The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Letter -- Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Central African Republic

Dear Mr. Speaker: (Mr. President:)

Pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), I hereby report that I have issued an Executive Order (the "order") declaring a national emergency with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by the situation in and in relation to the Central African Republic.

The United Nations Security Council addressed this situation in Resolutions 2121, 2127, and 2134, and has required that Member States impose certain targeted measures on persons determined to be contributing to the situation. The order strengthens the United States ability to implement these measures.

The order does not target the entire country of the Central African Republic, but rather is intended to target those who threaten the peace, security, or stability of the Central African Republic or who undermine democratic processes or institutions in the Central African Republic. The order blocks the property and interests in property of persons listed in an Annex to the order. The order also provides authority for blocking the property and interests in property of any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State:

• to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have engaged in, directly or indirectly, any of the following in or in relation to the Central African Republic:

o actions or policies that threaten the peace, security, or stability of the Central African Republic;

o actions or policies that threaten transitional agreements or the political transition process in the Central African Republic;

o actions or policies that undermine democratic processes or institutions in the Central African Republic;

o the targeting of women, children, or any civilians through the commission of acts of violence (including killing, maiming, torture, or rape or other sexual violence), abduction, forced displacement, or attacks on schools, hospitals, religious sites, or locations where civilians are seeking refuge, or through conduct that would constitute a serious abuse or violation of human rights or a violation of international humanitarian law;

o the use or recruitment of children by armed groups or armed forces in the context of the conflict in the Central African Republic;

o the obstruction of the delivery or distribution of, or access to, humanitarian assistance;

o attacks against United Nations missions, international security presences, or other peacekeeping operations; or

o support to persons, including armed groups, involved in activities that threaten the peace, security, or stability of the Central African Republic or that undermine democratic processes or institutions in the Central African Republic through the illicit trade in natural resources of the Central African Republic;

• except where intended for the authorized support of humanitarian activities or the authorized use by or support of peacekeeping, international, or government forces, to have directly or indirectly supplied, sold, or transferred to the Central African Republic, or been the recipient in the territory of the Central African Republic of, arms and related materiel, including military aircraft, and equipment, or advice, training, or assistance, including financing and financial assistance, related to military activities;

• to be a leader of (i) an entity, including any armed group, that has, or whose members have, engaged in any of the activities described above or (ii) an entity whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to the order;

• to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, logistical, or technological support for, or goods or services in support of (i) any of the activities described above or (ii) any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to the order; or

• to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to the order.

In addition, the order suspends entry into the United States of any alien determined to meet one or more of the above criteria.

I have delegated to the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the authority to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA and the United Nations Participation Act as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the order. All agencies of the United States Government are directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of the order.

I am enclosing a copy of the Executive Order I have issued.

Sincerely,

BARACK OBAMA

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Readout of National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice's Meeting with Syrian Opposition Coalition President Ahmad Jarba

This afternoon, President Obama joined National Security Advisor Susan Rice’s meeting with Syrian Opposition Coalition President Ahmad Jarba and the Coalition delegation.  President Obama and Ambassador Rice reaffirmed that Bashar al-Assad has lost all legitimacy to rule Syria and has no place in Syria’s future.  Both sides reaffirmed their commitment to a political solution to the conflict that includes a transition to a new governing authority.  President Obama welcomed the Coalition’s leadership and constructive approach to dialogue, and encouraged the Coalition to further its vision for an inclusive government that represents all of the people of Syria.  President Jarba thanked President Obama for U.S. non-lethal assistance, which totals $287 million and supports the Coalition, local communities inside Syria, and the moderate armed opposition.  He also thanked the United States for being the largest donor of humanitarian assistance.  The $1.7 billion committed by the United States goes to those in need inside of Syria and in neighboring countries.

The President and Ambassador Rice condemned the Assad regime’s deliberate targeting of Syrian civilians through aerial bombardments—including the use of barrel bombs—and the denial of food and humanitarian assistance to civilians located in areas under siege by the regime.  They emphasized the responsibility of the Syrian regime to provide rapid, safe, and unhindered humanitarian assistance.  The delegations also discussed the risks posed by growing extremism in Syria and agreed on the need to counter terrorist groups on all sides of the conflict.

President Obama and Ambassador Rice emphasized the illegitimacy of the regime’s plans to hold elections and underscored that the United States stands with the moderate opposition and the Syrian people in their efforts to end the conflict and facilitate a political transition.

A photograph of President Obama meeting with President Jarba is available HERE.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Press Briefing by the Press Secretary Jay Carney, 5/13/14

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

12:45 P.M. EDT

MR. CARNEY:  Hello, everyone.  Thanks for being here.  It’s great to see you.  I think if we close the door back there we’ll get less of an echo.

Before I begin, I wanted to make note of something and that is that we welcome the announcement today from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Federal Housing Finance Agency that will help more responsible Americans get access to credit so they can realize the American Dream of homeownership.

While we are encouraged that the housing market is showing signs of recovery, we recognize that lingering scars from the financial crisis have resulted in significantly constrained access to mortgage credit for some borrowers.  That is why the President has repeatedly called for regulators to cut red tape so that all responsible families can get a mortgage -- not a return to the days of unsound lending practices, but ensuring that responsible, creditworthy families from all communities can obtain access to sustainable mortgage credit when they’re ready and prepared to buy a home.

Since the beginning of his administration, the President has made access to mortgage credit a priority with support for refinancing and foreclosure prevention programs throughout the housing crisis.  Last summer, the President called for more certain, brighter-line rules for lenders to encourage more lending to creditworthy borrowers. 

Today, we applaud the FHA for doing just that with the announcement of their Quality Assurance and Homeowners Armed With Knowledge initiatives.  And we applaud the Federal Housing Finance Agency for issuing certainty and clarity on the rules of the road for loans backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Given the key role played in the current mortgage market by FHA and FHFA, today’s announcements represent a meaningful step towards helping more Americans own their home and continued strengthening of the housing market.

And now I’ll take your questions.  Jim.

