The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest, 10/27/2014

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

**Please see below for a correction marked with an asterisk.

1:09 P.M. EDT

MR. EARNEST:  Afternoon, everybody.  Happy Monday.  Let me do a quick announcement, and then we’ll get to questions.  We discussed at some length on Friday the President’s meeting with the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership Steering Committee, so I thought I would bring a little information about it just to let you know exactly what it is.  (Laughter.)  I learned a little bit myself as I looked into this.

The President’s Advanced Manufacturing Partnership Steering Committee is part of a council of 19 leading CEOs, labor leaders and university presidents that was assembled by the President with the recognition that industry, academia and government must work together to revitalize our manufacturing sector.  The President’s view is that the manufacturing sector here in this country is central to the foundation of our economy, and the United States’ manufacturing sector is as competitive as it has been in decades -- as measured both by investment and new jobs.

Since February of 2010, the United States manufacturing industry has added more than 700,000 jobs, which is the fastest pace of job growth in the manufacturing sector since the 1990s.  And in the context of today’s meeting, there were three new substantial -- three new executive actions that represent substantial investment by the federal government into research and technology that could boost the advanced manufacturing sector moving forward.  And I think this reflects the President’s ongoing commitment to ensure that creating good, middle-class jobs is critical to the success of our economy because it reflects the President’s view that our economy is strong and dynamic when the middle class is strong and dynamic.  And the strength of our middle class is predicated on good, middle-class jobs being available to American workers.

So this is a core component of that.  And I know that we put out a factsheet about some of these announcements this morning, so I would commend that factsheet to you, and in your spare time do a little reading if you're interested.

So with that, Mr. Kuhnhenn, do you want to get us started?

Q    Thank you, Josh.  I’ll leave to the factsheet to answer all our questions on manufacturing.  So I’ll go directly to Ebola.  We’ve had over the past couple of days a number of states -- meaning New York and New Jersey -- taking steps to quarantine returning travelers from the afflicted Ebola region.  But more significantly, today, the Pentagon is applying those same kind of quarantine measures to troops, including General Darryl Williams, who has returned from the region to Italy.  Does the White House support the Pentagon move?  And does the fact that these various states and now the Pentagon are taking these steps suggest that the White House -- that the administration has been -- the steps that it has taken have been inadequate so far, given that these other entities are taking these more aggressive positions?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, there’s a lot there, Jim, that I want to respond to, so let me try to unpack those things one at a time.

The first is, the Department of Defense has not issued a policy related to their workers that have spent time in West Africa.  I know that there was this decision that was made by one commanding officer in the Department of Defense, but it does not reflect a department-wide policy that I understand is still under development.  So I’d refer you to the Department of Defense for additional details on where that policy process stands and what consequences that could have for their personnel.

The second thing is, the announcement from New York and New Jersey that was followed by announcements from a couple of other states was specifically related to health care workers, not just returning -- not just people who are returning from the region.  And that distinction is important because it continues to be the view of this administration that stopping this Ebola outbreak in its tracks in West Africa is critically important to our national security and to the safety and health of American citizens.

As we’ve said many, many times, the likelihood of a widespread outbreak in this country of Ebola is exceedingly low, but the only way that we can entirely eliminate that risk is to stop this Ebola outbreak in its tracks in West Africa.  And in order to succeed in stopping this outbreak in West Africa, we’re going to need doctors and nurses traveling to West Africa to treat Ebola patients.

Sadly -- tragically, even -- this Ebola outbreak in West Africa has occurred in countries that have little to no modern medical infrastructure.  And that is the reason that we have seen this Ebola outbreak spiral so quickly in a way that has claimed so many lives.

So we want to make sure that whatever policies are put in place in this country to protect the American public do not serve as a disincentive to doctors and nurses from this country volunteering to travel to West Africa to treat Ebola patients.  The first is that is a -- it reflects -- a commitment from a doctor or a nurse who traveled to West Africa reflects a generosity of spirit and a concern for common humanity that is worthy of praise.  It also reflects a commitment to the ideal that stopping the Ebola outbreak in West Africa is the only way we can entirely eliminate the risk to the American people from the Ebola virus.

And what you will -- and I guess this is the last thing I want to say about this, Jim -- is you will hear from the CDC later today some additional information about guidelines that they believe should be in place as it relates to protocols for returning health care workers, or health care workers who are returning from West Africa.

So we’ll have additional guidelines from CDC; they’ll make that announcement later on this afternoon.  But ultimately, it’s the responsibility -- in fact, the authority is vested with state and local officials to make decisions about how best to protect their citizens.

Q    Doesn’t that kind of create a patchwork of policies that can confuse the public, might even encourage people to game the system, lie about what they encountered when they’ve been in West Africa when you don’t have an overarching federal policy that rules?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I mean, we were talking about this a little bit earlier, Jim -- anticipating your question.  I mean, some of this is -- in some ways, you can sort of take this up with James Madison, right?  We have a federal system in this country in which states are given significant authority for governing their constituents.  That is certainly true when it comes to public safety and public health.

At the same time, I think that you have seen a strong working relationship between states across the country and the federal government.  What we believe is important -- and I think is a view that is shared by governors and local officials across the country -- is that these kinds of policies should be driven by science and the best scientific advice that is available.  We have experts at the Centers for Disease Control and at HHS that have been dealing with Ebola outbreaks for decades now.  And there is a body of medical science and research that should guide the implementation of these policies, and we’re going to work closely with states and localities to do exactly that.

I think the best and most recent piece of evidence that I can point to to illustrate this ongoing coordination is this morning’s announcement that Kaci Hickox, the nurse who has recently returned from West Africa, will be discharged from the hospital in New Jersey and will be traveling via private transportation to her home in Maine.

Q    Let’s take the case of the Pentagon.  You’ve talked about how the administration has been aware and has acted on the Ebola outbreak since March.  And then, shouldn’t the policy have been in place when you decided to send troops to West Africa?  Shouldn’t have how you were going to treat those returning troops been a matter of protocol then rather than what appears to being made up on the fly, as we go?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, Jim, the commitment of Department of Defense resources was something that the President announced I believe just last month.  And this is an ongoing effort by the Department of Defense to use their logistical expertise in West Africa to assist those, essentially, first responders who are actually treating Ebola patients.

We have been clear that the role of American military personnel in West Africa will not be to render medical assistance to the people of West Africa.  Instead, it will be -- the logistical expertise of the American military will be deployed to assist those doctors and nurses and other public health experts from around the world who are responding to this urgent situation.  That was a commitment that was made by the President just about a month or so ago.  And we are already seeing important work that’s being done in West Africa by our American military personnel.

And as needed, they will continue to put in place policies that they believe best protect the members of the military and the members of the public back here in the United States as well.

Roberta.

Q    So is the White House concerned that the decision made by one commanding officer in this case of the Pentagon is sending a mixed message to people about the need for these kinds of policies?

MR. EARNEST:  No.  We believe that -- I mean, it’s clear -- and if it wasn’t clear before, it is now that I’ve helped make it clear -- that the Department of Defense policy has not been settled and implemented yet, and they will ultimately -- that will be a decision that’s driven by a variety of operational factors.

What we are -- what this administration is working to do is to coordinate with state and local officials across the country to put in place the policies that scientific experts tell us are in the best interest of the American people.  And that’s what we believe should guide the policy decisions that are made in this country.

Q    I’m confused, though, because -- I mean, we’ve known about this outbreak for some time.  We’re going to hear, as you say, from the CDC later today, guidelines for protocols for returning medical workers, which we knew they were there -- and the Pentagon, too, in the case of these people that are being held or sort of semi-quarantined in Italy.  Why weren’t these kinds of decisions made earlier?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, Roberta, I think what this reflects is a commitment by this administration to regularly review the guidelines that are in place to make sure that they reflect what’s necessary to protect the American people.  And we should not lose sight of the fact that whatever guidelines and policies are put in place should not unduly burden those health care workers that, in fact, are operating in West Africa in very difficult situations.  They are putting themselves at risk to try to meet the needs of other people.  That is a pretty remarkable show of charity.

It also is an effort that is clearly in the best interest of the American people, because we know that the only way to entirely eliminate the risk from the Ebola virus to the American people is to stop this outbreak in West Africa.  And there are American citizens who are using their own medical expertise in pursuit of that goal.  These individuals are heroes.  And their commitment to their common man and to their country is one that should be respected.  And we believe that we can both show them the respect that they have earned while also ensuring that we have protocols in place to protect the American people.

Q    Just one quick one on NHTSA.  The Transportation Department is reviewing how NHTSA has handled a series of problems, like faulty airbags and defective ignition switches.  Did the White House ask Secretary Foxx to conduct this investigation?  Is the White House satisfied with NHTSA’s performance?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, Roberta, I can tell you that NHTSA has been aggressive in responding to the situation related to defective airbags.  And they have sought to move forward aggressively to protect the American people once they had data to indicate that action was needed.

There have been some issues that have cropped up around the announcement of the safety advisory last week, and the Department of Transportation review that has commenced is the right step to make sure that everyone is focused on learning from this situation and strengthening the response.

Q    Did the White House ask for that review?

MR. EARNEST:  This is something that is being led by the Department of Transportation, so if you have questions about their review I’d refer you to them.

Jim.

Q    Josh, the CDC guidelines that are coming out later on this afternoon, will the states be compelled to follow those guidelines?  Or could they still chart their own course when it comes to quarantines?

MR. EARNEST:  Yes, that’s a good question.  State and local officials have broad authority to impose quarantine policies in their own states and localities.  So the role for the CDC is to marshal scientific evidence.  As I mentioned, the Centers for Disease Control has extensive experience in dealing with Ebola outbreaks.  There is a body of medical science that’s been devoted to understanding how exactly the Ebola virus is transmitted.  That science tells us that the likelihood of a widespread Ebola outbreak in the United States is exceedingly low; that the risk to the average American citizen is exceedingly low.  I think even Dr. Fauci yesterday described it as “vanishingly” low.

Q    But there is the potential for different states to have different protocols.

MR. EARNEST:  Well, there are -- there is the potential for governors and mayors in specific jurisdictions to exercise the authority that they have to impose quarantine policies.  What the Obama administration --

Q    Isn’t that kind of messy to have different states with different guidelines and different protocol?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, as I mentioned to Jim, I guess you can take that up with James Madison.  The fact of the matter, though, Jim, is that we have a strong working relationship from the administration to -- a strong working relationship between the Obama administration and states and cities all across the country.  And again, I think the best evidence of that is something that was announced just today, which is that by working with CDC, the state of New Jersey has determined that it’s appropriate to release her from the hospital where she has been in New Jersey so that she can travel home to Maine.

I think that reflects ongoing discussions between the Centers for Disease Control and public officials in New Jersey.  And again, I think that reflects a decision that was made by New Jersey officials that was driven by the kinds of scientific expertise that resides at the Centers for Disease Control

Q    And speaking of Kaci Hickox, what did the White House make -- or what did the President make, if he had an opinion on it, of seeing her in that tent in that hospital where she was required to be for some time?  And does the White House believe that her rights were violated in any way?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, Jim, I have not spoken to the President about this, so I’m unaware of what his personal reaction is.  I think that the reaction that many people across the country had, and I think it was shared by at least some people here in the White House, is that the service of somebody like Kaci Hickox is something that we should honor and respect.  Again, she traveled to a West African country that is dealing with the outbreak of a contagious deadly disease.

She didn’t travel over there because she was getting a big paycheck.  Presumably, she’s not going to be inducted into the nurse’s hall of fame for it.  She did it out of concern for her common man, and she saw an opportunity to serve people that are clearly not as fortunate as we are to have a modern medical infrastructure.

And ultimately, because of her hard work, we are going to stop this disease in its tracks in West Africa, and that is the only way that we can eliminate the risk that this disease poses to the American people.

So her service and commitment to this cause is something that should be honored and respected, and I don’t think we do that by making her live in a tent for two or three days.

Q    So the White House disagrees with that confinement, her being confined in that tent?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, again, Jim -- I guess I’ve tried to answer this a couple of ways.  The fact is it is -- the state and local authorities have the authority to make these kinds of decisions about how to implement quarantine policies in ways --

Q    So if states want to put people in tents, they can do that?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, subject to the laws of these individual states.  What we hope and what we think has been true in the vast majority of circumstances is that these kinds of policy decisions should be driven by science.  And there is a body of scientific work out there that helps us understand exactly what kind of risk we face.

Again, as Dr. Fauci said yesterday on some -- it might have even been on your network -- where he indicated that the risk that was facing the average American is “vanishingly” low.  And the only way that we can drive that risk to zero is to stop this outbreak in its tracks in West Africa.  And the only way that we’re going to be able to stop this outbreak is if there are brave individuals like Kaci Hickox who are willing to put themselves at greater risk to try to stop this outbreak because it’s in the best interest of the American people.  So again, her service and commitment is something that we should celebrate.

Q    And folks are wondering where is Ron Klain in all of this.  He’s supposed to be the Ebola response coordinator.  It seems that you have a need for some coordinating here.

MR. EARNEST:  Jim, I’ll say a couple things about that.

The first is, again, the state of New Jersey made a decision in consultation with the CDC earlier today to release Ms. Hickox from the hospital where she had been staying so that she could travel home to Maine.  That was a policy decision that was made by New Jersey officials, exercising the authority that they have, in consultation with scientific experts at the CDC.

That is evidence that the ongoing coordination between the Obama administration and state and local officials continues successfully in this case.

Q    And did the White House get a heads-up from New York and New Jersey before they --

MR. EARNEST:  A heads-up on what?

Q    On those quarantine policies that were announced.  Was the White House or the Obama administration notified before New York and New Jersey went forward with these quarantine policies?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, Jim, I can tell you that the White House and administration officials at the CDC and HHS and DHS, and other relevant agencies, have been in close coordination with state and local officials in these states for some time now, for weeks, months, even.

And I’m not going to be in a position to detail or draw a timeline for all of those conversations, but those intensive conversations continue as state and local officials exercise the authority that they have under their own state law to protect their citizens.

Again, what the science tells us is that a really important step for us to take in terms of protecting the American people is to stop this outbreak in West Africa.

Q    And I apologize, I’m taking too much of my time here -- and everybody else’s time -- but it seems like you sort of danced away from an answer to that question.  Was it a surprise to this administration when New York and New Jersey came out with their policies on these quarantines?  Is that a yes or a no in terms of whether or not the administration was told in advance?

MR. EARNEST:  What I’m telling you, Jim, is that I’m not going to be in a position to detail all of the phone calls.

Q    You can’t say?

MR. EARNEST:  But administration officials at a variety of agencies, including HHS, CDC and the White House have been in regular touch with state and local officials in New York and New Jersey elsewhere as they deal with this Ebola situation.

Steven.

Q    Josh, what do you suppose did drive the decision to impose these mandatory quarantines?  If the federal guidelines or protocols that will be announced later today are driven by science, what drove the decision last week in New York and New Jersey?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I understand that Governor Cuomo and Governor Christie have conducted a number of sessions just like this one where they’ve been answering a variety of questions about the policies that they put in place, so I’d encourage you to ask them.  It’s their authority that they were exercising, and they were the ones that we making the decision.

