in their people instead of a corrupt few; that embrace a vision of society where everyone can contribute -- men and women, Shia or Sunni, Muslim, Christian or Jew. Because from Europe to Asia, from Africa to the Americas, nations that have persevered on a democratic path have emerged more prosperous, more peaceful, and more invested in upholding our common security and our common humanity. And I believe that the same will hold true for the Arab world.
This leads me to a final point. There will be times when the breakdown of societies is so great, the violence against civilians so substantial that the international community will be called upon to act. This will require new thinking and some very tough choices. While the United Nations was designed to prevent wars between states, increasingly we face the challenge of preventing slaughter within states. And these challenges will grow more pronounced as we are confronted with states that are fragile or failing -- places where horrendous violence can put innocent men, women and children at risk, with no hope of protection from their national institutions.
I have made it clear that even when America’s core interests are not directly threatened, we stand ready to do our part to prevent mass atrocities and protect basic human rights. But we cannot and should not bear that burden alone. In Mali, we supported both the French intervention that successfully pushed back al Qaeda, and the African forces who are keeping the peace. In Eastern Africa, we are working with partners to bring the Lord’s Resistance Army to an end. And in Libya, when the Security Council provided a mandate to protect civilians, America joined a coalition that took action. Because of what we did there, countless lives were saved, and a tyrant could not kill his way back to power.
I know that some now criticize the action in Libya as an object lesson. They point to the problems that the country now confronts -- a democratically elected government struggling to provide security; armed groups, in some places extremists, ruling parts of a fractured land. And so these critics argue that any intervention to protect civilians is doomed to fail -- look at Libya. No one is more mindful of these problems than I am, for they resulted in the death of four outstanding U.S. citizens who were committed to the Libyan people, including Ambassador Chris Stevens -- a man whose courageous efforts helped save the city of Benghazi. But does anyone truly believe that the situation in Libya would be better if Qaddafi had been allowed to kill, imprison, or brutalize his people into submission? It’s far more likely that without international action, Libya would now be engulfed in civil war and bloodshed.
We live in a world of imperfect choices. Different nations will not agree on the need for action in every instance, and the principle of sovereignty is at the center of our international order. But sovereignty cannot be a shield for tyrants to commit wanton murder, or an excuse for the international community to turn a blind eye. While we need to be modest in our belief that we can remedy every evil, while we need to be mindful that the world is full of unintended consequences, should we really accept the notion that the world is powerless in the face of a Rwanda or Srebrenica? If that’s the world that people want to live in, they should say so and reckon with the cold logic of mass graves.
But I believe we can embrace a different future. And if we don’t want to choose between inaction and war, we must get better -- all of us -- at the policies that prevent the breakdown of basic order. Through respect for the responsibilities of nations and the rights of individuals. Through meaningful sanctions for those who break the rules. Through dogged diplomacy that resolves the root causes of conflict, not merely its aftermath. Through development assistance that brings hope to the marginalized. And yes, sometimes -- although this will not be enough -- there are going to be moments where the international community will need to acknowledge that the multilateral use of military force may be required to prevent the very worst from occurring.
Ultimately, this is the international community that America seeks -- one where nations do not covet the land or resources of other nations, but one in which we carry out the founding purpose of this institution and where we all take responsibility. A world in which the rules established out of the horrors of war can help us resolve conflicts peacefully, and prevent the kinds of wars that our forefathers fought. A world where human beings can live with dignity and meet their basic needs, whether they live in New York or Nairobi; in Peshawar or Damascus.
These are extraordinary times, with extraordinary opportunities. Thanks to human progress, a child born anywhere on Earth today can do things today that 60 years ago would have been out of reach for the mass of humanity. I saw this in Africa, where nations moving beyond conflict are now poised to take off. And America is with them, partnering to feed the hungry and care for the sick, and to bring power to places off the grid.
I see it across the Pacific region, where hundreds of millions have been lifted out of poverty in a single generation. I see it in the faces of young people everywhere who can access the entire world with the click of a button, and who are eager to join the cause of eradicating extreme poverty, and combating climate change, starting businesses, expanding freedom, and leaving behind the old ideological battles of the past. That’s what’s happening in Asia and Africa. It’s happening in Europe and across the Americas. That’s the future that the people of the Middle East and North Africa deserve as well -- one where they can focus on opportunity, instead of whether they’ll be killed or repressed because of who they are or what they believe.
Time and again, nations and people have shown our capacity to change -- to live up to humanity’s highest ideals, to choose our better history. Last month, I stood where 50 years ago Martin Luther King Jr. told America about his dream, at a time when many people of my race could not even vote for President. Earlier this year, I stood in the small cell where Nelson Mandela endured decades cut off from his own people and the world. Who are we to believe that today’s challenges cannot be overcome, when we have seen what changes the human spirit can bring? Who in this hall can argue that the future belongs to those who seek to repress that spirit, rather than those who seek to liberate it?
I know what side of history I want to the United States of America to be on. We're ready to meet tomorrow’s challenges with you -- firm in the belief that all men and women are in fact created equal, each individual possessed with a dignity and inalienable rights that cannot be denied. That is why we look to the future not with fear, but with hope. And that’s why we remain convinced that this community of nations can deliver a more peaceful, prosperous and just world to the next generation.
Thank you very much. (Applause.)
END
10:52 A.M. EDT