Q    Thanks, Jay.  On Ukraine, today the Germans are trying to broker talks between the government in Kyiv and the Russian separatists.  Does the White House support that effort?  And do you all believe that the Germans are better positioned to be brokers than the U.S. or other Western allies?

MR. CARNEY:  We work very closely with our key ally, Germany, on this matter, and we commend the Ukrainian government’s efforts to hold roundtables on constitutional reform and national unity, facilitated by the OSCE, including with Ukrainians from the eastern and southern regions of the country. And we call on Russia to support this effort.

So as I noted yesterday, the Ukrainian government in Kyiv has proactively initiated a process whereby Ukrainians from the eastern and southern regions of the country can participate in roundtables to discuss a path forward through constitutional reform and discussions about national unity and the degrees of autonomy that regions of the country might have through a negotiated political dialogue. 

That is the path to resolving these challenges.  The path taken by separatists and endorsed by Russia is unacceptable.  It’s illegal under the Ukrainian constitution.  And it is unacceptable under international law. 

So we commend the Ukrainian government for the efforts it has initiated, and we certainly support the efforts of our allies and partners, who have stressed all along, as we have, that this is something that can be resolved appropriately through roundtables and discussions and a national dialogue among Ukrainians throughout the country.

Q    Russia apparently is saying that they want swift implementation of the OSCE plan.  Is that a welcome development? Do you believe what the Russians are saying?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, they also said they support implementation of the results of the referenda -- referenda that are illegal and results that are essentially meaningless.

So we certainly are glad to see any support from Russia, or separatists, for that matter, for the notion of an OSCE-led process or facilitated process around dialogue.  That is certainly something we support, and that’s something the Ukrainian government supports.  But when it comes to Russia’s rhetoric and its actions, we, of course, look very closely at its actions.  And on the issues that concern us, the support for armed militants, separatists in eastern Ukraine and elsewhere, we have concerns that we’ve expressed quite clearly.

The presence of Russian troops on the border with Ukraine continues to concern us.  And despite statements by Russian government officials, we have not seen a pullback of Russian military units from the Ukrainian border.  So these are matters that continue to be of great concern. 

Q    On another subject, the President is presenting a Medal of Honor today.  It’s, I think so far, 13 medals for action in Afghanistan and Iraq, and I wondered if the President thinks this is an adequate number of medals for conflicts that have gone on for more than 10 years.

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t had a discussion with him from that perspective.  I know that he greatly looks forward to the results of the processes in place at the Department of Defense that lead to the awards -- the awarding of Medals of Honor.  Those who have been awarded are inspirations to all Americans, and certainly that’s true of the individual today.

But you certainly make a good point that these were -- in Iraq’s case, were, and in Afghanistan’s case, continues to be -- very long kinetic military engagements.  And the heroic actions of so many American men and women in uniform will be remembered throughout history, and this is one means by which we can do that. 

Q    Speaker Boehner says most of his caucus is willing to act on immigration reform this year.  Is this a message he’s conveyed here?  And are you willing to make any concessions to bring him to the table? 

MR. CARNEY:  The President has long believed, as I think he said earlier today, that there is an opportunity available to the House of Representatives to move forward with comprehensive immigration reform this year.  That opportunity is not everlasting, at least in this Congress, but it is urgent and it is necessary. 

We have long believed that there is a majority in the United States House of Representatives that supports comprehensive immigration reform along the lines of the principles embodied in the Senate bill that passed with bipartisan support, and along the lines of the principles that the President established several years ago, prior to the development of and passage of the Senate bill.

So we welcome any indication that Republican leaders in the House see an opportunity and a possibility to move forward with immigration reform.  As the President has long noted, as was the case in the Senate, it would certainly be the case in the House that comprehensive legislation that emerged would not be written word-for-word the way he would write it, but it would have to meet the principles that he set forward.  The Senate bill certainly does that, and the House has the opportunity to do it as well. 

This is an opportunity here that doesn't come very often in Washington or in our country, where you have a broad coalition -- bipartisan coalition across the country, a coalition that represents not just members of both political parties, but business leaders, labor leaders, faith leaders, law enforcement leaders.  You have compelling data from independent economists that demonstrate that passing comprehensive immigration reform would provide great benefits to our economy, would increase growth, would increase innovation and would reduce the deficit significantly. 

These are all selling points that I think members of both parties can take with them in making the case for comprehensive immigration reform.  So the President hopes to see progress in the next several months, as he has mentioned.

Q    Does it have to be one large piece of legislation, or can it be done piecemeal?

MR. CARNEY:  We have always said that the House will have to address this in its own way.  The result has to be a comprehensive immigration reform package.  The reasons -- and I won’t bore you with them because I’ve done it in the past -- but the reasons why a comprehensive package is necessary are many, and what the President wants to see emerge from Congress is legislation that achieves the principles that he laid out when it comes to enhancing security, when it comes to holding -- making sure that all of our businesses in this country are playing by the same set of rules; improving our legal immigration system and enhancing the capacity of folks in technology and science who are educated here to stay here and build businesses here in the United States that hire here in the United States; and when it comes to dealing with the 11 million undocumented people in this country and providing them a clear path to citizenship that begins at the back of the line and presents requirements to them. 
These are principles that he laid out.  These are principles that are met in the Senate bill.  How the House gets there is obviously up to the House, but we would certainly hope and expect that legislation that emerged from the House and then emerged from the Congress could be signed by the President.

Jim.

Q    The President in those remarks on immigration reform said he’s not hell-bent on every word.  Would it have to be nearly every word?  Or are there parts of it that he’s less wedded to than others?

MR. CARNEY:  It’s a good question, and I think what you saw in the process in the Senate reflects what the President was discussing today, which is even the Senate bill does not reflect word-for-word the legislation as it would have been written by the President or his team, so there were compromises contained within that process in the Senate, but compromises that helped create the bipartisan majority -- the significant bipartisan majority that passed the bill in the Senate.