Q    Do you suppose it was driven by something other than science?  Was it driven by fear or irrational --

MR. EARNEST:  Again, you’d have to ask them.

Q    The federal government also has the power -- the CDC, the President have the power to issue mandatory quarantines, to restrict people from traveling over state borders or imposing other kinds of public health rules and regulations.  Will the announcements that the CDC will be announcing today, will they be mandatory guidelines, or will they be merely advisory?

MR. EARNEST:  We’ll wait until those announcements are made and you can ask them.

Viqueira.

Q    Thanks.  A while ago, you mentioned some of the aid workers that are going overseas to West Africa, and no one is going to argue with you about their courage and dedication in doing so.  But could this be overcome, could it be contained in West Africa without Americans going there?

MR. EARNEST:  That’s a good question.  There is probably somebody that has some more public health expertise than I do to better assess that question.

Q    Well, I mean, how vital -- can you quantify how vital their assistance is?

MR. EARNEST:  Look, I think some of this goes back to some of the discussions that we’ve had over the course of the summer about the indispensable role that the United States of America plays in the world; that we have the kinds of resources and infrastructure and expertise and values that guide us to play a leading role in difficult situations like this one.

Those are the kinds of values and the commitment that guided the President to make a commitment of Department of Defense resources to deal with the situation in West Africa, and I suspect it’s those kinds of values that are driving medical workers in this country to place themselves at some risk, to volunteer their time and travel to West Africa to serve those who are less fortunate.

And again, I think that is a commitment and a reflection of the kinds of values that that is worthy of our respect.

Q    And absent a Halloween séance to take it up with James Madison -- (laughter) -- you’re saying there’s nothing the federal government can do to compel states at this point to not --

MR. EARNEST:  I’m not rendering a legal analysis, I’m just observing what I think is a basic fact, right, which is that states have the --

Q    The White House understands what power it has in this situation?

MR. EARNEST:  Yes.

Q    And what is that power?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, again, I would encourage you to consult a legal expert here.  The role that this government is playing is one that we have played for some time in terms of this response, which is making sure that we are marshaling the best scientific evidence and expertise that is available, and working closely with state and local officials to put in place policies that protect the American people.  That is essentially the bottom line when it comes to this policymaking process, protecting the American people.

We need to understand as we’re putting in place those policies that the only way that we can entirely eliminate the risk from the Ebola virus to the American people is to stop this outbreak at the source.  And it’s why, as we’re putting in place these policies, we should be mindful of not placing undue burdens, or in some cases even outright disrespecting health care workers who are making a commitment to go and serve those who are less fortunate in West Africa to try to stop this outbreak at the source.

Q    Finally, very quickly, did you over the weekend -- did the White House speak directly with Governors Cuomo or Christie to get them to reverse this decision?

MR. EARNEST:  Again, I think this is similar to Mr. Acosta’s question.

Q    I’m not asking about the whole totality of the conversations, I’m asking did this one particular conversation take place.

MR. EARNEST:  And again, I’m not going to detail individual conversations, but suffice it to say, individuals at the White House, CDC, HHS and other relevant agencies have been in touch with officials in New York and New Jersey, and we have been for some time.

Ed.

Q    Josh, putting aside the governors for a second, where is the White House itself in terms of policymaking, in terms of a 21-day federal quarantine?  Because we were told I think by Dr. Fauci on the record on Friday that it was at least being considered by the White House.  Is that still being considered, or is that off the table, a federal quarantine?  Again, putting aside the governors, is that possible or is that off the table?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, what the President has indicated will guide him in all of these policy decisions is protecting the American people.  And the President continues to be open-minded about suggestions that people may have about the best way to protect the American people.  Those sorts of decisions are going to continue to be driven by science and by a priority that reflects the need to make sure that we’re not placing an undue burden on those health care workers that have volunteered their time to go and try to stop this outbreak at the source.

Q    That’s what I’m trying to get at.  Since you’ve said several times you’re being driven by the science and that -- you seem to suggest that the science believes a 21-day quarantine might not make sense, why would the President still be considering it if he’s driven by the science?  Or is it still evolving?

MR. EARNEST:  I think this is -- no, I don’t think it’s evolving.  What is evolving is the situation on the ground in West Africa.  That’s something that we’re closely monitoring, and we made a significant commitment of resources to try to stop the spread of this terrible disease.

I think this is analogous to the question that was asked of the President recently about a travel ban -- that it is the view of this administration that a travel ban is not in the best interest of the American people at this point.  If circumstances change, we’ll consider it because it’s not something that he’s philosophically opposed to.

I think an answer about a quarantine would be along the same lines, which is to say it’s something that we do not believe is necessary right now, but it’s not something we’re necessarily philosophically opposed to and something that we’ll keep an open mind about moving forward.

Q    Back to the Pentagon.  Before, you said that there was one commanding officer in the Army who’s undergoing quarantine, but we’re told it’s broader than that in terms of the recommendation that late last week the Joint Chiefs recommended formally to Defense Secretary Hagel that all U.S. troops -- not just this one commanding officer -- who are in the hot zone should when they come back have a 21-day quarantine.  And I think you were asked that by Jim and I didn’t hear an answer.  Does the White House agree with the Joint Chiefs?

MR. EARNEST:  Ultimately, it will be the responsibility of the Secretary of Defense to put in place this policy.  And so because that policy decision has not been rendered, I’m not going to get ahead of it from here.

Q    So the White House is not going to be involved?  I mean, we’ve been through this with Keystone and other decisions; the State Department is handling that.  I get the Pentagon is ultimately going to announce it, but you’re saying the White House is not involved in talking to Secretary Hagel?

MR. EARNEST:  No, I think what I said was that the Secretary of Defense will announce this decision.  He ultimately will be the one that will drive this process as he’s making decisions about the policy that should be put in place to protect his troops.  I wouldn’t rule out any coordination with the White House on it, though.

Q    Sure, okay.  So then my question is, what is the -- I still haven't heard -- what is the President’s view about whether returning troops should be in a 21-day quarantine?

MR. EARNEST:  Again, we will let the Department of Defense make an announcement about what they think is the best manner moving forward.

Q    But how can the Commander-in-Chief send U.S. troops basically into the hot zone without a policy on when they come home whether or not they’re in quarantine?  How could that have not been decided before?

MR. EARNEST:  Because what we’re seeing here, Ed, is we are seeing this administration put in place the policies that we believe are necessary to protect the American people and to protect the American troops.  And we’re going to let science drive that process, and as soon as we have a policy to announce on this we’ll let you know.

Q    But if you watched “60 Minutes” last night, you heard the nurses who first treated Mr. Duncan saying that despite all the talk from the CDC about how procedures were in place, protocols were in place, that they were not followed in the initial hours and these nurses were dealing with a horrific situation.  I’m trying to understand -- we heard from the beginning that troops were going in and they were going to help -- and you mentioned before, heroes -- and they’re doing heroic work.  But how could those heroes not have a plan in place before and during that heroic work?  Don’t you understand?  It seems like we’re still waiting, we’re still studying this, we’re still trying to figure it out.  These troops are in the hot zone now.

MR. EARNEST:  Well, let’s be clear about one aspect of this.  There are a couple things about what our troops are doing in West Africa.  The vast majority of them are actually not in countries that are affected by Ebola.  There is an air bridge that’s being constructed in Senegal, which is a neighboring country, to try to assist the logistical effort to get supplies and resources and personnel into the affected areas where they can do their important work.

Q    They’re also building health facilities.

MR. EARNEST:  Some of them are in these countries where they’re building health facilities.  None of the -- no Department of Defense personnel is responsible for actually medically treating patients.  So it’s important for people to understand -- and again, Dr. Fauci talked about this a little bit yesterday too -- that it’s important for us to assess risk in a detailed way.  And clearly, the risk associated with being in a neighboring country is different than the risk that’s associated with being responsible for directly treating patients.

Major.

Q    In other words, you don’t know the risk yet, and you’re waiting to try to --

MR. EARNEST:  No, I think we do know the risk.  What we know is that there’s a different amount of risk associated with being in a neighboring country and spending several weeks at a time in the bush treating patients with Ebola firsthand.

Q    So they’re at a lower risk is what you would theorize.

MR. EARNEST:  I’m not a medical expert, but I think common sense does indicate that being in a neighboring country would indicate that you have lower risk than those who are treating Ebola patients firsthand.

Q    So it sounds as if, at least based on what the White House knows so far, its recommendations in coordination with the Pentagon would be not to go down this road on a 21-day quarantine.

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I’m not going to get into what sort of advice is being shared between the White House and the Secretary of Defense.  But again, we do want this process to be driven by science, and science would mandate close examination of the risk that’s associated with all these different activities.

Q    Jim asked this before and I wanted to give you another chance.  Do you believe that there were legitimate legal issues at stake in Kaci Hickox’s circumstance, and that that was something the administration, in coordination with the governors, want to avoid?  Litigious -- I mean, an outbreak of litigation over someone being quarantined who believes they have rights that are being violated in the here and now?

MR. EARNEST:  What’s the question?

Q    Do you believe -- is that something the administration is trying to prevent, as it coordinates with governors, what to do with people returning from the hot zone?  Because she got a lawyer.  She was going to file a lawsuit saying, look, you can’t keep me here; this is a violation of some basic rights.  And I’m asking, is that something in the entire process that you’re dealing with this, as this story has many components, you’re trying to minimize?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I don’t think that -- I think she was expressing her concern about a state-implemented policy.  So I’m not sure that she or her lawyer was considering action against the federal government.  Maybe I’m wrong about that.

Q    I’m not suggesting they were either.  But all of this is being absorbed by a public that’s trying to understand what’s actually going on -- what’s their risk, what are the procedures, how should the elected leaders in their states proceed.  And I’m just wondering, as you talk to the governors and try to work through all these things, Ron or someone else here might say, look, we don’t want lawsuits cropping up all over the country about people who are in a tent at an airport because their rights are being violated, when we’re trying to talk about public and other aspects of this contagion.

MR. EARNEST:  Well, our top priority here has been the protection of the American public, and that is what’s driving these discussions.  What we believe should be driving the policies is the body of scientific work that indicates what sort of risk individuals face.  And again, in this case, the American people should understand that the risk that they face from the Ebola disease based on the likelihood of a widespread outbreak in the United States is exceedingly low.  That’s very unlikely to occur.  And we know that based on the science surrounding how Ebola is spread and based on the modern medical infrastructure that we have here in this country.

And we believe -- and we’re going to continue to work with state and local officials as they implement these policies -- that these policies should be driven by science.

Q    Is it fair to say that the White House take over the decision by Governors Cuomo and Christie was they acted rationally and they unintentionally temporarily stigmatized this health care worker?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I don’t know if that was the effect.  But we certainly believe that any policies that are in place should be driven by science and should reflect the significant commitment -- in fact, heroism -- of some of these individuals who are volunteering their time to operate in a very dangerous environment, both to serve their fellow man but also to serve the American people.

Q    And their decision was not consistent with that?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, again -- and I think I did say this pretty clearly to Jim’s question -- that, again, somebody like Kaci Hickox, who is making a commitment to volunteer her time and travel to West Africa and work intensively and closely with highly contagious Ebola patients is service that is deserving of praise and respect.  And having her sit in a tent for two or three days doesn’t exactly do that.

Go ahead, Jon.

Q    Josh, let me ask -- and Jim asked this and I didn’t hear an answer from you on Kaci Hickox’s case.  She says that her rights were violated; she was locked in that tent against her will.  Do you agree with her that her rights were violated when that was done?

MR. EARNEST:  It’s hard for me to render a judgment on that, Jon.  I’m not steeped in New Jersey quarantine law.  What I do know, however --

Q    Isn’t this a human rights issue?  This goes beyond Jersey law.

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I think I’ve been pretty clear about the praise and respect that I think she’s entitled to.

Q    Okay, let come at this from a different perspective.  You mentioned that U.S. military personnel are not directly treating Ebola -- those suffering from Ebola in Africa -- that the bulk of them are in a neighboring country, not even in the countries that are affected here.  If the major threat here is what’s happening in those countries in West Africa, why not -- the United States military has some of the best medical personnel in the world.  Why are we not more directly engaged in getting control of this disease at ground zero, where it’s happening?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, Jon, what we feel like right now is -- what the President has concluded is that the best way to leverage the expertise and resources of the American people in this instance is to offer up logistical support from the Department of Defense, and that we have seen a significant response from the international community, both foreign governments and non-government organizations, dedicating resources and personnel to trying to stop the outbreak in West Africa.  And --

Q    But you don’t disagree there’s nowhere near enough medical personnel in those countries to help the people that are affected.

MR. EARNEST:  There is more that is needed.  I can tell you that the commitment of the American military to this effort has galvanized the international community to ramp up the response.  But there’s no doubt that more is needed.

Q    But what kind of a message does it send if we say that our personnel will not be allowed to treat those that are actually suffering from the disease?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I think what it says is it says that the best way that the Department of Defense can help is by offering their logistical expertise to speed the transfer of supplies and equipment and personnel into the region.  And I think it is certainly fair to say that there are a large number of American doctors and nurses who are volunteering their time to trying to confront this outbreak, to stop this outbreak, both because they believe that it reflects a commitment to their common man to try to meet those basic medical needs of those who are less fortunate.  It also happens to reflect what science tells us is in the best interest of the American people:  Stopping this Ebola outbreak at its source is the only way that we can completely eliminate the risk from the Ebola virus to the American people.

Q    Okay, quickly, entirely different subject.  We are eight days out from midterm elections that could be highly consequential for this President and for his party.  Why is he here without any public schedule at the White House?  Why did he spend the entire weekend completely outside of public view?  How come he is not out campaigning with and for Democratic candidates in these races?

MR. EARNEST:  Those who are interested in seeing the President campaigning will have ample opportunity to do so over the course of this week.

Q    Josh, you know what I’m saying though.

MR. EARNEST:  I do.

Q    He has not been out on the campaign trail.  Not a single Senate candidate yet.

MR. EARNEST:  I can tell you that the President is looking forward to his trip to Wisconsin tomorrow.  The President will be traveling to Maine in support of Democrats there on Thursday. He’ll be spending some time in Rhode Island on Friday.  And then he’s going to ramp up even further his activities over the course of this weekend and doing two stops on Saturday and two stops on Sunday.

Q    Where?

So I think that reflects a commitment by this President to supporting Democrats on the ballot.  Did somebody ask where?

Q    Yes.

MR. EARNEST:  There are so many stops that I have to look up exactly where the President is traveling.  (Laughter.)  Where are they?  So we’ve got the President traveling to Milwaukee, as I mentioned, on Tuesday.  Traveling to Portland, Maine on Thursday.  The President will be in Rhode Island on Friday.  Then he’s going to travel to Michigan on Saturday.  And then he’s going to travel to Philadelphia and I believe Connecticut on Sunday.

So again, a variety of stop where the President will be actively campaigning in support of Democratic candidates.

Q    You’re not going to stand there and tell me the President has been actively campaigning in these midterm elections, are you?

MR. EARNEST:  I think any examination of the President’s schedule over the course of the next eight days in advance of the midterm election would indicate a serious commitment by this President to supporting Democratic candidates on the ballot.