Similarly -- let’s just stipulate that if the House simply took and passed the Senate bill, it would not be a bill that the President would have written himself word-for-word, but it would meet his principles.  So the same perspective applies to the House process.  What he is looking for is legislation that would meet the principles he laid out prior to the legislative action in the Senate.  And he would hope the Senate -- the House would do the same.

Q    Is it doable this year, do you think?

MR. CARNEY:  It is doable, absolutely.  Again, you cannot doubt that comprehensive immigration reform along the lines that the Senate passed could pass the House with a majority and with votes from members of both parties.  What is required is the decision by the leadership in the House to move forward. 

There’s a lot of pent-up, I think, interest in getting this done within the Republican Party -- and I’m not just saying that because I’m guessing it.  You see it reported on all the time.  And that’s because of the benefits that comprehensive immigration reform would provide to our economy, and to our security, and to our capacity to innovate and grow.

So we hope that whether it’s what the Speaker of the House has just said, or what other leaders in the Republican Party have said, or action that we hope to see take place up on Capitol Hill, what we hope all of it represents is movement towards achieving this goal.

Q    Has it popped up on the radar screens over here at the White House these cases of MERS that have come out of Saudi Arabia?  Apparently now in Florida there are a couple of health care workers who are being treated for symptoms that may be related to this.  What’s the administration --

MR. CARNEY:  Yes, it has.  Thank you for asking.  The President has been briefed on this development.  The CDC is taking the current situation very seriously and is working in close coordination with local health authorities.  I believe the CDC and the Florida State Department of Health discussed this yesterday in a public press conference, and it, as I understand it, has been confirmed that there is now a second case or was a second case established.  So CDC is monitoring this very closely. It’s something that is of a nature that would be briefed to the President and has been briefed to the President, and our team is watching it very closely.

Q    And just very quickly, tomorrow at the event at the Tappan Zee Bridge, where the President will be talking about infrastructure, is there going to be a midterm campaign pitch here?

MR. CARNEY:  No, this is about getting something done that has traditionally enjoyed bipartisan support, which is passing legislation that invests substantially in rebuilding our roads and bridges across the country and thereby putting people to work right away, and investing in our economic foundation and our future by enhancing our transportation networks. 

One of the reasons, as Secretary Foxx said yesterday, that international investors look to the United States as a good place to put their money and to invest in businesses or build businesses is because they have faith in our infrastructure.  And we need to make sure that faith is maintained.  We have an infrastructure that’s in far worse shape than it should be, that is crying out for significant investment.  The President has laid forward a very specific plan for how we can do that.  And as Secretary Foxx said yesterday, he looks forward to seeing Congress move on this so that we can put folks back to work, we can restore and rebuild bridges and roads and other transportation projects around the country and enhance our economic competitiveness by doing so.

Move around -- Wendell.

Q    There are new calls for Secretary Shinseki to resign today, and there’s question -- there are questions about whether the VA system has the capacity to deal with 9 million, I guess, veterans who are due medical care.  What’s your reaction to both of those?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, my reaction to the first point you made is what it has been, which is that the President takes the allegations around the Phoenix situation very seriously, and that’s why he immediately directed Secretary Shinseki to investigate.  And Secretary Shinseki has also invited the independent Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General to conduct a comprehensive review. 

It is essential that we ensure that our nation’s veterans get the benefits and services that they deserve and they have earned.  The President remains confident that Secretary Shinseki has the ability to lead the department and to take appropriate action based on the IG’s findings.

I appreciate the question because I think it’s important, since we discussed this yesterday at the briefing, that when we talk about the claim backlog -- because there was a back-and-forth yesterday on this -- the claim backlog refers to the disability compensation, not to VA health care.  So the issue under investigation in Phoenix has to do with access to VA health care.  The issue of the claims backlog has to do with disability compensation.  And the VA has cut the disability claims backlog by 50 percent since March of 2013, and is continuing to push hard to make progress on that backlog.

I can also tell you that under the leadership of Secretary Shinseki and his team, the VA has made strong progress to better serve veterans both now and in the future.  And there’s more work to do, and the Secretary, of course, knows this.  The VA’s progress includes enrolling 2 million veterans in high-quality VA health care, reducing veterans’ homelessness by 24 percent, providing Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits to more than 1 million students, and decreasing, as I noted, the disability claims backlog by nearly 50 percent. 

So there is a broad effort underway to improve services, to attack the disability claims backlog, and also to investigate what happened in Phoenix.

Q    One of the points the President wants to make -- and certainly Sergeant Kyle [sic] who is getting the Medal of Honor today -- is to encourage vets who may need care for PTSD to seek it.  Does the problems in Phoenix, Durham frustrate that call in any way?

MR. CARNEY:  I think it’s an excellent question.  The President has committed to ensuring that our veterans, including veterans from our most recent wars, have access to the health care they need and to the disability compensation that they deserve. 

One of the reasons, as I’ve discussed, that you have -- that the claims backlog expanded several years ago was because of the inclusion of PTSD within that process -- the presumption around PTSD when it came to a disability claim.  And that was a very important and positive thing to do on behalf of our veterans.  It added to the backlog, but it was the right thing to do.

The same is true of the decision to create a presumption around claims involving exposure to Agent Orange in the Vietnam conflict -- the right thing to do, but obviously one that increased the disability claims backlog, and another reason why the VA has been aggressively reducing the backlog as it has -- 50 percent since March 2013.

Q    How would you escribe the level of trust that the President has in the Syrian Opposition Coalition and as a group that represents moderate opposition in Syria?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, we do recognize, as you know, the Syrian Opposition, and we recognize President Jarba -- who is meeting with National Security Advisor Susan Rice today, along with other National Security Council staff.  As I mentioned yesterday, I don't have any specific presidential scheduling announcements to make, but I would not rule out the possibility of President Obama joining that meeting.

So we have worked very hard with our partners to assist the moderate opposition, to ensure that the aid that we are providing the opposition is getting into the hands of the moderate opposition and not falling into the wrong hands.  And this is something that has been a concern and an issue obviously since the beginning of the conflict there, but it is one that we take very seriously.

Q    Has that concern been assuaged to the extent that it allows you now to provide them with weapons, or let other partners provide them with weapons you refused in the past?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, each nation obviously makes decisions for itself about what kinds of support it will provide to the Syrian opposition.  We provide significant assistance, and we’re committed to building the capacity of the moderate opposition, including through the provision of assistance to vetted members of the moderate armed opposition.  But we’re also not going to catalogue or detail every single type of the assistance that we provide.  But when we provide that assistance, we make sure that the recipients of it are vetted and that they are members of the moderate opposition.

Q    Can I follow on Syria?

MR. CARNEY:  Sure.

Q    Two questions.  Ban Ki-moon just announced the resignation of Lakdar Brahimi as an envoy to Syria.  Your reaction to that?  And second, are you looking for a different framework for the negotiation since Geneva doesn't seem like it’s going anywhere?

MR. CARNEY:  On the first question, the United States deeply appreciates Joint Special Representative Brahimi’s tireless efforts to work towards a lasting peace in Syria and is grateful for his leadership and his counsel.  We look forward to the appointment of his successor.  And I would refer you to the United Nations for questions about his successor.

On the matter of the Geneva talks, they are certainly on hold.  Resuming the talks and starting a third round of negotiations is dependent upon the Assad regime agreeing to discuss among other issues a transitional governing body with full executive powers, as cited in the Geneva Communique.  The regime refused to do so in the first two rounds of the talks.  That has to be the first item on the agenda.

The regime also needs to postpone its upcoming presidential elections, which as I noted earlier, represent a sham democratically and are entirely inconsistent with the Geneva Communique’s call for the establishment of a transitional governing body.

The Assad regime alone is responsible for the talks’ lack of progress thus far.  Its refusal to engage seriously in negotiations based on the Geneva Communique has stalled progress -- whereas the Syrian Opposition Coalition accepted the Geneva Communique as the basis for negotiations and conducted itself in accordance with the communique’s provisions during those talks. 

So that is our view on the process.  It is still very much our view that there must be a negotiated political settlement to this conflict and that that has to include a transitional governing body.

Q    Meanwhile the French, your ally, are introducing a resolution to take Syria to the ICC, to try to them for war crimes.  Are you going to join in on that?  Are you going to support them?

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t seen that report, so I’ll have to take the question. 

Let me move around a little bit.  Jon, yes.

Q    Yes, just a follow-up.  This summer it will be three years since the President first said it’s time for Assad to go. Now we see, as you mentioned, Brahimi stepping down.  The rebels have abandoned Homs.  The momentum clearly seems to be with Assad.  Is the White House now going to undergo a review of whether or not it’s time to change a policy that has fundamentally failed in the objective of removing Assad from power or ending the violence in Syrian?

MR. CARNEY:  Jon, we are constantly reviewing our policy options when it comes to Syria and constantly working with our partners, including the Syrian opposition, in an effort to assist the Syrian people, assist the Syrian opposition, and press forward towards a negotiated political settlement.  There is no question that this conflict has gone on far too long and has cost far too many lives.  The responsibility for that is unquestionably with Syrian President Assad and his regime that has engaged in a conflict against its own people with horrific brutality. 

We will continue to work with our partners and the opposition, continue to provide assistance, step up that assistance where we can and it’s appropriate.  Today’s meeting with the Opposition Coalition President and the National Security Advisor represents the level of cooperation that we have established with the opposition and that you will see moving forward.

In the end, the course of this conflict on the battlefield will inevitably result in no permanent outcome -- will not result in Assad ever controlling Syria as it used to exist and in the manner that he used to control it.  There is no alternative, ultimately, when it comes to resolving this conflict to a negotiated political settlement, and that’s what we’re going to continue to press for.

Q    Will you acknowledge that the policy that’s been pursued up to this point has not been successful?

MR. CARNEY:  I certainly acknowledge that the conflict has continued and that we have continued to work with the opposition that we support, the moderate opposition, and our many partners in this effort to help the opposition and to isolate and pressure Assad into a negotiated political settlement that would lead to a transitional governing body. 

What I will also note is that because of the threat that one of the largest stockpiles of chemical weapons posed to the region and the world, the United States led the effort to initiate a process through which the Assad regime, for the first time in its history, acknowledged that it possessed these weapons and has rid itself of 92 percent of those stockpiles.

It is absolutely incumbent upon Syria and on Russia, one of Syria’s only friends -- the Syrian regime’s only friends -- to complete that responsibility and to make sure that the remaining 8 percent of the chemical weapons stockpiles possessed by the Syrian regime are transferred for destruction to the OPCW.  And we are monitoring that very closely.  That is a very important aspect of the conflict that we’ve seen with regards to the regional and global security that -- or threat that those weapons presented.

Q    On another subject, Hunter Biden has now taken a position with the largest oil and gas company -- holding company in Ukraine.  Is there any concern about at least the appearance of a conflict there -- for the Vice President’s son to take a --

MR. CARNEY:  I would refer you to the Vice President’s office.  I saw those reports.  Hunter Biden and other members of the Biden family are obviously private citizens and where they work does not reflect an endorsement by the administration or by the Vice President or President.  But I would refer you to the Vice President’s office.

Q    Jay, would the President support negotiations with Boko Haram if they would lead to the release of these young girls?

MR. CARNEY:  I think I understand the report that you’re referring to.  What I can tell you is that we’re focused on working with the Nigerian government to locate and bring home those girls.  That includes a team of individuals that I itemized yesterday.  It also includes manned reconnaissance flights that I can confirm we are conducting in cooperation with the Nigerian government.

When it comes to the approach to Boko Haram, in this case, Nigeria, of course, has the lead and we play a supporting role.  It is the policy of the United States to deny kidnappers the benefits of their criminal acts, and that includes ransoms or concessions.

Q    Would the White House or the U.S. officials that are there -- is that the advice that they’re providing Nigeria, that they propose they do not negotiate with these individuals?  Among those, there are hostage negotiator consultants, or hostage negotiators.

MR. CARNEY:  That’s certainly our position.  I can’t speak to every conversation, but that is certainly the position of the United States -- that we, as a matter of policy, deny kidnappers the benefits of their criminal acts, and that includes ransoms or other concessions.