Q    How many Democratic Senate candidates has he campaigned with in this midterm election?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, there are a number of Democratic Senators with whom the President has appeared.  So, certainly, he’s looking forward to his event with Mr. Peters in Michigan on Saturday.  The President has appeared in public -- for example, I know that he traveled with Senator Franken, where they were discussing some issues that are important to middle-class voters in Minnesota.  I don’t think there were any campaign events that were associated with that specific trip.

But what you’ve seen the President do is dedicate his time to doing what he can to support Democratic candidates.  And he’s spent a lot of time raising money for them, and that reflects I think a significant commitment of this President’s time and energy to supporting Democratic candidates.

Q    You don’t agree that the President has been considered politically toxic to many of those Democrats running in most competitive Senate races?

MR. EARNEST:  It won’t surprise you to hear that I do not agree with that assessment.  (Laughter.)  Stop the presses.

Jared.

Q    Josh, you seem to be going up to the line but not yet criticizing directly the actions by the New York and New Jersey governors.  When state policies differ from the CDC’s science-based policies, and you’re alluding to the fact that it might create a disincentive for health care workers, does the administration believe it’s a bad idea to go beyond the CDC’s science-based policies?  Is it a bad idea?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, what we believe, Jared, is that science should drive these decisions and science should drive how these policies are implemented.

Q    Does the White House characterize when the policies are driven or go beyond what the CDC recommends, that that’s a bad idea?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I think that is -- it’s difficult to sort of encounter that specific hypothetical.

Q    It’s not a hypothetical.  These are actual policies that have been put in place.

MR. EARNEST:  Which policies?

Q    The ones in New York and New Jersey.

MR. EARNEST:  Okay.  Well there’s two, is there one state you’d like to choose?

Q    Let’s go with New Jersey’s policies.  (Laughter.)

MR. EARNEST:  (Phone rings.)  It’s like a game show all of a sudden.

Q    Three-hundred dollars.

MR. EARNEST:  What would you like behind -- what’s behind door number one?  (Laughter.)

What’s your question, Jared?  (Laughter.)

Q    Are the policies -- (phone rings) -- I’m sorry, somebody is not going to get that.   Are the state policies in New Jersey, and just New Jersey for the sake of this -- because I don’t think federalism limits your criticism -- do the state policies in New Jersey hinder health care workers, and does this administration view them as a bad idea?

MR. EARNEST:  Jared, what I can tell you is that the administration, from the CDC and HHS to even up here at the White House, has been in close touch with New Jersey officials as they implement the policies that they believe are in the best interest of the people of New Jersey.

This administration believes that policies that reflect the scientific expertise of medical experts who have been tracking this disease for four decades now should guide the implementation of those policies.  And we’re going to continue to work with officials in New York and New Jersey and states all across the country to make sure that those policies do reflect the science.  And that will be an ongoing process, as I guess Ed noted.

There has been, on occasion, the need for the federal government to strengthen the guidance that we’re putting in place based on changing situations on the ground in West Africa, based on updated scientific protocols.

So we’re certainly open to working closely with state officials to tailor the kind of response that’s necessary to protect individuals in their states.  All of that is mindful of the fact that what science tells us is that the only way to eliminate risk from the Ebola virus is to stop this outbreak at the source.

Q    Since the CDC’s policies are not superseding state policies at this point, and since Ron Klain’s role has been Ebola Response Coordinator, can you tell me what areas are under his purview?  Is it the federal response only?  Is it the federal response and the state response?  Is it the federal response that includes the military component, like what we’ve seen in Italy?  Or is it to be determined?

MR. EARNEST:  Jared, we’ve tried a couple of times I think to describe what Mr. Klain’s role is here at the White House and in the federal government, and he is responsible for coordinating the whole-of-government approach that the President has suggested is necessary to --

Q    Whole-of-federal government approach?

MR. EARNEST:  Yes.  Yes.

April.

Q    Josh, a couple of questions on a couple different subjects.  I want to go back to the issue of the President and the midterms.  Michelle Nunn, the President went on (inaudible) in Atlanta talking about how we -- if we go to the polls -- meaning how young people, blacks and Latinos, they could keep the Senate basically in Democratic hands.  So Michelle Nunn apparently has a three-point lead, basically tied with a three-point lead.  What does this White House feel about this?  Do you feel that the President made an impact on some of those voters to help, possibly see a win?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, April, let me just say as a general matter that the President is very interested in supporting Democratic candidates on the ballot who are interested in promoting policies that benefit middle-class families.  That’s what’s at the top of the President’s domestic policymaking agenda, and he’s interested in having partners in Congress, in the House and the Senate, who will work with him to make progress in support of middle-class families.

And the President has done a number of interviews to encourage voters to be engaged in the midterm election process, and he’s worked hard to elevate the attention around issues that are affecting the middle class.  And I guess we’ll find out on Election Day the extent to which Democratic candidates benefitted from that advocacy.

Q    Also, what’s the timeline for this administration -- since you’re saying that you want to attack it at the source, the Ebola situation at the source -- what is the timeline for this administration as it pertains to the medical infrastructure in West Africa and the U.S. military?  What is your timeline?  Because I talked to retired General Kip Ward, who was the head of AFRICOM.  He said it could take you six months, literally, to help build -- if you were serious about it -- to help build the medical infrastructure over there.

MR. EARNEST:  Well, April, I don’t have an updated timeframe.  I guess I’d refer you to the CDC or maybe even HHS, or maybe even the State Department, on this.  I think that reflects the number of agencies that are engaged in this process.

But we believe, again, that the only way to entirely eliminate the risk to the American people from the Ebola virus is to stop this outbreak at the source.  And you’ve seen a significant commitment of resources from the Department of Defense to supporting that infrastructure that’s necessary to move supplies and equipment and personnel into the region to do exactly that.

Q    And I hear you, and I understand there's a great need for this infrastructure, but if it’s so urgent why not be a timeline to help build this infrastructure to stop it at the source?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, again, I think you might be conflating two different things.  I’m not suggesting that the United States is going to go in and construct a medical infrastructure for these countries.  I’m suggesting that this virus is raging out of control in these countries because there isn’t a modern medical infrastructure in place.

Q    But you’re helping to support the building of a medical infrastructure.

MR. EARNEST:  What we’re helping to do is to put in place the infrastructure that will allow supplies and personnel and equipment to get to this region of the world so that these medical professionals can do their work and treat those who are afflicted with this deadly disease.

I’m confident that it’s going to require more sustained and longer-term investment in this area of the world to build them the kind of medical infrastructure that’s needed to prevent these kinds of outbreaks in the future.  What we’re focused on right now is trying to stop this outbreak.

Q    And lastly, as there’s this conversation going in this room about the situation in New York and New Jersey, what’s the thought of this administration when it comes to colleges and universities in this country who have a lot of college students that come from Africa, particularly West Africa -- Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia -- and they’re imposing tougher travel restrictions on their students, particularly when it comes to the holiday season now?  What’s the administration saying about that?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, there are policies that are in place that guide this, April, which is there are screening measures that are in place in West Africa, and there are screening measures that airports in this country to make sure that individuals who have recently traveled to West Africa, when they get off the plane that their temperature is checked, that their personal contact information is collected so that the government can stay in touch with them.  That information is then transferred to state and local authorities who can monitor the health of these individuals once they return.  And we believe that’s what -- that the science tells us that that’s the best way to ensure the safety of the American public.

Q    Is that what you’re telling -- the science to -- about the science to universities and colleges when they’re imposing these tougher restrictions?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I don’t think it’s the -- I can’t speak to any restrictions that are being put in place by colleges and universities.  What I can speak to are the restrictions that are currently in place -- I mean, or the screening measures that are currently in place at airports in West Africa, at airports in this country, and then the kind of active monitoring that state and local officials will be responsible for doing when you have individuals with a travel history of being in West Africa that appear in their states.

Kristen.

Q    Josh, thanks.  Has President Obama spoken to Governors Christie or Cuomo?

MR. EARNEST:  Kristen, as I’ve mentioned I think a couple of times now, the members of this administration have been in close touch with state and local officials in New York and New Jersey over the last several weeks.

Q    I understand, but has the President spoken to them?

MR. EARNEST:  And, Kristen, I’m telling you that I’m not going to detail specific conversations other than to say that there are a range of conversations that have occurred from White House officials, officials at HHS and DHS and CDC, with state and local officials in New York and New Jersey and a variety of other states across the country.

Q    Have the White House officials actually spoken to the governors?  And the reason why I ask that is because, as late as yesterday evening Governor Christie said he hadn’t spoken to the White House.  So had someone from the White House reached out to Governor Christie directly?

MR. EARNEST:  Kristen, I’m just not going to be in a position to read out individual conversations.

Q    On the point of Ron Klain, he was appointed to be the point-person, the Ebola czar, whatever term you’d like to use.

MR. EARNEST:  That’s not one we’ve used.

Q    What has changed since he started his job?  Because it appears as though this week there’s more confusion than there was last week, given what we’re seeing in New York and New Jersey and more sort of differences between how the states are dealing with this.  So what’s changed?  Has he accomplished, and is he accomplishing what he was appointed to do?

MR. EARNEST:  Kristen, I will -- I think the record should reflect that Mr. Klain started one week ago today last Wednesday.*  And in that time we have seen a significant number of announcements related to the whole-of-government approach that the President has ordered to dealing with the Ebola situation.

We’ve seen a commitment from DOD not just to invest resources in West Africa, but also to put together a team of medical professionals that can be on standby in this country and ready to respond as necessary.  We have seen a significant commitment of resources from federal governments around the world to the broader effort to stop the outbreak at its source in West Africa.  We’ve seen beefed-up protocols that were issued by the CDC to guide the precautions that medical professionals in this country should take when they’re dealing with an Ebola patient.  We’ve seen the CDC stand up and actually deploy a SWAT team from Atlanta to New York when there was the suspicion that an Ebola patient had been identified in New York.

There have been a whole series of training and outreach programs that have been performed by CDC officials in consultation obviously with state and local public health officials.  This came in particularly handy in New York where there were thousands of health care professionals that were trained at the Javits Center in New York just days before this Ebola patient turned up in New York City.

There were additional screening measures that were implemented by DHS to ensure that individuals who had recently traveled in West Africa were now traveling only into those five airports in this country.

I see that you want to interrupt me, I’ve gone on quite some time and I apologize for doing so, but I think it’s important to reflect all that has been -- all that has happened and all that has been announced in just the last week.

Obviously, some of that Mr. Klain was very closely involved with.  Some of it he wasn’t, because it reflected work that had been done before he arrived.  But I do think that what you see here is intensive coordination among a range of federal agencies to respond to this very difficult challenge.

Q    And yet, wasn’t part of his task to streamline the response all across the country?  And I understand what you’re saying about different states and James Madison.  But still, picking up on where some of my colleagues have left off, the fact that you’re seeing this different response in New York, New Jersey, Florida fuels panic, I think, and misunderstanding about the disease.  So doesn’t there need to be more of an effort to get everyone on the same page?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I don’t think that it fuels panic because I think people understand the facts.  And to the extent that there is any panic, if that’s what you’ve observed, then maybe it’s important for me to repeat the basics about this disease one more time.

It’s important for people to understand that you cannot catch Ebola by drinking the water, eating the food in this country.  Ebola is not spread through the air like the flu.  The only way that you can catch Ebola, the only way that Ebola is transmitted is by coming into close contact with the bodily fluids of an individual who is already displaying symptoms of Ebola.  That’s why the only two situations in which the Ebola virus has been transmitted in this country have been by health care workers who were treating a very sick Ebola patient.

So to the extent there is panic, I would encourage panicked individuals to consult the scientific facts and understand that the risk that is facing the average American, as Dr. Fauci said yesterday, is “vanishingly” low.

Q    Does Ron Klain have any plans to go to New York or New Jersey, up to that region, and meet with officials there in person?

MR. EARNEST:  I don’t anticipate that he has the plans to do that any time soon.

Q    And then just one more, Josh.  According to our latest NBC News/Marist Poll, three of the hardest-fought states -- Iowa, Colorado and Arkansas -- show Republicans with a one-point lead.  How much responsibility does President Obama bear for this moment, the fact that Democrats are --

MR. EARNEST:  Tied?  (Laughter.)

Q    -- I should say Republicans are inching closer --

MR. EARNEST:  I think, as I mentioned --

Q    One-point lead eight days out.

MR. EARNEST:  Yes, that’s not something -- I guarantee you that if Democrats had a one-point lead in those states I wouldn’t be bragging about it.

What I will tell you is that the -- even though there are states that -- at least one of them that you named is a state that is considered a red state.

But let me just say something that I alluded to last week, which is that I am confident that in the aftermath of the election there will be ample opportunity for all of you to assess what sort of impact the President had on these races even though his name wasn’t on the ballot.  But what I feel confident predicting in advance is that the President will at least get some credit if Democrats hold onto the majority in the Senate and he’ll get more than his fair share of the blame if they don’t.

Ron.

Q    Question about Ebola.  You keep saying that what’s driving the decision-making on this is the science.  And you were just explaining how difficult it is to catch this disease and so forth.  What is it about the science of Ebola that has drawn this firm line where no DOD personnel will directly treat patients, particularly because, again, this is a matter of national security you say, and every doctor you talk to -- or I’ve talked to -- this problem can be solved?  So what is it about the science that has drawn this line, stopping American doctors -- associated with the DOD, at least, or elsewhere -- from directly tackling this national security problem?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, Ron, I think we have seen a commitment from American doctors and nurses traveling into West Africa.

Q    But for volunteers.

MR. EARNEST:  Yes, that’s right.  Again, Americans who are summoning their own sort of spirit of humanity.

Q    Right, but that’s not something that’s being organized by the administration to deal with the national security issue.  And in talking to a lot of these volunteers, yes, they’re not paid well, they’re doing it on their vacations.  Why leave such a huge problem to that sort of spirit individual?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, Ron, I think what you have seen in this particular response is a commitment of resources by the United States government and by our Department of Defense that’s unparalleled.  There’s no other international government that’s made a commitment like the United States has to ensuring that we’re going to strengthen the logistics in place in West Africa to speed the transfer of supplies, equipment and personnel into the region to stop this outbreak at the source.

And, again, this goes to something that the President talked about in the interview that he did with “60 Minutes” last week, that when there’s a significant problem like this that’s going on around the globe -- and this is the kind of problem that people I think would prefer to just sort of put away the newspaper, turn off the television, pull the blinds, and act like it doesn’t exist.  And the reason they would prefer to do that is because it’s a really hard one to solve. 

We’re talking about three countries in West Africa that do not have modern medical infrastructures.  You have very difficult situations in which medical professionals are trying to operate to meet the needs of the local population.  And you’ve seen a commitment by the United States, by the President of the United States, and by our men and women in uniform that’s unprecedented, that is unparalleled by other countries.

And, again, when we have a situation like this on the global scene, people aren’t wondering what the Chinese are doing to respond to it.  People aren’t picking up the phone and wondering if Vladimir Putin is going to commit Russian resources to this effort.  People want to know what the United States of America is doing about it.  And what this President has done is stepped up and showed the kind of American leadership that makes the American people proud.  It also happens to be, as you point out, in the clear interest of the American people.  This is a national security priority and it’s one we’re going to solve.

Q    But what exactly is it about the science of Ebola, since you’re driven by science, that has drawn this line whereby the DOD, American troops will not deal directly with American patients -- with Ebola patients?  What scientifically has drawn that line?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, again, I’m not sure that this is a scientific decision that was made as much as it is an operational decision that was made.  The best way that the United States government can assist in this effort is to put in place the kind of infrastructure that is sorely lacking in West Africa.  Right now, it is hard to get a large shipment of supplies and equipment where it is sorely needed in West Africa.  But if you have -- because of the involvement of the Department of Defense, because of the logistical expertise that our American military has, we can make that process of getting supplies and equipment into the region much more efficient and much faster.  And so that’s sort of the -- that’s the expertise that they can leverage to benefit this situation.

And what we have seen is that because of the commitment of American resources and personnel in that logistical effort, we’ve seen a bunch of nongovernmental organizations and other governments commit their own significant resources to dealing with this problem.  Now, their commitment is not as big as the commitment that’s made by the United States, but it has had the effect of galvanizing the international community to pay attention and respond to this pressing situation.

Q    Just lastly, are there incentives to individuals provided by the government to go and do this work?  Because, again, one of the concerns about the quarantine is coming back for three weeks and not being able to work, taking time off to go do this.  This is what many of these volunteer doctors are doing.  And aside from providing airlift capability and so forth, are there incentives built into what you’re doing that on an individual basis would encourage a doctor to go and spend a month there, trying to deal with this problem?

MR. EARNEST:  There’s nothing that I know of, but I’d encourage you to check with a couple of other agencies like USAID or CDC.  Maybe there are programs where individuals can volunteer their time and get some compensation from the government and those programs.  But I’d check with them.

Justin.

Q    I just wanted to return to something that April was asking about.  Do you think it would be fair to say that between the radio ads, robocalls, radio interviews, all these sorts of things, that one area -- I mean, to kind of contrast with what Jon was talking about -- that the President has been very active as trying to turn out the black vote?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I think there is no question that there is -- that the President, in the course of his own campaigns, has been successful in motivating core elements of the Democratic Party to support his campaign.  That’s been true of African American voters, that’s been true of Latino voters, it’s true of Asian voters, it’s true of young voters.  So to the extent that the President has had his own personal success in motivating certain elements of that coalition, then, yes, the President is eager to try to use his influence to motivate people and, at least, at a minimum, help them understand the stakes of this election.

Q    And you said that that’s the most important part of the coalition.  I mean, just based on what the President has been doing, we haven’t seen him campaign for women or Latinos or young people in the same way.  He hasn’t been going to college radio stations.

MR. EARNEST:  Presumably there are young people and women that are listening to those radio shows.  But you can check that out, I’m not certain about that.

Q    And then lastly, kind of on this issue, you said that we’ll find out on Election Day how successful the President’s outreach efforts have been.  Would you say that getting part of those coalition votes above where they were in 2010 or 2012 -- is that a success for the President’s campaign efforts in these last few weeks?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I think we’ll see.  We’ll see.

J.C.

Q    Let me just follow up on my colleague, Ron.  Would the administration consider providing free military transport, let’s say, to U.S. volunteer health care workers, and offer them -- to pay them for their possible quarantine period as well?  Is that something that might work?

MR. EARNEST:  I don’t know how logistically feasible that is, J.C.  I’d refer you to the Department of Defense on that.

Leslie.

Q    Thanks, Josh, appreciate it.  Do you know if the White House has developed any protocols yet for Ambassador Power when she returns, in terms of will she be quarantined, will she observe it at home?  And can you tell us about how big her party is and sort of give us a little background on what she’s doing?

MR. EARNEST:  I’d refer you to my colleagues at the United Nations in terms of who else is traveling with her.  But I’m confident that she will follow all of the policies that are in place when she returns, and that will include the active monitoring and the screening that everybody goes through when they go through that process.  I’m confident that she’ll be subjected to those policies in the same way that everybody else is.

Q    And it will be more so sort of on the CDC base than anything we saw in New York or New Jersey?

   

MR. EARNEST:  Well, again, it’s important -- this actually goes back to the very first question from the briefing today.  What New York and New Jersey put in place were specific policies related to health care workers who were returning from Africa.  Ambassador Power, as far as I know, is not rendering any medical assistance while she is in West Africa.  So there are policies in place that are implemented by state and local officials, because they have the authority to do so, that guide the monitoring of the health of those who are recently returned from West Africa.  So she will, just like any other traveler, abide by those monitoring requirements.

Q    Which are?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, again, I guess I’d refer you to the state of New York.  They obviously have been talking with us quite a bit, but my understanding and what the CDC has recommended is that individuals who have recently returned from West Africa or recently traveled in West Africa, that they go through the screening process.  They’re going to get their temperature taken before they board an aircraft.  They’ll get their temperature taken when they return.  They’ll be subjected to an additional layer of screening once they disclose that they’ve spent some time in that region of the world.  Their contact information will be collected and it will be shared with state and local officials who will be responsible for following up and actively monitoring the health of those individuals.

That is the policy that was envisioned by the Centers for Disease Control.  I believe that’s the policy that’s been put in place in each of these states.  But, again, you’d have to check with the state officials who have the authority for putting these policies in place.

Q    You don’t have anything different here at the White House?  There’s no official White House protocol?

MR. EARNEST:  No.  Again, it’s state officials that have the responsibility for implementing these policies.

I’ll give you the last one.

Q    Thank you.  I have a question about Ron Klain.

MR. EARNEST:  Okay.

Q    Basically, Ron Klain has -- we want to know whether or not Ron Klain was involved in the discussions over the weekend with New York and New Jersey, whether or not he played a leading role, given the fact that he is the Ebola Response Coordinator, in convincing the governors there to change their policies.

MR. EARNEST:  Well, as I mentioned to Kristen, I won’t read out specific conversations but I can tell you that the administration has been in close touch with him for a number of weeks, including over the weekend.  And there continues to be robust coordination between federal officials here in the Obama administration, including here at the White House but also at the CDC and HHS, and state officials.

And, again, I think the best evidence or illustration of that successful coordination is the announcement from earlier today that Kaci Hickox had been discharged from the hospital where she’d been the last few days and was traveling to her home in Maine.

Q    The American people have not yet heard from Ron Klain directly.  Is he the face of the Ebola response for the American people?  Will we see him?  And if not, why not?

MR. EARNEST:  As I’ve mentioned before, I wouldn’t rule out some sort of public appearance from Ron, but his principal responsibility is a behind-the-scenes role in coordinating the whole-of-government response that the President has directed be implemented to respond to this specific situation.  And that means that he will work closely with the CDC and HHS, other White House officials, to make sure that the Ebola response is up to the high standards that the President has set.  That has in the past included conversations with state and local officials, and I’m confident those kinds of conversations will continue.

All of that sounds like a lot of work to me and I anticipate we’ll limit the amount of time that he can dedicate to making the case publicly about our response.  But if that need arises, I’m confident that he will do that if necessary.

Q    Lastly, do we know what he’ll be doing in Atlanta?

MR. EARNEST:  I know that he is slated to travel down there later this week.  He is going to meet with CDC officials that he has been in regular touch with over the last several -- over the last week that he has been in the job.  But I don’t have any preview of his trip.

Thanks a lot, everybody.  We’ll see you tomorrow.

END
2:14 P.M. EDT

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

President Obama to Award the Medal of Honor

WASHINGTON, DC – On November 6, 2014, President Barack Obama will award the Medal of Honor to Army First Lieutenant Alonzo H. Cushing for conspicuous gallantry. 

First Lieutenant Alonzo H. Cushing will receive the Medal of Honor posthumously for his actions while serving as commanding officer of Battery A, 4th United States Artillery, Artillery Brigade, 2nd Corps, Army of the Potomac during combat operations in the vicinity of Cemetery Ridge, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, on July 3, 1863.

During Longstreet's Assault, also known as Pickett's Charge, First Lieutenant Cushing's battery took a severe pounding by Confederate artillery.  As the Confederate Forces advanced, he manned the only remaining, and serviceable, field piece in his battery.  During the advance, he was wounded in the abdomen as well as in the right shoulder.  Refusing to evacuate to the rear despite his severe wounds, he directed the operation of his lone field piece continuing to fire.  With the Confederate Forces within 100 yards of his position, Cushing was shot and killed during this heroic stand.  His actions made it possible for the Union Army to successfully repulse the assault.

First Lieutenant Cushing's cousins, Frederic Stevens Sater and Frederic Cushing Stevens III, and families will join the President at the White House to commemorate his example of selfless service and sacrifice.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

THE MEDAL OF HONOR:

The Medal of Honor is awarded to members of the Armed Forces who distinguish themselves conspicuously by gallantry above and beyond the call of duty while:

  • engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States;
  • engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force; or
  • serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.

The meritorious conduct must involve great personal bravery or self-sacrifice so conspicuous as to clearly distinguish the individual above his or her comrades and must have involved risk of life. There must be incontestable proof of the performance of the meritorious conduct, and each recommendation for the award must be considered on the standard of extraordinary merit.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Statement by the President on Parliamentary Elections in Ukraine

On behalf of the American people, I congratulate the people of Ukraine on holding successful parliamentary elections on October 26. Despite a challenging security environment in certain regions, millions of Ukrainians turned out across the country to cast their ballots in an orderly and peaceful manner. I commend the Government of Ukraine for the conduct of the campaign and election day vote, which international monitoring organizations assess to have been largely in line with international standards.

At the same time, it is clear that Russian authorities occupying Crimea and Russian-backed separatists in parts of eastern Ukraine prevented many Ukrainian citizens from exercising their democratic rights to participate in national elections and cast their votes. I call on Russia to ensure that its proxies in eastern Ukraine allow voters in the parts of Donetsk and Luhansk subject to the Special Status Law to choose their representatives in legitimate local elections on December 7, in keeping with the agreement that Russia and separatist representatives signed in Minsk, Belarus, on September 5, 2014. The United States will not recognize any election held in separatist-held areas that does not comport with Ukrainian law and is not held with the express consent and under the authority of the Ukrainian government.

Yesterday’s parliamentary vote represents another important milestone in Ukraine’s democratic development. We look forward to the convening of the new parliament and the quick formation of a strong, inclusive government. The United States stands ready to support the choices of the Ukrainian people and Ukraine’s new government as it enacts and implements the reforms necessary to promote further democratic development, strengthen the rule of law, and foster economic stability and growth in Ukraine. The United States also will continue to support Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity as it works toward a peaceful resolution of the conflict in the east and a return of Crimea, and will stand with its people as they seek to build a more secure, prosperous, and democratic future.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

FACT SHEET: President Obama Announces New Actions to Further Strengthen U.S. Manufacturing

U.S. manufacturing is central to the foundation of our economy, and the U.S. manufacturing sector is as competitive as it has been in decades for new jobs and investment.  Since February 2010, U.S. manufacturing has added more than 700,000 jobs, the fastest pace of job growth since the 1990s.

Today, to continue to build on this momentum, the President will unveil new executive actions to strengthen U.S. advanced manufacturing, spur innovation, and continue to take steps to make the U.S. a magnet for new jobs and investment.  At an event this afternoon, the President will thank the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership (AMP) Steering Committee, a working group of the President’s Council of Advisors in Science and Technology, for their efforts to develop advanced manufacturing across the U.S.  The final AMP, Accelerating U.S. Advanced Manufacturing, is now available.

In response to an earlier report of the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership, which began in June 2011, the President has already launched four manufacturing innovation institutes with four more on the way; invested nearly $1 billion to upgrade our community colleges to train workers for advanced manufacturing jobs; expanded investments in applied research for emerging, cross-cutting manufacturing technologies; and launched a new initiative to deploy the talent of returning veterans to in-demand jobs, including in advanced manufacturing.

The final AMP report makes recommendations addressing three key pillars that support American manufacturing: 1) enabling innovation, 2) securing the talent pipeline, and 3) improving the business climate. The executive actions announced today align with the report’s recommendations by making investments in emerging, cross-cutting manufacturing technologies, training our workforce with the skills for middle-class jobs in manufacturing, and equipping small manufacturers to adopt cutting-edge technologies.

New Executive Actions to Strengthen Advanced Manufacturing in America

Enabling Innovation:

Investing More than $300 Million in Emerging Manufacturing Technologies Critical for U.S. Competitiveness:  The Departments of Defense, Energy, Agriculture and NASA are announcing more than $300 million in investments in three technologies the AMP identified as critical to U.S. competitiveness: advanced materials including composites and bio-based materials, advanced sensors for manufacturing, and digital manufacturing.

Spurring Innovation by Providing Manufacturers Access to New and Expanded State-of-the-art Facilities like those at our National labs:  The National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and NASA are taking steps to connect industry and universities on research and development and develop ‘technology testbeds’ within Federal research facilities where companies can design, prototype, and test a new product or process.

Securing the Talent Pipeline:

Expanding Effective Workforce Development Strategies through the $100 Million American Apprenticeships grant competition: This fall, the Department of Labor will launch a $100 Million American Apprenticeships Grant Competition to spur new apprenticeship models and scale effective ones in high-growth fields like advanced manufacturing.  AMP members Dow, Alcoa, and Siemens have launched apprenticeship pilots and a “how-to” guide for other employers looking to use apprenticeship as a proven training strategy.

Improving the Business Climate:

Launching New Tools and a Five-Year Initial Investment to Support Innovative Small Manufacturers in the Supply Chain:  Given the  innovation gap faced by small manufacturers, the Department of Commerce’s Manufacturing Extension Partnership, which serves over 30,000 U.S. manufacturers each year, will build new capabilities at its state-based centers and pilot a competition for $130M over five years across ten states to help small manufacturers adopt new technologies and bring new products to market. 

Background on New Executive Actions to Strengthen American Manufacturing Enabling Innovation 

  • Investing Over $300 Million in Emerging Manufacturing Technologies Critical for Sustaining U.S. Competitiveness: The Departments of Defense, Energy, and Agriculture and NASA are committing to invest over $300 million in three emerging manufacturing technologies including advanced materials like composites and bio-based materials, advanced sensors, and digital manufacturing. In its recommendations, the AMP report identified these technologies as critical for lasting U.S. competitiveness in advanced manufacturing. The Administration’s research investments, matched by private sector efforts and resources, will drive advances in manufacturing high-tech materials, like new steel alloys that are twice as strong and lighter than today, new processes to eliminate reliance on foreign supplies of critical materials, cut the time to test and prototype a design by half, and replace chemicals made using oil with those made from plants harvested on American farms.

  • Spurring Manufacturing Innovation by Reinforcing New Partnerships between Manufacturers and Universities, National Labs, and Manufacturing Centers of Excellence The National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy (DOE), and NASA will take new steps to support science and research capabilities that strengthen U.S. manufacturing competitiveness.

    • NSF will establish up to two new manufacturing centers of excellence in basic research, bringing together universities and industry to partner at the earliest stages of the manufacturing technology pipeline with a particular focus on advanced sensors for manufacturing and digital manufacturing, through its Industry and University Cooperative Research Center Program (IUCRC).
    • DOE will expand its efforts to provide small manufacturers with access to cutting-edge tools for technology demonstration by reaching more companies through new or expanded “technology testbeds.” An existing model for these efforts is the Manufacturing Demonstration Facility located at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which has helped close to 150 small businesses access cutting edge manufacturing technologies and research this year alone.
    • NASA is expanding its efforts to engage industry and academia on advanced manufacturing topics central to the nation’s space mission through its National Center of Advanced Manufacturing, with a particular focus on manufacturing technologies that reduce the weight of materials during space flight.