Q    I want to ask you a couple of other questions quickly. I know that we heard from the former owner of the Los Angeles Clippers again yesterday in an interview on CNN where he criticized all sort of individuals, including black people in general, suggesting that they -- and his language was basically that they do not help members of their own community.  I’m curious if the President had any comments on what he heard, including the comments that Donald Sterling made about one of the President’s own friends, as they’ve met at numerous events, Magic Johnson.

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t spoken to the President about that interview.  The President spoke about this general issue at a press conference not long ago, so I would point you to those remarks. 

Q    We heard -- Karl Rove a couple days ago said something about Hillary Clinton’s health situation.  Specifically, his language was she spent “30 days in the hospital and when she reappears she’s wearing glasses that are only for people who have Traumatic Brain Injury.  We need to know what’s up with that.”  Obviously, they have their motivations behind perhaps raising this topic as they consider 2016 --

MR. CARNEY:  You think?  (Laughter.)

Q    -- but I just want to get a sense of, as the White House was working with Hillary Clinton at the time as the Secretary of State -- is there something about her health concern, Traumatic Brain Injury or anything, that was communicated to the White House that has not been communicated publicly?  Or can you right now say --

MR. CARNEY:  You’re asking this question based on the assertion of a political consultant -- which is a kind way of putting his job -- and his medical evaluation.

Q    I'm allowing you the opportunity to say that he’s wrong --

MR. CARNEY:  Here’s what I would say about cognitive capacity, which is that “Dr. Rove” might have been the last person in America on election night to recognize and acknowledge that the President had won reelection, including the state of Ohio.  So we’ll leave it at that.  (Laughter.)

Q    I just want to go back to Steve’s question about immigration reform.

Q    Are you saying he’s brain-damaged?  (Laughter.) 

Q    He needs special glasses. 

MR. CARNEY:  Mara.

Q    Just to go back to Steve’s question about immigration reform, are you just watching the Republicans’ internal debates from afar about whether they should go forward with this?  Or is there some kind of communication that you’re having with Speaker Boehner --

MR. CARNEY:  About immigration reform?

Q    Yes.

MR. CARNEY:  We have been, as a matter of course, for some time now communicating with lawmakers of both parties on comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate and the House.  And those conversations continue.  I don’t have specific recent conversations to detail to you, but to be sure we are pressing the case both publicly and in private conversations on Capitol Hill. 

But I think we are not under the illusion that simply calling for it from this podium or this building will persuade fence-sitters to embrace it.  We think that the merits of moving forward on comprehensive immigration reform are strong enough to compel lawmakers to get off the fence and get it done by themselves. 

And as I noted earlier, the arguments in favor of comprehensive immigration reform aren’t liberal arguments; they’re even, some might say, conservative arguments.  When you talk about deficit reduction and economic growth, and holding people accountable, and ensuring that businesses across the country all play by the same set of rules, when you talk about enhancing our security, they’re everybody’s values and principles.  And that is why you have this broad coalition across the country -- and unlikely and diverse coalition that supports passage of comprehensive immigration reform.  The time has come. It’s the right thing to do.  And we hope and expect that the House will move forward.

Q    But no recent communication with the House Republican leadership on this subject?

MR. CARNEY:  I didn’t say that.  I just don’t have any specific conversations to read out to you.  This is something we discuss with members and leaders who are interested in Capitol Hill with great regularity.  You saw from the President’s comments today that he remains very focused on and hopeful about the prospects of getting comprehensive immigration reform done this year. 

Dave.

Q    Thanks, Jay.  I don’t think this came up yesterday.  Did the President express any thoughts about Michael Sam being the first gay player to be drafted by the NFL?

MR. CARNEY:  What I can tell you is that the President congratulates Michael Sam, the St. Louis Rams, and the NFL for taking an important step forward in our nation’s journey.  From the playing field to the corporate boardroom, LGBT Americans prove every day that you should be judged by what you do and not who you are, and certainly the fact that Michael Sam was drafted represents and reflects what he did on the field in his college career.

Q    Did the President think it was appropriate that the Miami Dolphins punished, fined, disciplined that player who tweeted --

MR. CARNEY:  I haven’t spoken to him about that.

Carol.

Q    The President’s nominee for the U.S. District Court in Georgia has faced some opposition from members of his own party, particularly on his positions on abortion and some issues that he dealt with involving the confederate flag.  I’m wondering if you have a comment on their specific criticism and how you would respond to that.  And secondly, if you can talk about whether there’s a problem here in the President’s nominations given that he’s had other issues with nominees from members of his own party, including the Surgeon General and another one earlier this year.

MR. CARNEY:  Well, let me focus on this specific question.  And I think it’s important when we discuss the context of this nomination of Michael Boggs that we review how this process works a little bit.  The President agrees that home-state senators should be consulted in the judicial nomination process.  However, problems arise when senators abuse the so-called blue-slip system, either by vetoing nominees and potential candidates without explanation, or by refusing to engage in our efforts at consultation in a timely manner.  This abuse is a significant constraint on the President’s selection of potential nominees and on his ability to nominate quickly individuals to fill long-standing vacancies. 

In the case of Georgia, we’ve been trying to fill these judicial vacancies for more than three years, but two of the President’s nominees were blocked for nearly 11 months and returned at the end of 2011.  Our choice is clear:  Do we work with Republican senators to find a compromise, or should we leave the seats vacant?  Given that option, four of these vacancies are judicial emergencies and we believe it would be grossly irresponsible for the President to leave these seats vacant.

Judge Michael Boggs was recommended to the President by Senators Isakson and Chambliss as part of a compromise to fill six judicial vacancies in Georgie.  Senators Isakson and Chambliss have now also agreed to support the President’s nomination of Leslie Abrams to fill a seventh vacancy.  These seven nominees include five women, one who would be the first female district judge on her court, and two who would be the first African American female lifetime-appointed judges in Georgia.