Securing the Talent Pipeline

  • Expanding Effective Workforce Development Strategies through the $100 Million American Apprenticeships Grant Competition: AMP has highlighted apprenticeships as a highly effective strategy for manufacturing workforce development. This fall, the Department of Labor will launch a $100 Million American Apprenticeships Grant Competition to launch new apprenticeship models in high-growth fields like advanced manufacturing, align apprenticeships with pathways for further learning and career advancement, and scale apprenticeship models that work. Industry is already leading the way in exploring new models, and Dow, Alcoa, and Siemens have launched new apprenticeship pilots and developed a “how-to” guide for other employers looking to use apprenticeship as a proven training strategy.
  • Communicating the Value of Careers in Manufacturing to America’s Youth: This year‘s National Manufacturing Day, hosted by the Department of Commerce Manufacturing Extension Partnership and leading manufacturing industry associations, attracted more than 50,000 visitors to over 1,600 factories across the country to teach America’s youth about the good career opportunities in manufacturing, double the number of events in previous years. Next year, the Department of Commerce and its partners plan to further expand the number of Manufacturing Day events across the country and the number of people participating in Manufacturing Day. In addition, the Department of Education has begun developing a national campaign to promote the value of career and technical education.  The campaign will inform educators, students, and their families of the value of promising careers and education pathways in technical fields, like advanced manufacturing.

Improving the Business Climate

  • Launching New Tools and a Five-Year Initial Investment to Support Innovative Small Manufacturers in the Supply Chain: The National Institute of Standards and Technology Manufacturing Extension Partnership (NIST MEP), using its network of more than 50 centers and relationships with over 30,000 small manufacturers each year, will deploy new tools to help small manufacturers access advanced technologies, new markets, and growth capital. As part of a national Supply Chain Innovation initiative, these tools will help connect small manufacturers with testbeds housed at national research facilities to test new technologies, helping small manufacturers bring to market novel products and processes. In addition, NIST MEP is committed to providing greater flexibility and funding to its national network of locally-based centers, to allow them to use these new tools and others to better assist small firms in adopting new technologies and innovations. As an initial investment, NIST MEP is launching a $130 million pilot competition in ten states to give centers the flexibility to adopt supply chain innovation tools and build enhanced capabilities over five years.

Building on Progress:  The Administration’s Investments to Increase U.S. Competitiveness in Advanced Manufacturing

The Obama Administration has continued to make investments that directly support innovations in manufacturing, and we’ve made significant progress to date, supported by our ongoing work with AMP, making good on the President’s commitment in 2011 when he launched the AMP to create new partnerships between industry, academia, and government to spur U.S. advanced manufacturing competitiveness, including:

  • Reaching the halfway mark on the President’s original goal of 15 manufacturing institutes in the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation with more than $1 billion in Public-Private Investment to date supporting four manufacturing institutes open today and four more on the way.
  • Deploying nearly $1 billion to strengthen manufacturing curriculum at community colleges across the country to train America’s workforce through the TAA-CCCT fund, led by the Departments of Labor and Education.  
  • Increasing Federal investments in advanced manufacturing research and development to nearly $2 billion supporting investments in major developments in advanced manufacturing, up over 34 percent from $1.4 billion in 2011.
  • Investing in energy efficiency to lower costs for manufacturers so that American manufactures have the opportunity and the imperative to lock in a competitive advantage in energy costs by implementing energy-saving technologies and practices. 

The White House and the Department of Commerce recently released a Digital Tour of American Manufacturing, highlighting how our manufacturing sector is central to making America a magnet for good, middle-class jobs and for generating durable economic growth, both today and tomorrow.

Advanced Manufacturing Partnership Final Report

Beginning in October 2013, the AMP Steering Committee “2.0” – a council of 19 leading CEOs, labor leaders, and university presidents co-chaired by Andrew Liveris, CEO of Dow, and Dr. Rafael Reif, President of MIT - began working with the recognition that industry, academia, and government must work in partnership to revitalize our manufacturing sector. The AMP Steering Committee is a working group of the President’s Council of Advisers of Science and Technology (PCAST) and was initially launched in June 2011.  The initial findings and recommendations in the AMP "1.0" report released in July 2012 have already spurred action by both the Administration and by the manufacturing community.

Over the past year, the AMP Steering Committee has harnessed the energies and expertise of over 100 manufacturing industry and academic experts to identify opportunities and policies to strengthen U.S. advanced manufacturing. The final Advanced Manufacturing Partnership report released today, Accelerating U.S. Advanced Manufacturing, AMP makes recommendations addressing three key pillars:

  • Enabling Innovation – Recognizing that leadership in emerging technologies anchors advanced manufacturing in the U.S. ,AMP endorses increased technology coordination and investments in three priority technology areas – advanced materials, advanced sensors for manufacturing, and digital manufacturing – calling. The report s for a full pipeline approach spanning centers of excellence in basic manufacturing research, the continued creation of the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation for final mile development of advanced technologies, and technology testbeds to spur the adoption of these technologies on factory floors.
  • Securing the Talent Pipeline – Manufacturers continue to need highly-skilled workers to fill open jobs on factory floors. AMP, building on its playbooks for employers and colleges to replicate proven training models, like apprenticeship, calls for further investments in the creation of a national industry-recognized, competency-based system of workforce development. And, to change the image of manufacturing, a national effort to communicate the value of careers in manufacturing to the nation’s youth.
  • Improving the Business Climate – For the U.S. to compete in manufacturing, we must build the environment for main street and start-up manufacturers to scale and grow. AMP calls for building new intermediary services to help small manufacturers adopt new technologies and expand into new markets and calls for a public-private investment fund to help high tech manufacturing start-ups scale from pilots and prototypes into full scale U.S. commercial production, ensuring what is invented here can be made here.

The final Advanced Manufacturing Partnership report released, Accelerating U.S. Advanced Manufacturing, is attached.

Chaired by Andrew Liveris, President, Chairman, and CEO of the Dow Chemical Company, and Rafael Reif, President of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the AMP Steering Committee includes:

  • Wes Bush, Chairman, CEO and President, Northrop Grumman Corp.
  • Mark Schlissel,  President, The University of Michigan
  • David Cote, Chairman and CEO, Honeywell
  • Nicholas Dirks, Chancellor, University of California, Berkeley
  • Kenneth Ender, President, Harper College
  • Leo Gerard, International President, United Steelworkers
  • Hon. Shirley Ann Jackson, President, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
  • Eric Kelly, President and CEO, Overland Storage
  • Klaus Kleinfeld, Chairman and CEO, Alcoa Inc.
  • Andrew Liveris, President, Chairman, and CEO, The Dow Chemical Company
  • Ajit Manocha, Senior Advisor, GLOBALFOUNDRIES
  • Douglas Oberhelman, Chairman and CEO, Caterpillar Inc.
  • Annette Parker, President, South Central College
  • G.P. “Bud” Peterson, President, Georgia Tech
  • Luis Proenza, President, The University of Akron
  • Rafael Reif, President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • Eric Spiegel, President and CEO, Siemens Corp.
  • Mike Splinter, Executive Chairman of the Board, Applied Materials Inc.
  • Christie Wong Barrett, CEO, Mac Arthur Corp.

For more information about the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership, please visit: http://www.manufacturing.gov/amp.html

For more information about PCAST, please visit: http://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ostp/pcast

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Presidential Election in Brazil

President Obama congratulates President Dilma Rousseff of Brazil on her re-election yesterday.  Brazil is an important partner for the United States and we are committed to continuing to work with President Rousseff to strengthen our bilateral relationship.  The President looks forward to calling President Rousseff in the coming days to congratulate her personally and discuss how we can increase our collaboration to promote global security, prosperity, and respect for human rights, and increased bilateral cooperation on education, energy, trade, and other issues of mutual interest.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Readout of the President’s Meeting on Ebola

The President on Sunday afternoon convened his public health and national security teams to discuss appropriate measures to mitigate the risk of additional domestic Ebola cases. The President’s advisors updated him on policy considerations for new measures pertaining to returning healthcare workers, whose selfless efforts are critical to fighting this epidemic in West Africa. The President underscored that the steps we take must be guided by the best medical science, as informed by our most knowledgeable public health experts. He also emphasized that these measures must recognize that healthcare workers are an indispensable element of our effort to lead the international community to contain and ultimately end this outbreak at its source, and should be crafted so as not to unnecessarily discourage those workers from serving. He directed his team to formulate policies based on these principles in order to offer the highest level of protection to the American people.

 

Participants:

  • The Vice President (via telephone)
  • John Kerry, Secretary of State
  • Chuck Hagel, Secretary of Defense
  • Eric Holder, Attorney General
  • Sylvia Burwell, Secretary of Health and Human Services
  • Jeh Johnson, Secretary of Homeland Secretary
  • Denis McDonough, Chief of Staff
  • Shaun Donovan, Director of the Office of Management and Budget
  • Amb. Samantha Power, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations (via video teleconference)
  • Valerie Jarrett, Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement
  • Susan Rice, National Security Advisor
  • Lisa Monaco, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism
  • Neil Eggleston, Counsel to the President
  • John Holdren, Director of the Office of Science and Technology
  • Ron Klain, Ebola Response Coordinator
  • Thomas Frieden, Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (via video teleconference)
  • Katie Fallon, Director of the Office of Legislative Affairs
  • Jennifer Palmieri, Director of Communications
  • Marisa Lago, Assistant Secretary for International Markets and Development, Treasury Department
  • Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease
  • Nancy Lindborg, Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance, U.S. Agency for International Development
  • Suzanne George, Chief of Staff of the National Security Council
  • Brian Egan, Deputy Counsel to the President
  • Rand Beers, Deputy Assistant to the President for Homeland Security
  • Jeffrey Prescott, Deputy National Security Advisor to the Vice President
  • Gayle Smith, Senior Director for Development and Democracy, National Security Council

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Statement by the President on Parliamentary Elections in Tunisia

On behalf of all Americans, I congratulate the people of Tunisia on the democratic election of a new parliament – an important milestone in Tunisia's historic political transition.  In casting their ballots today, Tunisians continued to inspire people across their region and around the world, as they did during Tunisia's 2011 revolution and with the adoption of a new constitution earlier this year.  Tunisia's example reminds us all that dialogue, consensus-building, political pluralism, and peaceful assembly help form the bedrock of democracy.  The United States reaffirms its commitment to supporting democracy in Tunisia, to our continued friendship with the people of Tunisia, and to partnering with the next government as it works to promote economic opportunity, protect freedom, and ensure security for all Tunisians.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Weekly Address: Focused on the Fight Against Ebola

WASHINGTON, DC — In this week’s address, the President discussed the measures we are taking to respond to Ebola cases at home, while containing the epidemic at its source in West Africa.  This week we continued to focus on domestic preparedness, with the creation of new CDC guidelines and the announcement of new travel measures ensuring all travelers from the three affected countries are directed to and screened at one of five airports.  The President emphasized that it’s important to follow the facts, rather than fear, as New Yorkers did yesterday when they stuck to their daily routine. Ebola is not an easily transmitted disease, and America is leading the world in the fight to stamp it out in West Africa.

The audio of the address and video of the address will be available online at www.whitehouse.gov at 6:00 a.m. ET, October 25, 2014.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
The White House
October 25, 2014

Hi everybody, this week, we remained focused on our fight against Ebola.  In Dallas, dozens of family, friends and others who had been in close contact with the first patient, Mr. Duncan, were declared free of Ebola—a reminder that this disease is actually very hard to catch.  Across Dallas, others being monitored—including health care workers who were most at risk—were also declared Ebola-free.

Two Americans—patients in Georgia and Nebraska who contracted the disease in West Africa—recovered and were released from the hospital.  The first of the two Dallas nurses who were diagnosed—Nina Pham—was declared Ebola free, and yesterday I was proud to welcome her to the Oval Office and give her a big hug.  The other nurse—Amber Vinson—continues to improve as well.  And in Africa, the countries of Senegal and Nigeria were declared free of Ebola—a reminder that this disease can be contained and defeated.

In New York City, medical personnel moved quickly to isolate and care for the patient there—a doctor who recently returned from West Africa.  The city and state of New York have strong public health systems, and they’ve been preparing for this possibility.  Because of the steps we’ve taken in recent weeks, our CDC experts were already at the hospital, helping staff prepare for this kind of situation.  Before the patient was even diagnosed, we deployed one of our new CDC rapid response teams. And I’ve assured Governor Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio that they’ll have all the federal support they need as they go forward. 

More broadly, this week we continued to step up our efforts across the country.  New CDC guidelines and outreach is helping hospitals improve training and protect their health care workers.  The Defense Department’s new team of doctors, nurses and trainers will respond quickly if called upon to help. 

New travel measures are now directing all travelers from the three affected countries in West Africa into five U.S. airports where we’re conducting additional screening.  Starting this week, these travelers will be required to report their temperatures and any symptoms on a daily basis—for 21 days until we’re confident they don’t have Ebola.  Here at the White House, my new Ebola response coordinator is working to ensure a seamless response across the federal government.  And we have been examining the protocols for protecting our brave health care workers, and, guided by the science, we’ll continue to work with state and local officials to take the necessary steps to ensure the safety and health of the American people.

In closing, I want to leave you with some basic facts.  First, you cannot get Ebola easily.  You can’t get it through casual contact with someone.  Remember, down in Dallas, even Mr. Duncan’s family—who lived with him and helped care for him—even they did not get Ebola.  The only way you can get this disease is by coming into direct contact with the bodily fluids of someone with symptoms.  That’s the science.  Those are the facts.

Sadly, Mr. Duncan did not survive, and we continue to keep his family in our prayers.  At the same time, it’s important to remember that of the seven Americans treated so far for Ebola—the five who contracted it in West Africa, plus the two nurses from Dallas—all seven have survived.  Let me say that again—seven Americans treated; all seven survived.  I’ve had two of them in the Oval Office.  And now we’re focused on making sure the patient in New York receives the best care as well. 

Here’s the bottom line.  Patients can beat this disease.  And we can beat this disease.  But we have to stay vigilant.  We have to work together at every level—federal, state and local.  And we have to keep leading the global response, because the best way to stop this disease, the best way to keep Americans safe, is to stop it at its source—in West Africa.

And we have to be guided by the science—we have to be guided by the facts, not fear.  Yesterday, New Yorkers showed us the way. They did what they do every day—jumping on buses, riding the subway, crowding into elevators, heading into work, gathering in parks.  That spirit—that determination to carry on—is part of what makes New York one of the great cities in the world.  And that’s the spirit all of us can draw upon, as Americans, as we meet this challenge together.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Press Briefing by the Press Secretary Josh Earnest, 10/24/14

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

1:08 P.M. EDT

MR. EARNEST:  Good afternoon, everybody.  I don't have any announcements at the top, so, Mr. Lederman, would you like to get us started?