Based on Judge Boggs’s 10-year track record as a state trial and appellate court judge, the President believes he is qualified for the federal bench.  Of all the recent criticisms offered against Michael Boggs, not one is based on his record as a judge for the past 10 years.  What has distinguished his as a state court judge at the trial level as well as on the court of appeals, is that he has taken a keen interest and leading role in criminal justice reform. 

The President thinks he’s qualified -- I think it’s important in any reporting on this nomination to understand, as I know many of you do who’ve covered the Hill, but I’d urge you share that understanding with your readers and viewers, that you understand how this process works and how this nomination arose.

Q    So just two quick follow-ups.  So the President would urge Democrats to compromise and back off?

MR. CARNEY:  The President believes that he is qualified and ought to be confirmed, yes.

Q    Secondly, do you see any kind of -- is there a disconnect between the White House and members of the Democratic Party on the Hill in terms of who the President wants to see be confirmed?  Because this is not the first time that something like this has happened.

MR. CARNEY:  I think the President’s track record on getting his nominees supported by Democrats has been very strong and continues to be strong, and we look forward to confirmation of all of his nominees in a timely fashion.

Justin.

Q    I wanted to ask about net neutrality.  Back in February, you guys kind of said you were going to leave it up to the FCC.  But now that Wheeler has come out with his proposal, I’m wondering if you support it or endorse it, especially ahead of the vote that is coming up.

MR. CARNEY:  Well, what I can tell you is that the FCC is an independent agency and I can’t offer much beyond what we have said before, which is that the President strongly supports net neutrality.  The FCC Chairman has said that it is his goal to preserve an open Internet and that he has all the tools he needs to do it.  We have been clear from the start that we support that goal and will be closely following developments as the FCC launches its proceeding. 

But beyond that and the fact that the President remains committed to an open Internet, consumers are free to choose the websites they want to visit and the online services they want to use.  I really don’t have much more comment on the independent agency’s process.

Q    So no reaction to the sort of fast-lane proposal that’s garnered a lot of criticism?

MR. CARNEY:  I don’t have a specific reaction.

Jessica.

Q    Just a follow on Ukraine.  The French Foreign Minister was here today and said that if there were sectoral sanctions, he would like to see them simultaneously hit arms, energy, and banking at the same time.  I’m wondering how much pushback the U.S. is getting as it considers sectoral sanctions as the next step.

MR. CARNEY:  We have worked very closely with all of our European partners, including France, Germany, the UK and others, as well as our G7 partners, including Japan, on the matter of acting in a coordinated fashion when it comes to imposing sanctions in the Ukraine situation.  And you have seen that coordination all along, and you’ve seen it in the telegraphing by European leaders of what next steps would be when it comes to the imposition of sanctions should Russia engage in further transgressions -- should Russia, for example, send significant military forces across the Ukrainian border, should Russia take steps to disrupt the May 25 presidential elections in Ukraine, which are the focus of our attention right now and the focus of the attention of the Europeans and all of our partners on this matter.  And we call on Russia to support those free and fair democratic elections.

So I think that we have been speaking with a great deal of unanimity in terms of our view of this and our view of the need to ratchet up the costs for Russia should Russia continue to engage in transgressions.  We’ve made clear that more severe sanctions, higher costs will come to Russia if they take the steps that I just described, and that includes the possibility of targeted sanctions aimed at sectors of the economy.  But for more details on how that process would work, I would ask for your patience.

Obviously, we remain hopeful -- skeptical but hopeful -- that Russia will, instead of ratcheting up activity that destabilizes Ukraine and attempts to disrupt the elections, would instead support the dialogue that the Ukrainian government supports and that would be facilitated by the OSCE when it comes to constitutional reform and national unity, and would support a process that has been affirmed by the international community through the OSCE, which is being implemented, to allow for free and fair democratic elections for president on May 25.

Q    But just in terms of the point that he raises, basically saying you’re going to spread -- we want you to spread the pain, we want -- we’re prepared to go forward with the sanctions, but we’d like to see them hit sectors where everybody in Europe has to pay a price, how does the White House feel about that approach?

MR. CARNEY:  I would say that we are very mindful, as the President has said and I have said, that imposition of more severe sanctions will come at a cost to the global economy and, therefore, the economies of those nations that are imposing the sanctions.  Of course, the costs will be much, much higher for Russia and the Russian economy.  And we take that into account as we review our options when it comes to imposing sanctions, and as we work with our partners and discuss with them actions that they are considering when it comes to the imposition of sanctions. 

So it’s absolutely the case that the economic impact of sanctions on the nations imposing the sanctions is something that is very closely evaluated.  What I think I would point you to are statements by European leaders and obviously by the President here that despite those costs to the global economy, should more serious sanctions be called for because of Russian transgressions, they would be necessary.  And we would have to deal with those costs because the actions that Russia would have taken in that case would be necessarily met with a higher cost the Russian economy.

Olivier.

Q    On the MERS briefing, can you say what kind of official brief the President -- was it national security, was it a scientist, was it someone from CDC?

MR. CARNEY:  The coordinator for these kinds of issues is Lisa Monaco, who is the Homeland Security Advisor, and so she would be the individual who would provide the briefing on those issues.

Q    And the French Foreign Minister also dramatically said that the world has 500 days to avoid climate chaos.  I’m wondering what your countdown clock says.

MR. CARNEY:  I would point you to the National Climate Assessment that was released last week that made clear in the view of the science that climate change is upon us and the effects and impacts of climate change are being felt today. 

We’ve laid out a comprehensives strategy aimed at helping communities around the country prepare for the effects of climate change, as well as a strategy to reduce our carbon pollution, enhance our energy independence, and address climate change in the future to try to mitigate future impacts. 

There’s no question that this is a global effort that has to be undertaken because of the nature of carbon emissions around the world.  But I don't have a specific reaction to that statement except to say that the National Climate Assessment that was released last week I think paints a pretty stark picture about the fact that these impacts are already here.  In some cases, they’ve arrived sooner than expected -- sooner than scientists expected, and that only reinforces the need to approach this in the kind of comprehensive way that the President has laid out.