Q    Thanks, Josh.  Let’s talk about Nurse Nina Pham’s visit to the White House this afternoon.

MR. EARNEST:  Sure.

Q    It seems like a pretty powerful image having her in the Oval Office really just hours after being discharged.  I assume this is designed to reassure people of the President’s confidence that there’s no danger to the public from people who are not symptomatic with Ebola.

MR. EARNEST:  That certainly is a medical fact.  That's what our experts tell us.  I think this also should be a pretty apt reminder that we do have the best medical infrastructure in the world, and certainly a medical infrastructure that's in place to protect the American public.  And the track record of treating Ebola patients in this country is very strong, particularly for those who are quickly diagnosed and admitted through the system.

So this is a testament today to a young woman who, over the course of doing her job and treating an Ebola patient, got sick.  And she was doing the work that many nurses do on a daily basis, and she did so even though it did put her at some personal risk.  And what she did, she didn’t do it because she was promised a raise; she didn’t do it because it was glamorous.  She did it because she’s committed to her profession and she was committed to treating an individual who was sick, and she was prepared to use her training to try to meet that person’s needs.

So the fact that she has been treated and released I think is terrific news and I think answers the prayers of many people across the country today.

Q    What can you tell us about the federal government’s response to the diagnosis of an Ebola patient in New York City?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I can tell you a couple of things about that.  We certainly are pleased that so much of the planning that has been done in recent days has proved to be very useful.  As you know, there are -- earlier this week, medical professionals conducted a training for health care workers at the Javits Center in New York to ensure that they had all of the training that they needed to understand what was necessary to treat an Ebola patient in a way that was safe for them and safe for the broader community.  That certainly looks like prudent planning in hindsight.

The other thing that has been underway for some time is the President had designated five airports where individuals who were traveling from West Africa could enter the country.  By funneling these passengers to those five airports we were able to marshal the appropriate resources that were necessary to apply an additional layer of screening for those individuals who had traveled recently in West Africa.  In conjunction with that, state and local officials had worked to identify hospitals in the same region of each of these airports where patients who are sick could be directed.

So Bellevue Hospital in New York was the hospital that had been identified as the hospital where patients who -- or where passengers who were detected with a higher fever or otherwise sick would be sent as they’re coming off the airplane.  So Bellevue is a place where significant planning had already been done to ensure that protocols were in place to treat Ebola patients.  I understand that Bellevue had been designated both by the state and city as one of eight medical facilities in the state of New York that was prepared to treat Ebola patients.  So a lot of training and planning went into that.

In fact, I also understand that when Dr. Spencer was admitted to Bellevue Hospital yesterday, there actually happened to be a team of CDC experts already at the hospital evaluating that hospital, making sure that they were up to the needed standards to treat an Ebola patient. 

Consistent with the order that the President gave last week for CDC to organize a SWAT team of CDC experts to rapidly deploy to a hospital where an Ebola patient had been identified, I’m told that this SWAT team actually arrived in New York last night, the same evening that this individual was a confirmed Ebola patient.

We had experts on the ground in New York working side by side with hospital administrators and health care professionals at Bellevue Hospital to ensure that the strengthened protocols that the CDC announced earlier this week were in place so that this individual could get high-quality treatment, and that that treatment could be administered in a way that the risk to health care workers was not significantly elevated.

Q    You talked about Bellevue being one of these designated hospitals to treat Ebola.  Would you like every state to designate hospitals particularly to treat Ebola?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, this I think is an indication of the solid preparation that was put in place by state and local officials.  Governor Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio I think deserve a lot of credit for the effort that they put into ensuring that New York was prepared to deal with a situation like this.

We certainly value the strong working relationship that already exists between federal officials and medical experts in the federal government and state and local officials across the country.  That working relationship has been important.  It will continue to be important as we deal with this situation.

So far, what we have worked with state officials to do is to ensure, as I mentioned earlier, that hospitals are in region -- in the same region as the airports where individuals traveling from West Africa are arriving in this country; that those hospitals are prepared and have the training and information and equipment that they need to receive patients that may test positive for Ebola.

So that is the kind of detailed planning that’s been done.  What you’ve also seen is the CDC offer up strengthened guidance to health care workers and public health officials all across the country to give them guidance about what they should do to prepare to treat an Ebola patient.

That all said, we continue to believe to this day that -- and when I say “we,” I mean our medical experts continue to believe to this day that the risk of a widespread Ebola outbreak in the United States continues to be exceedingly low.

Q    And Dr. Fauci this morning said that a mandatory quarantine for people returning from the Ebola hot zone in West Africa was something that’s under very active discussion.  Can you tell us a little bit about those discussions and what that might look like?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I can tell you that the protocols that guide the restrictions that are placed on individuals that are returning from West Africa are driven by the best scientific advice that we can get.  We have our medical experts and our scientists looking carefully at how we treat Ebola patients and how we can do that in a way that protects the American public and in a way that protects health care workers who are rendering lifesaving aid.  So we’re going to continue to rely on that advice as we regularly update and review procedures as necessary to protect the American public. 

You’ll recall that one of the strengthened measures that was announced just this week was the intention of CDC to share contact information with state and local officials so that state and local officials could take the necessary steps to protect the public when it comes to individuals who have returned to the U.S. after having recently traveled in West Africa.  So that’s an example of the kind of beefed-up procedures that the CDC has put in place to ensure that we’re doing everything we can to protect the American public.

Q    And briefly, on the President’s plans next week to campaign really across the country for some Democratic candidates for governor, despite this push at the end for governors, the President only did one fundraiser this year for the Democratic Governors Association; I think it was back in February.  And really the focus of his fundraising has been for House and Senate.  I’m wondering, if governors’ races are so important to the President, to the party this year, why didn’t he do more earlier in the year to help raise money for them?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, as you point out, Josh, the President has done a number of things to boost the candidacy of Democratic candidates up and down the ballot all across the country.  And the President has worked to try to boost the candidacy of Democratic governors who are running for reelection or candidates for governor who are Democrats. 

In terms of the exact fundraising strategy that’s deployed by the DGA, I’d refer you to them about what sort of requests they made.  I, frankly, don’t have off the top of my head about whether or not the President signed the emails to help raise money via the Internet for candidates for governor.  I can tell you that certainly Democratic candidates, like others, benefit from the kinds of resources that the President raised for the Democratic Congressional Committee.  We have the party working very aggressively to benefit Democrats up and down the ballot, and that’s one way in which they’ll benefit from the President’s involvement.  But we also anticipate that the events that the President will be hosting over the course of next week will also significantly benefit those campaigns as well.

Roberta.

Q    So does the administration feel that the post-arrival monitoring that the CDC announced earlier this week is enough?  Or how much thought is being given to people also needing to agree to stay in some kind of self-isolation or self-quarantine once they arrive back from the hot zone?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, we do anticipate that -- we do expect that these active monitoring procedures that are in place for individuals who have recently traveled in West Africa will be in place on Monday.  So those measures are being ramped up.  But we do continue to have confidence -- as I believe Mayor de Blasio and the public health commissioner in New York stated yesterday -- that the risk facing the people of New York continues to be exceedingly low. 

We understand from reports that subway traffic today was typical for a Friday.  I think that’s an indication that the people of New York are feeling confident, as they should, about their safety as they go about their daily business.  They should, because Dr. Spencer, as we discussed, is somebody who upon return from West Africa was screened at the airport.  And when he was screened at the airport, it was determined that he did not have a temperature.  And that’s significant because we know that the only way that you can contract Ebola is by coming into contact with the bodily fluids of an individual who is exhibiting symptoms of Ebola.  Dr. Spencer, when he flew on a plane, did not have any symptoms of Ebola.  That’s why we’re not concerned at all about the risk facing people who may have been on that airplane.

Since he returned, Dr. Spencer was regularly taking his temperature and monitoring his health.  And as soon as it became clear that his temperature was elevated, he contacted medical authorities.  These were medical authorities who, as I mentioned to Josh, had recently been trained in the protocols that are necessary to detect and isolate an Ebola patient.  So those medical authorities responded promptly in accordance with protocols.  He was transferred to Bellevue Hospital, a hospital that had been preparing for weeks to receive a possible Ebola patient.  He was appropriately isolated, and he started receiving treatment while he was being tested for the Ebola virus.

So this is an indication that this kind of planning and preparation will be very important to the successful treatment of Ebola patients and the continued safety of the people of America and, in this case, the people of New York City.

Q    Right, so he did all those things as you laid out, but what he didn’t do, it seems that he didn’t self-isolate.  He went out into the community to the limited degree that we’ve all been reading about.  So is that something that the administration is considering requiring people who come back to do?  To self-isolate, to stay indoors or stay in their homes, or some additional measure?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, we’re always reviewing and assessing the protocols that are in place.  But the fact of the matter is the CDC is doing the necessary contact tracing, but our experts tell us that -- and as a result of that contact tracing I think that there are a couple of people that have been isolated.  But the fact is that the risk facing the average New Yorker is exceedingly low, and the reason for that is that this is an individual who was monitoring his health very closely.

And again, what we know about Ebola is very clearly about the way that it’s transmitted.  It’s only transmitted when an individual comes in close contact with the bodily fluids of an individual who has symptoms of Ebola.  That is why I think it is instructive for people to take note of the fact that we only have two instances where the Ebola virus has been transmitted inside the United States, and those are instances where you had health care workers who were treating a very sick Ebola patient.  And that obviously is very different than the kind of day-to-day encounters that people have as they go about their business in public.

So that is why the risk that is facing the people of New York and people of America continues at this point to be exceedingly low according to our medical experts.

Q    Just briefly, is the administration considering requiring people who have been in a hot zone to complete a quarantine before coming back to America?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I’m not going to get into sort of the ongoing deliberations of our public health professionals.  What I can tell you is that these kinds of policy decisions are going to be driven by science and by the best advice of our medical experts, and by our scientists that have four decades of experience in dealing with Ebola outbreaks in West Africa.

So we’ve got teams on the ground at Bellevue Hospital that have experience in infection control, that have experience in limiting infection control inside medical facilities.  These are individuals that have an expertise in treating the Ebola virus.  We’re going to make sure that they’re taking the necessary steps that they can treat Dr. Spencer in a way that will protect the public and the health care workers who are rendering him aid.    

Olivier.

Q    Josh, one question and one housekeeping item.  The question is, when someone who has beaten Ebola comes to see the President in the Oval Office, are there additional layers of precautions taken?  Do they undergo -- is there a White House overseeing medical checkup to double -- just to make sure that they’re, in fact, clear of this?

MR. EARNEST:  No.  As Dr. Fauci noted in his news conference that I caught part of earlier today, Ms. Pham was tested five different times to confirm that she no longer had the virus.  So all the necessary testing that allows her to safely return home with a clean bill of health is the same guidance that she has gotten in terms of meeting the President.

Q    And then the housekeeping item -- I would like to ask the White House, through you, to open the 1:30 event -- obviously, I think we’re very, very close now -- open this event to the full complement of print, television and radio reporters who would typically cover an event like this.

MR. EARNEST:  In this case, we’re just going to do the still photographers.

Q    Could you explain why?  I mean, is it out of concern for her?  To me, it seems like it reduces the magnitude of this event a little bit.  Nothing against our stills brethren, obviously.

MR. EARNEST:  Right.  I think in this case we determined that the still photographers would provide the access that was necessary to ensure that you and the American people were informed about this event.

Juliet.

Q    Hi.  I know you can’t get into great details about the policy deliberations on quarantining returning medical personnel, but can you talk about some of the balancing act that you’re trying to do when you’re looking at, for example, whether a quarantine upon return to the United States would affect the ongoing international effort to stop Ebola at its source?  Could you just -- there’s a lot of concern among folks that between cutting commercial traffic, changes in insurance policies and something like this, that there aren’t -- it’s becoming more difficult to get volunteers to go to the region.

MR. EARNEST:  Well, Juliet, you, as usual, raise a really important point, which is Dr. Spencer is somebody who, as I alluded to earlier, volunteered his time to treat people with Ebola in West Africa.  It doesn’t exactly sound like a luxurious vacation.  But this is somebody who was prepared to use his skills as a doctor to try to meet the needs of those who are far less fortunate than we are.  And that is I think a pretty astounding display of generosity and charity and goodwill.  It certainly reflects the spirit of the American people that we are willing to selflessly try to meet the needs of those who are less fortunate.

At the same time, it’s not just charity, though, because we know that the only way that we can entirely eliminate the risk to the American people from the Ebola virus is to stop this outbreak at the source.  And in order to stop this outbreak at the source in West Africa, we’re going to need to surge personnel and supplies to stop this outbreak.

So we are certainly appreciative of what Dr. Spencer has done, not because it respects -- not only because it reflects the true spirit of America, but also it reflects the commitment that’s required to stop this Ebola outbreak at the source.

And I guess to answer your question more directly, we do want to ensure that whatever policies we put in place takes as the first priority the protection of the American public.  But at the same time, we don’t want to overly burden those individuals who are going to great lengths to try to serve their fellow man and stop this outbreak at the source, which ultimately is in the best interest of the American people.

Julie.

Q    Can you tell us a little bit about how this visit came together?  Did the President invite her?  Or how it came to fruition and sort of what was the impetus for that?  And then also, separately, I’m sure you’re aware there’s a hearing on the Hill today where the administration’s response to Ebola has come under some fair degree of criticism.  So can you tell us what Ron Klain has been doing and will be doing in the days to come to sort of get that into a better place and respond to some of the criticism that you’ve been getting that the response has been inadequate?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, let’s first talk about the visit of Nina Pham today.  The White House learned early today that she was going to be released from the National Institutes of Health medical facility that had been treating her for the last week or so.  Of course, the NIH is just a few miles from the White House. And White House officials contacted the NIH to let her know that the President was interested in meeting her if she felt up to it. We were certainly pleased to see that she accepted the invitation and all look forward to her arrival here at the White House shortly.

As it relates to the hearing today, I didn’t see much of it. It does seem that most of the criticism was registered by somebody who struggled to pronounce the name of the virus at the hearing, so I think we might not be too concerned about some of the partisan criticism that was on display I think in the hearing.  But there was representation from the administration at the hearing.  It does reflect our commitment to working with Congress to ensure that the country is working together and pulling in the same direction to respond to this situation, and we’ll continue to do that in the days ahead.

Q    What’s Ron Klain doing?  And can you tell us anything about how he’ll be spending his time?  I know he is supposed to go to Atlanta, to the CDC next week.  What else is he doing?

MR. EARNEST:  Today is his third day on the job, so I’m pleased that there has been a lot of interest in the work that he is doing here.  He is somebody who has been convening meetings and regularly working closely with officials at the CDC and HHS as they put in place some of the protocols that have been announced over the course of this week. 

He also was in touch with New York officials last night and over the course of today to ensure that the state and local officials were feeling the kind of support that they’re receiving from the Obama administration as they deal with this latest Ebola case.  He is planning to travel to Atlanta next week, where he’ll have the opportunity to meet in person with some of the CDC officials that he has been on the phone with a lot over the course of the last few days.

Jon.

Q    Josh, can you give us some details on the SWAT team that was sent to New York last night -- how many people, what exactly they’re doing?

MR. EARNEST:  I don’t have specific details about the members of the SWAT team.  I know as a general matter, when they are -- members of the SWAT team who are assembled are individuals who typically have an expertise in the area of infection control in hospitals.  It typically will include individuals who have dealt with Ebola patients in the past.  There has also been talk about the importance of individuals who can be closely monitoring health care workers as they’re donning and doffing personal protection equipment. 

There also has been the designation in these circumstances of a site manager, somebody who can be in charge of ensuring that the protocols are very closely followed. Those are the kinds of people that are typically part of a SWAT team.  And so I’d refer you to CDC about how many individuals and which individuals fit the profile that I just described. 

I can give you a little bit more color on one other aspect of this, which is that there was -- in order to quickly transport the team from the CDC to New York, the President ordered that a Department of Defense aircraft be commissioned to fly them from Atlanta to New York so they could be in place as soon as possible.  I do understand that weather briefly delayed their arrival because there was a pretty bad storm in New York last night.  But it is because we were able to draw on some DOD resources and because this team was prepared, that they were on the ground within hours, just a couple hours of this individual being -- testing positive for Ebola.  And I think that indicates the kind of commitment that CDC has to taking very seriously the responsibilities of acting quickly to support local health care professionals when they’re dealing with an Ebola patient.

Q    So how soon after news of the confirmation that that individual in New York had Ebola did the President make that order?

MR. EARNEST:  I don’t have the exact tick-tock of all of this.  I know that there was a -- because of his travel history and because of his close contact with Ebola patients in West Africa, there was a strong suspicion that he would test positive for Ebola.  So I think that some of the wheels were put into motion a little earlier than they otherwise would have been because of the specifics of this individual case.

Q    And I know you haven’t wanted to comment on the specific plans, whether or not you’re considering quarantine -- forcing a quarantine here in the United States or before folks travel.  But as a general matter, does news of the fact that we have another case of Ebola, this time in New York, indicate that something more needs to be done, that more steps need to be put in place?

MR. EARNEST:  I think the answer to that is, not necessarily.  Because we continue to believe that the risk facing New Yorkers from the Ebola virus today continues to be exceedingly low.  There are a small number of individuals who did have close contact with Dr. Spencer upon his return from West Africa who have been isolated.  But for the average New Yorker who is riding the subway today or taking a stroll along the High Line, presuming the weather there is better than it was yesterday, those individuals do not face a significantly elevated risk in this situation. 

And the reason is -- and this is important -- the reason is that Dr. Spencer was very closely monitoring his own health.  And as soon as he noticed that he might be displaying symptoms that are consistent with Ebola, he contacted health care professional who are trained and prepared to respond quickly, and that’s exactly what they did.

Q    So the President wouldn’t have any qualms about riding the subway today in New York, or going bowling at the bowling alley, or hitching a ride with Uber?

MR. EARNEST:  The President is a big fan of bowling.  (Laughter.)

Q    He’s not the best bowler, but --

MR. EARNEST:  He is an accomplished bowler.  (Laughter.) 

Q    Josh, I think we may need a fact-check on that.

MR. EARNEST:  He’s been practicing.  I can tell you that the President would have no qualms about riding the subway in New York or taking a stroll on the High Line, which is, I know, something that he would love to do -- or even bowling a few frames at this bowling alley in Brooklyn.

The risk that is facing the average New Yorker, the average person going to those places remains today exceedingly low.

Q    And can you just, just one more time -- this is quite an extraordinary event that Nina Pham has just been released, just been cleared of Ebola, and then she’s coming right here to the Oval Office.  What is the significance, the symbolic significance of the President’s meeting today with Nina Pham?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I think it is an opportunity for the President to, first of all, to thank her for her service.  Again, this is an individual -- this is a nurse who used her training to treat somebody who was really sick with Ebola.  And she dove into treating this individual without regard for her own health.  This is somebody who -- she didn’t get a raise because she did it.  She certainly didn’t do it for the glory.  There are a lot of individuals who treated that first Ebola patient in Dallas who we don’t know about.  So this is somebody who displayed the kind of selfless service to her fellow man that I think is worthy of some praise. At the same time, we’re also certainly relieved that she has been successfully treated and has recovered from Ebola.  I think that reflects, as I mentioned earlier, that the prayers of countless of Americans have been answered today.

So we’re certainly celebrating alongside her.  And the President is looking forward to meeting her.

Q    And then just to follow up lastly on what Olivier was asking about.  I mean, this is an important meeting.  Why ban reporters from this meeting?  Why ban video cameras?  I mean, countless other events in the Oval Office under this President and other Presidents, there are reporters present, there are television cameras present.  Why does this White House decide on a meeting this important to say, no, reporters are not allowed at this event?  Why?

MR. EARNEST:  The good news is that reporters will be allowed at the event.  The photo -- your colleagues, the photojournalists will be in there to take a photograph of the President greeting her.

Q    You know what I’m saying.  There are no print reporters allowed.  There are no television reporters allowed.  There’s no editorial presence.  You’re only allowing still photographers.  Why?

MR. EARNEST:  Many of you did have the opportunity to see her deliver remarks at the NIH upon her departure from the hospital. 

Q    That’s not an answer to my question.  Why was this decision made?

MR. EARNEST:  Because reporters did have the opportunity to see her speak already.  And this is an opportunity for the President to greet her at the White House.  And we did want to make sure that photographers could see her do so, but the President, nor Ms. Pham plans to make any comments today.

Laura.

Q    Now, just to follow up on what Olivier and this gentleman is saying, if you had a foreign camera, this is a worldwide story.  This is a huge symbol for all of us.  I mean, American press or foreign press, to see the President welcoming here this nurse.  Yes, why, is the first question. 

MR. EARNEST:  It’s certainly good news, and I do understand that there will be wire photographers that will be in the Oval Office taking this picture and that image will be beamed around the world.

Q    But it’s not a video thing.  I mean, for people in Africa at this moment, it would be quite important to see this footage of the President welcoming this woman.

MR. EARNEST:  And the good news is that they will see a photograph of the President greeting this woman in the Oval Office.  So it will be a really nice event I think.

Q    My second question is, was the President briefed on the attack in New York against the police officers yesterday?

MR. EARNEST:  The President was informed of the situation by Lisa Monaco last night.

Q    And what’s the White House reaction?

MR. EARNEST:  This is a situation that is under investigation by the New York Police Department, local law enforcement authorities.  Officials here at the White House and other federal law enforcement officials have been in touch with local law enforcement on this matter, but it’s still under investigation so I don’t have too much to say about it at this point.

Ed.

Q    Josh, I wanted to go back to Ebola.  You’ve said several times Dr. Spencer was monitoring himself very closely.  Why was a doctor who just came from treating Ebola patients in West Africa allowed to monitor himself as opposed to having the government keep a closer eye on whether or not he was getting sick?

MR. EARNEST:  He is a highly trained medical professional, certainly had the capacity to take his own temperature.  He had been advised by the government that --

Q    Right, and he still got Ebola, obviously.

MR. EARNEST:  He had been advised by the government about what steps he should take should he notice that symptoms like a high fever, or at least an elevated fever, were evident.  And he followed those steps.  And because of the preparation of state and local officials in New York, he is receiving treatment already.

Q    The President has told the public again and again we don’t need a travel ban because we have these very tough restrictions in place, which include taking people’s temperatures when they come in.  And so we did that, and he didn’t have a temperature at that point.

MR. EARNEST:  That’s correct.

Q    Doesn’t that suggest there is a gap there in the system?

MR. EARNEST:  There is not a gap in the system, Ed.  And it goes back to the fact that the only way that an individual can contract the Ebola virus is by coming into close contact with the bodily fluids of an individual who is already displaying symptoms of Ebola.  You can’t catch Ebola through the air.  You can’t catch Ebola by drinking food -- or drinking water or eating the food in the United States.

Q    I understand that.  You said that earlier.  I guess I’m not trying to raise a question about the people on the plane -- you made that point earlier.  I get that.  But I’m saying there’s somebody who was interacting with people who had Ebola in West Africa, so we knew he was high-risk for this.  He did heroic work trying to help those people.

MR. EARNEST:  Well, he was not high-risk for this, Ed.  It’s important for people to understand that there --

Q    So how did he get it?  He’s a doctor treating Ebola patients.

MR. EARNEST:  Yes, there are dozens of health care workers who have treated Ebola patients in West Africa and did that without contracting the Ebola virus.  He is at an --

Q    A higher risk than you or I.

MR. EARNEST:  -- an elevated risk, but not a high risk.  And it’s important for people to understand the difference.

Q    So then why isn’t he stopped from coming to America until we know for sure he does not have Ebola since he was interacting with people and treating people who had Ebola?

MR. EARNEST:  Again, he was somebody who was screened before he returned to the United States.  He was screened in West Africa before he boarded an aircraft and he was screened upon arrival in the United States.  In both indications -- or in both situations, he did not exhibit any symptoms of Ebola.  That means that he was not at all contagious.  So anybody who was flying on the plane, anybody who happened to be in the airport at the same time that he was there does not face --

Q    He got it later.  I understand.  I’m just saying but then he still got Ebola later and went out -- we don’t know whether he infected anyone else.  Hopefully he did not.  But the point is he got through there because he was not showing symptoms.  Doesn’t that suggest that you can’t catch everyone on their way in because they might not be showing symptoms?

MR. EARNEST:  But what it shows is it shows that people can’t catch Ebola unless they come into the close contact with the bodily fluids of somebody who is already displaying symptoms of Ebola.  And because he -- shortly after he started displaying symptoms of Ebola, he contacted public health officials who safely transported him to a hospital where he was isolated and where he was being -- where he started treatment.  And that is an indication that the American people and the people of New York City do not face a significant risk from this situation.

Q    Okay.  I want to go on to another subject.  The conservative group, Judicial Watch, has just put out a statement yesterday, I believe, saying when the President, months ago, evoked executive privilege on Fast and Furious, it included 20 emails between the Attorney General, his wife and his mother.  And I was wondering, did the Attorney General talk about this sensitive gunrunning operation with his wife and his mother and that’s why you have to invoke executive privilege?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, Ed, I’d refer you to the Department of Justice about this.

Q    It wasn’t Justice privilege; it was executive privilege.  It was invoked by the President, not the Attorney General.

MR. EARNEST:  But I can tell you that it’s the Department of Justice that can discuss those emails with you.  What is clear is that this lawsuit that has been filed by Judicial Watch actually doesn’t have anything to do with the actual Fast and Furious operation.  It has to do with emails and documents related to the operation.  More than 7,500 pages of those documents have already been turned over to Congress, which has obviously thoroughly reviewed this situation and they’ve conducted countless interviews.  The Inspector General has as well.  This is something that has been thoroughly investigated.

Q    But if there was nothing sensitive in the emails that the Attorney General sent to his wife and mom, presumably they could have been turned over.

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I know that, again, 7,500 pages of documents were turned over both to the Inspector General as well as to Democrats and Republicans in Congress who are investigating this issue.  So we have demonstrated I think a pretty clear commitment to a legitimate oversight on this matter and others.    

Q    Okay.  Last one, on ISIS.  There were reports that the administration is investigating allegations that there have been chlorine attacks by ISIS on the ground in the Middle East.  Can you tell us whether that's been in Iraq?  Was it also in Syria?  And how concerned are you that these terrorists are also using chemical weapons?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, Ed, we've seen those reports and we're continuing to investigate them.  We, obviously, as we have in the past, take seriously allegations of chemical weapons use, and so we'll have staff on the ground and other places analyze what exactly happened and try to get to the bottom of these reports.  But I'm not in a position to confirm them at this point.

Kristen.

Q    Josh, just to follow up, if they are true, how would it change the equation in Iraq?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, we're going to investigate those reports.  I've seen them, but I don't have any comment beyond saying we're looking into them.

Q    Would it potentially change the U.S. strategy?

MR. EARNEST:  We're going to review those reports before we draw any conclusions.

Q    Okay.  And during the hearing today, several doctors said to Congressman Issa when he asked if there’s a larger overall failure when it comes to being prepared to fight infectious disease, several doctors said yes.  So my question is are there steps being taken beyond Ebola to tighten the system to make sure the U.S. is prepared for these types of eventualities?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, there obviously have been a lot of steps that have been taken already to ensure that we are doing everything we can to protect the American public.  And there has been a significant commitment by this administration even before this latest Ebola outbreak in West Africa to ensure that we're taking the necessary steps here in the U.S. but also around the world to try to protect the American people from diseases like this.

What we are typically concerned about are situations that exist in countries like those in West Africa that don't have a modern medical infrastructure, and the ability of an outbreak of a contagious virus is something that we've been focused on for quite some time.  I know this was actually the focus of attention in the previous administration as well.

I'll tell you that as recently as September, the United States convened a major global event to garner international commitment and resources for the global health security agenda.  So this is something that has drawn the attention of the Obama administration and medical professionals here in this country even before the headlines were filled with reports of Ebola.

Q    So just to be clear, does the administration disagree with what those doctors were saying?  Do you have confidence right now --

MR. EARNEST:  I haven't seen the specific testimony of those individuals.  But what I can confirm for you, and what is evident from anybody who takes a close look at the track record here is that the United States, under the leadership of this President, has been focused on ensuring we're doing what we can to protect the American public from diseases that may break out anywhere in the world.

Q    I want to take one more try at this question that I know you’ve gotten a number of different ways, but Congressman Jason Chaffetz said today, “You can't have someone who’s had direct contact with Ebola patients and allow them to go bowling.”

Isn't there -- do you agree that on some level there is a problem with that, that that exposes a gap in the system?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I think the problem it's exposed may be related to Mr. Chaffetz’s knowledge of actually how Ebola is transmitted. 

Q    He was treating Ebola patients, though. 

MR. EARNEST:  He was.  But it sounds like I should go through this again.  The only way that you can contract Ebola is by coming into the close contact with the bodily fluids of an individual who is displaying symptoms of Ebola.

Q    I understand what you're saying, Josh.  But now there are two other people who were quarantined because this individual -- and again, this is not to place the blame on him at all, but because this individual was obviously exposed to the disease and then came back here. 

MR. EARNEST:  Well, let me try to answer this a slightly different way, which is to present an illustration.  There are only two known instances in which the Ebola virus has been transmitted inside the United States, and those were to two health care workers in Dallas who were treating a patient who was very sick with Ebola.  These are ostensibly individuals who, because of their commitment to serving this individual and because of their commitment to their profession, probably came into close contact with the bodily fluids of this individual who was very sick with Ebola. 

The exact details or the exact circumstances that were in place that allowed them to contract the disease is still under investigation, but we know why they were at a higher risk.  I think what people should understand is the people who are in Mr. Duncan’s family and living with him even after he was sick with Ebola recently were cleared from monitoring because it had been more than 21 days since they had last been in contact with him.

So that is an indication of the circumstances under which someone can contract Ebola.  The fact is that Dr. Spencer is somebody who was closely monitoring his health and at the first indication that he might have the symptoms of Ebola, therefore at the first indication that he might at all be even the slightest bit contagious with Ebola, he contacted health care professionals who responded quickly to his residence, and they transported him under existing, strengthened protocols to the hospital that was prepared to receive him.  They quickly isolated him and began giving him treatment. 