Q    Thanks, Jay.  The French Foreign Minister, Laurent Fabius, also claimed that the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons 14 times since last October, and that President Assad has hidden part of his stockpile.  We also have a report from Human Rights Watch earlier today claiming at least three attacks with chlorine in northern Syrian.  Would you agree with those assessments?   What is your reaction?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, we’ve seen allegation of additional attacks in Syria using chlorine, as we’ve discussed here, and that is deeply concerning.  The OPCW, as you know, has a fact-finding mission looking into allegations of chlorine chemical weapons use, and we support them in their efforts, and we’ll continue consulting closely and sharing information with the OPCW and our international partners as we work to determine exactly what happened.  Syria needs to cooperate fully with the fact-finding mission. 

I think it’s -- as I think I’ve mentioned before when asked about this after earlier reports of the use of chlorine, that chlorine itself is used in commercial and industrial processes and is not required to be declared under the CWC unless it is directly related to a chemical weapons program.  As a general matter, repurposing chlorine for use as a weapon would be a violation of the convention, the Chemical Weapons Convention, and the actual use of chlorine as a weapon would be a further violation.  So this matter is being investigated by the OPCW.  We take it very seriously, and it’s deeply concerning.

I think I’ve been told we’re done, so I thank you very much.  And I’ll see you next time.

END
1:36 P.M. EDT

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Remarks by the President at Presentation of Medal of Honor to Sergeant Kyle J. White, U.S. Army

East Room

2:44 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:  Good afternoon, everybody.  Please, be seated.  Welcome to the White House.  It has been said that true courage is “a perfect sensibility of the measure of danger, and a mental willingness to incur it.”  For more than 12 years, with our nation at war, the men and women of our armed forces have known the measure of danger that comes with military service.  But year after year, tour after tour, they have displayed a selfless willingness to incur it -- by stepping forward, by volunteering, by serving and sacrificing greatly to keep us all safe.

Today, our troops are coming home.  By the end of this year, our war in Afghanistan will be over.  And we’ll welcome home this generation -- the 9/11 Generation -- that has proven itself to be one of America’s greatest.

And today, we pay tribute to a soldier who embodies the courage of his generation -- a young man who was a freshman in high school when the Twin Towers fell, and who just five years later became an elite paratrooper with the legendary 173rd Airborne -- the Sky Soldiers.  Today, we present our nation’s highest military decoration -- the Medal of Honor -- to Sergeant Kyle J. White. 

Kyle is the second Sky Soldier to be recognized with the Medal of Honor for service above and beyond the call of duty in Afghanistan.  Today, he joins Staff Sergeant Salvatore Giunta, and a proud brotherhood of previous honorees, members of the Medal of Honor Society -- some of whom are with us here today.

We have a lot of VIPs here, but I’d like to acknowledge the most important -- Kyle’s parents, Cheryl and Curt, and Kyle’s girlfriend, Helen.  I am told that back home in Bonney Lake, Washington when Kyle wanted to enlist, at first he had his sights set on the Marines.  But his dad Curt is a veteran of the Army, Special Forces.  So I’m told there was a difference of opinion.  (Laughter.)  And, I suspect, a good family discussion.  As Commander-in-Chief, I cannot take sides in this debate.  (Laughter.)  The bottom line is Kyle joined the Army.  And in doing so he carried on his family’s proud tradition of service, which found its expression on a November day over six years ago.

Across Afghanistan, base commanders were glued to their radios, listening as American forces fought back an ambush in the rugged mountains.  One battalion commander remembered that “all of Afghanistan” was listening as a soldier on the ground described what was happening.  They knew him by his call sign -- “Charlie One Six Romeo.”  We know it was Kyle, who at the time was just 20 years old and only 21 months into his military service.   

Earlier that afternoon, Kyle and the 13 members of his team, along with a squad of Afghan soldiers, left an Afghan village after a meeting with elders.  The Americans made their way back up a steep hill -- single file, along a narrow path, a cliff face rising to their right, and a slope of rocky shale dropping on their left.  They knew not to stop, that they had to keep moving.  They were headed into an area known as “ambush alley”.  

And that’s when a single shot rang out.  Then another.  And then the entire canyon erupted, with bullets coming from what seemed like every direction.  It was as if, Kyle said, the whole valley “lit up.” 

The platoon returned fire.  Kyle quickly emptied a full magazine, but as he went to load a second, an enemy grenade exploded and knocked him unconscious.  He came to with his face pressed against a rock.  And as he moved to get up, enemy rounds hit a rock just inches from his head, sending shrapnel and rock shards across his face.   

Most of the unit had been forced to slide down the cliff to the valley below.  But Kyle saw a teammate -- Specialist Kain Schilling -- trying to treat his own shattered arm, using a tree as cover -- what Kain later called “the smallest tree on Earth.”  I’m sure that’s how it felt.  Kyle sprinted through enemy fire to Kain’s side and began applying a tourniquet -- shielding Kain with his own body as gunfire shredded that tree. 

Then Kyle saw another man down -- Marine Sergeant Phillip Bocks -- in the open, 30 feet behind them, but too injured to reach cover.  Kyle remembers thinking, “It’s just a matter of time before I’m dead.  If that’s going to happen, I might as well help someone while I can.”

With bullets impacting all around him, Kyle ran to Bocks and began to pull the injured Marine to cover.  But worried that he’d expose Bocks to more gunfire, Kyle retreated.  The enemy rounds followed him.  He ran out again, pulling Bocks a little farther.  And once more he retreated to distract the enemy fire.  Once more he went out -- over and over thinking to himself, “I’m not going to make it.”  Kyle could feel the pressure of the rounds going by him.  But somehow, miraculously, they never hit him.  Not once.  One of his teammates said it was as if Kyle was moving “faster than a speeding bullet”.

And finally, Kyle succeeded in pulling his comrade to cover.  Tragically, there on that cliff, Sergeant Bocks succumbed to his wounds.  But in his final moments, this American Marine surely found some solace in Kyle White -- the American soldier who, until the very end, was there by his side.   