So, again, I'm not sure if there are people who, for whatever reason, think that it might be in their interest one way or another to try to agitate or provoke anxiety among the American people, but I would strongly encourage anybody who is concerned about this situation to focus on the facts and to focus on exactly what we know about how this virus is transmitted, about how limited the circumstances have been where individuals have contracted Ebola in this country. 

It's also important for people to understand that there are circumstances where people did appear to be at an elevated risk of contracting Ebola but they didn’t.  And I think that that is a useful illustration that people should keep in mind if they’re concerned about how this disease is transmitted.  And I guess that's advice I wouldn't just share to average Americans, I'd even share it with politicians on Capitol Hill as well.

Mr. Plante.

Q    You said a moment ago that the reason the President wanted to see Nurse Pham was to thank her for her service.  That being the case, wouldn't you want to have him do that in front of a television camera so that the rest of the country could see it?

MR. EARNEST:  I think in this case, in order to offer his gratitude the President wanted to do that in person with Ms. Pham, and that's what he'll do in the Oval Office.

Q    Let me ask you this.  Was there a White House TV camera in that meeting?

MR. EARNEST:  I don't know.  The meeting has taken place since I walked out here, so I don't know.

Q    If there was, would you then put that on the net?

MR. EARNEST:  If you're interested in it, we can work with you to get that.

Q    No, we're interested in knowing why, if you do, you’d make it available, bypassing us.

MR. EARNEST:  We can engage in this hypothetical discussion after the briefing and after I've determined whether or not there was a television camera in there.

Q    Let me ask you about the nuclear deal.  There’s a report that the White House is pushing a particular deal with Iran with the rest of the P5-plus-1 in order to get something done by the deadline of the end of next month.  What can you tell me about that?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, discussions continue to be underway between the -- I guess among the members of the P5-plus-1 and Iranian representatives about steps that can be taken to resolve the international community’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program.

Q    But are we pushing a particular solution -- we, the U.S.?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, generally speaking, we’re pushing a solution that would allow the international community to have clear insight into Iran’s ability to resolve everybody’s concerns about their nuclear program.  In terms of the details of that agreement, I’m not going to get into that from here.  This is something that obviously is being discussed in a very detailed fashion by the United States and our P5-plus-1 partners and the representatives of Iran.

Justin.

Q    I wanted to ask about the President’s meeting this afternoon on ISIS over at the State Department.  I guess my first question is why he’s going to the State Department, especially since he’s -- according to the guidance you guys have given us, he’s meeting with his National Security Council, which he routinely meets with here.

MR. EARNEST:  He typically does meet with them here.  You’ll recall that just a week or two ago the President convened a National Security Council meeting at the Pentagon to discuss these issues.  The Pentagon obviously has a very important role in our strategy to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL.  The State Department also has an important role in terms of working through our diplomatic channels to build this broad international coalition in support of this broader effort.

So the President is going to convene the meeting there.  I think the meeting will sort of run the gamut of all of the elements of the strategy that’s been put in place, but we’ll have a readout of that meeting when it concludes.

Q    Do you anticipate him giving diplomats there guidance on this meeting that’s coming up in Kuwait on kind of combating extremism -- extremists -- extremism and sort of Internet recruitment, especially in light of what’s been going on?

MR. EARNEST:  I’m not aware of the specific meeting in Kuwait that you’re referring to.  But there are a lot of elements to our strategy.  Certainly stopping the flow of foreign fighters is an important part of that strategy.  I don’t know whether it’s on the agenda for this meeting, but we’ll try to get you a readout afterwards, and if it’s discussed we’ll try to let you know.

Q    And then, one last thing on a totally different topic. Politico had a story yesterday that said Denis McDonough was asking top staff members to say whether or not they’d stay through the remainder of the President’s term after the midterms. I was wondering if that’s true, if that’s a conversation you’ve had with him or that you’re aware that other staff members have had with him.

MR. EARNEST:  It’s not a conversation that I’ve had with him.  I can’t speak to all the conversations that senior staffers have had with the Chief of Staff.  But I don’t know of any regimented schedule of conversations that the Chief of Staff is planning to have.

Steven.

Q    Josh, there were reports today in Israel and now here in the U.S., as well, that the administration rejected the suggestion or the ask of a meeting between the Israeli Defense Minister and the Vice President and the Secretary of State, that it was punitive.  Do you have any comment on these reports?

MR. EARNEST:  I’ve seen those reports.  I do understand that the Israeli Defense Minister met with his American counterpart, our Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel.  I can’t speak to any of the meetings that -- so I can speak to the meeting that did occur, and I understand the Department of Defense put out a readout of that meeting.  I can’t speak to any meetings that didn’t occur.

Q    Do you know if it’s true that the U.S. and the White House rejected the ask for these meetings with the Vice President and the National Security Advisor?

MR. EARNEST:  Like I said, I’m not aware of -- I don’t have much information to share with you about meetings that did not occur.  I do know that there was a meeting that occurred between Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and his Israeli counterpart. 

As you know, the United States values the strong security relationship that we have with Israel.  It is arguably as strong with Israel as anybody else.  And so those kinds of meetings between the Israeli Secretary of Defense and his American counterpart are obviously an important priority; they take place pretty frequently.  But you can contact the Department of Defense for a readout of that meeting.

Jim.

Q    If I can just be a contrarian for one moment about the President’s meeting with Nurse Pham.  Is it a good idea for the President to meet with Nurse Pham given the fact that she just got out of a specialized hospital being treated for Ebola?

MR. EARNEST:  She is somebody who has tested negative five times for the Ebola virus.  Her doctors, who are some of the foremost experts in the field, have confirmed that she is virus free.

Q    No risk to the President whatsoever?

MR. EARNEST:  No.  And, in fact, I think the only question that people had was whether or not she would be up for making the trip down here to the White House.  And we were pleased to see on television that she looked very healthy when she was delivering her statement, and pleased that she accepted the invitation of the President.

Q    And according to the print photographers who went inside the President’s meeting with Nurse Pham, the President did hug Nurse Pham.  And is that -- should he maybe just hold off on that a little bit just to be cautious?  He is the President. 

MR. EARNEST:  Yes, he is the President, and he was not at all concerned about any risk that would be associated with him showing his gratitude to her by hugging her.

Q    And getting back to Dr. Spencer, his case, does it not present a sort of an interesting discussion about personal responsibility?  Because he came back, he was taking his temperature, he was monitoring his own health conditions and so forth.  But I mean, I think it could be argued that not every doctor would be as diligent coming back from West Africa, and perhaps some doctors might take more risks than others.  Aren’t you sort of leaving it up to the personal responsibility of each and every health care worker who comes back from West Africa to do the right thing, to make sure that you don’t have exposures like what could have happened in New York and may potentially still happen?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, I would just posit, Jim, that individuals who have spent time in West Africa certainly understand the seriousness of this disease.  And I think that they would take seriously their responsibility to ensure that they weren’t responsible for transmitting it to others intentionally.  And so I think it’s not at all surprising that somebody like Dr. Spencer, who was so dedicated to stopping the spread of this disease, that he’d be monitoring his own health very closely, which apparently he was.

It’s also not at all surprising that somebody was so steeped in the details of the treatment of this disease, that he would respond the appropriate way once it became clear that he was experiencing an elevated body temperature and he did contact the medical professionals in New York who were trained and ready to deal with this particular situation.  And we were pleased that he was transported so quickly to the hospital and isolated and began receiving treatment quite early.

Q    And there’s been some discussion about whether or not an Ebola vaccine has been developed quickly enough.  And I know Dr. Fauci talked about that earlier today down at the NIH.  Has the President mentioned it at all as a priority to the people meeting in these Ebola gatherings that you’ve had here at the White House?  Is Ron Klain prodding the scientists who are developing this vaccine to get things moving?  Is the President prodding people to get this moving?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, again, a lot of these kinds of decisions are driven by science, and there obviously is a sense of urgency associated with dealing with this Ebola outbreak in West Africa. And again, the only way that we can entirely eliminate the risk to the American people from the Ebola virus is to stop this outbreak at the source, and certainly a vaccine could play a key role in doing exactly that.

As a general matter, I can tell you that the President has, on countless occasions, spoken about the value of medical research in this country, both the value in terms of enhancing the safety of the American people, but also the value in strengthening our economy; that this kind of research often leads to important innovations that can be very good for our economy, can lead to elements of job creation.  And we have been disappointed that some Republicans in Congress haven’t shared the President’s commitment to this kind of issue that would be good for the American people, but also good for our economy.

Jim.

Q    Josh, how does our current system protect us from a psychopath coming from Africa who would want to do us harm, who would want to infect people?  Because it sounds like somebody who is infected could pass through into the United States and then develop a fever later.  How do we stop those people?

MR. EARNEST:  Well, we stop them in a couple of ways.  One is, we certainly do have in place screening measures at the airport both in West Africa and in the United States to ensure that individuals who’ve recently traveled in West Africa do not have symptoms of Ebola.

You’ll recall that just earlier this week, the CDC announced a regimen for the active monitoring of all travelers who have recently been in West Africa.  What the CDC will do is they will share information with state and local public health authorities so that those authorities have the information that they need to monitor the health of those individuals who have recently traveled to West Africa.  And that certainly would account for what I think is probably even the far-fetched hypothetical scenario that you’ve laid out.

Chris, I’ll give you the last one and then we’ll do the week ahead.

Q    Thanks, Josh.  After the U.S. Supreme Court last struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, the administration worked to extend the federal benefits of marriage to same-sex couples to a great extent throughout the country, regardless of the state in which these couples lived.  The exception to that is Social Security and veterans benefits, the Justice Department showing that it could not grant those benefits to couples living in non-marriage-equality states.  But now there are some LGBT advocates who say that those benefits can be extended and there’s been multiple lawsuits, including one filed this week to compel the administration to do so.  And Senator Dianne Feinstein, herself wrote a letter to the President saying that those benefits should be extended.  Is there any consideration at the White House to making a policy change to extend those Social Security and veterans benefits?

MR. EARNEST:  I have to admit, Chris, I’m not steeped in the details of this particular case or particularly as it relates to this lawsuit, so I’d refer you to the Department of Justice that may be able to share some more information for you on that.

So let’s do the week ahead.

On Monday, the President will meet with the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership Steering Committee at the White House.

On Tuesday, the President will travel to --

Q    What committee is that?

MR. EARNEST:  This is the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership Steering Committee. 

Q    What’s that?  (Laughter.)

MR. EARNEST:  We’ll have some more details -- this is a steering committee that’s interested in partnering on issues related to advanced manufacturing.  (Laughter.)

Q    Thanks for the guidance.  (Laughter.)

MR. EARNEST:  Please tip your waitresses on the way out.  (Laughter.) 

On Tuesday, the President will travel to Milwaukee, Wisconsin to attend a DNC roundtable and a campaign event for Mary Burke and other Wisconsin Democrats.  As you may know, Ms. Burke is running for governor in the state of Wisconsin.  Further details about the President’s trip to Wisconsin will be made available over the weekend.

On Wednesday, the President will be here at the White House and will attend some meetings.

On Thursday, the President will travel to beautiful Portland, Maine to attend a DNC roundtable and a campaign event for Mike Michaud and other Maine Democrats.  Mr. Michaud, as you guys all know, is a Democratic congressman from Maine who is running for governor there.  Additional details about the trip to Maine will be available soon.  After those activities in Maine, the President will travel to Providence, Rhode Island, where he will remain overnight.

On Friday, the President will wake up in Providence, Rhode Island, and deliver remarks at Rhode Island College.  His remarks will focus on the economy and the importance of pursuing policies that help women succeed.  Additional details about the Rhode Island trip will be available in the coming days as well.

The President will return to the White House on Friday after that event.  And then in the evening, the President and the First Lady will welcome local children and children of military families to a trick-or-treat on the South Portico of the White House.  I know that’s something that a lot of people are looking forward to.

On Saturday -- we’ve got some additional details about the President’s activities next weekend.  So this is next Saturday, the President will travel to Detroit, Michigan -- or the Detroit, Michigan area to attend a campaign event for Gary Peters and Mark Schuauer.  Additional details on the President’s travel to Michigan will be available soon.  Obviously Mr. Peters is a candidate for the Senate and Mr. Schauer a candidate for governor in Michigan.

On Sunday, the President will travel to Bridgeport, Connecticut for an event with Dan Malloy and other Connecticut Democrats.  Mr. Malloy is the sitting governor of Connecticut and he is running for reelection.  You’ll recall that this was a trip that was originally scheduled for last week, but was rescheduled for next weekend. 

After that event in Connecticut, the President will travel to Philadelphia to attend a campaign event for Tom Wolf and other Pennsylvania Democrats.  Mr. Wolf is, of course, the Democratic candidate for governor in Pennsylvania.  We’ll have additional details about next Sunday’s travel to Connecticut and Pennsylvania available soon.

Q    Rhode Island then is also a make-up?

MR. EARNEST:  Yes, this is -- that’s a good point, Scott.  The President’s event in Rhode Island on Friday is rescheduled from the event that had to be canceled last week. 

Q    This is the most he has been campaigning since the reelect, I guess.  That’s probably a fair assessment.

MR. EARNEST:  Yes, that’s probably a pretty good one.

Q    Is he pretty psyched up about it?  (Laughter.)

MR. EARNEST:  Psyched I think is actually the word the President used.  So we’re looking forward to it next week and hopefully you’ll all be able to join us as we travel.

Have a good weekend, everybody.

END
2:05 P.M. EDT

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Readout of the President’s Meeting with the National Security Council on ISIL

This afternoon at the Department of State, the President met with his National Security Council to discuss the status of the comprehensive campaign to counter ISIL.  He received an update on the political and security situation in Iraq and Syria.  The President reviewed ongoing coalition efforts to help train, advise, and equip Iraqi ground forces to reinforce their capacity to effectively counter ISIL.  He also discussed ways to continue to support and strengthen the moderate Syrian opposition in coordination with regional partners.

Participants in today’s meeting included:

  • The Vice President
  • John Kerry, Secretary of State
  • Jacob Lew, Secretary of the Treasury
  • Chuck Hagel, Secretary of Defense
  • Jeh Johnson, Secretary of Homeland Security
  • Denis McDonough, Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff
  • Susan Rice, Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs
  • Amb. Samantha Power, Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations
  • John Podesta, Counselor to the President
  • Antony Blinken, Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor
  • Lisa Monaco, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism
  • Katie Beirne Fallon, Assistant to the President and Director of the Office of Legislative Affairs
  • James Cole, Deputy Attorney General
  • Wendy Sherman, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs
  • Christine Wormuth, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
  • James Comey, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (via videoconference)
  • John Brennan, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency
  • GEN Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
  • GEN Lloyd Austin, Commander, U.S. Central Command (via videoconference)
  • Nicholas Rasmussen, Acting Director of the National Counterterrorism Center
  • Michael Dempsey, Deputy Director of National Intelligence
  • John Allen, Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL (via videoconference)
  • Suzanne George, Deputy Assistant to the President and Executive Secretary and Chief of Staff of the National Security Council
  • Colin Kahl, Deputy Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor to the Vice President
  • Brett McGurk, Deputy Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL (via videoconference)
  • Philip Gordon, Special Assistant to the President and White House Coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa, and Gulf Region