Now, that other injured soldier, Kain Shilling, was still out there.  And he had sustained another injury, this time to his knee.  Kyle ran out once more to Kain’s side.  Kyle ripped off his own belt for a tourniquet, and soon got his hands on a working radio.  The voice of Charlie One Six Romeo came into base.  Crouching behind that lone tree, Kyle began calling in airstrikes to take out enemy positions.

Kyle stayed with Specialist Schilling as night fell.  And Kain was too badly injured to move.  Kyle was starting to feel the fog of his own concussions set in, but he knew that he was Kain’s best chance to get out alive, so Kyle took charge and ordered the Afghan soldiers to form a security perimeter.  He called in a MEDEVAC and made sure Kain and the other injured were safely on board.  And only then did Kyle finally allow himself to be lifted out.

As the helicopter pulled away, Kyle looked out the window, watching the darkness as they pulled away from that single tree on the cliff.  “When you’re deployed,” he later said, “those people become your family.  What you really care about is:  I want to get this guy to the left and to the right home.”

This family was tested that day.  Not a single one of them escaped without injury, and six brave Americans gave their lives -- their last full measure of devotion.  And we remember them today.  Sergeant Phillip A. Bocks.  Captain Matthew C. Ferrara.  Specialist Joseph M. Lancour.  Sergeant Jeffery S. Mersman.  Corporal Lester G. Roque.  And Kyle’s best friend, Corporal Sean K. A. Langevin.  Some of their families are here today.  I’d ask them to please stand so we can recognize their extraordinary sacrifice.  (Applause.)

The legacy of these fallen heroes endures in the courage and strength of their unit -- 14 men, forever brothers-in-arms.  We’re proud to welcome those who fought so valiantly that day:  Specialist Kain Schilling, the soldier that Kyle saved, and members of the 2nd Battalion, Chosen Company of the 173rd Airborne Brigade.  Would you please stand.  (Applause.) 

We honor Kyle White for his extraordinary actions on that November day.  But his journey from that day to this speaks to the story of his generation.  Kyle completed the rest of a 15-month deployment in Afghanistan.  He came back home and trained other young paratroopers as they prepared to deploy.  When he completed his service, Kyle decided to pursue a different dream, and with the help of the Post-9/11 GI Bill, he went to college, he graduated, and today works for a bank in Charlotte, North Carolina.

When Kyle walks into the office every day, people see a man in a suit headed to work.  And that’s how it should be -- a proud veteran welcomed into his community, contributing his talents and skills to the progress of our nation.  But Kyle will tell you that the transition to civilian life -- and dealing with the post-traumatic stress -- hasn’t always been easy.  More than six years later, he can still see the images and hear the sounds of that battle.  Every day, he wakes up thinking about his battle buddies.

And if you look closely at that man in the suit on his way to work, you’ll notice the piece of the war that he carries with him tucked under his shirt sleeve -- a stainless steel bracelet around his wrist etched with the names of his six fallen comrades who will always be with him.  “Their sacrifice motivates me,” he says, to “be the best [that] I can be.  Everything I do in my life is done to make them proud.” 

Kyle, members of Chosen Company, you did your duty, and now it’s time for America to do ours:  After more than a decade of war, to welcome you home with the support and the benefits and opportunities that you’ve earned.  You make us proud, and you motivate all of us to be the best we can be as Americans, as a nation; to uphold our sacred obligations to your generation and all who have faced that “measure of danger” and “the willingness to incur it.”   

May God bless you, and may your courage inspire and sustain us always.  And may God continue to bless the United States of America. 

With that, I’d like to have the citation read.

MILITARY AIDE:  The President of the United States of America, authorized by Act of Congress, March 3, 1863, has awarded in the name of Congress the Medal of Honor to Specialist Kyle J. White, United States Army.

Specialist Kyle J. White distinguished himself by acts of gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while serving as a radio telephone operator with Company C, 2nd Battalion Airborne, 503rd Infantry Regiment, 173rd Airborne Brigade during combat operations against an armed enemy in Nuristan Province, Afghanistan on November 9, 2007. 

On that day, Specialist White and his comrades were returning to Bella Outpost from a shura with Aranas village elders.  As the soldiers traversed a narrow path surrounded by mountainous, rocky terrain, they were ambushed by enemy forces from elevated positions.  Pinned against a steep mountain face, Specialist White and his fellow soldiers were completely exposed to enemy fire.  Specialist White returned fire and was briefly knocked unconscious when a rocket-propelled grenade impacted near him. 

When he regained consciousness, another round impacted near him, embedding small pieces of shrapnel in his face.  Shaking off his wounds, Specialist White noticed one of his comrades lying wounded nearby.  Without hesitation, Specialist White exposed himself to enemy fire in order to reach the soldier and provide medical aid. 

After applying a tourniquet, Specialist White moved to an injured Marine, providing aid and comfort until the Marine succumbed to his wounds.  Specialist White then returned to the soldier and discovered that he had been wounded again.  Applying his own belt as an additional tourniquet, Specialist White was able to stem the flow of blood and save the soldier’s life.

Noticing that his and the other soldiers’ radios were inoperative, Specialist White exposed himself to enemy fire yet again in order to secure a radio from a deceased comrade.  He then provided information and updates to friendly forces, allowing precision airstrikes to stifle the enemy’s attack and ultimately permitting medical evacuation aircraft to rescue him, his fellow soldiers, Marines, and Afghan army soldiers.

Specialist Kyle J. White.  Extraordinary heroism and selflessness above and beyond the call of duty are in keeping with the highest traditions of military service and reflect great credit upon himself, Company C, 2nd Battalion Airborne, 503rd Infantry Regiment, 173rd Airborne Brigade, and the United States Army.  (Applause.)

(Prayer.)

THE PRESIDENT:  That concludes the ceremony, but not the celebration.  I hear the food here is pretty good.  (Laughter.)  And the drinks are free.  (Laughter.)  Who gave a big shout on that?  I heard somebody.  (Laughter.)  But I hope all of you enjoy the hospitality of the White House.  I hope we all remember once again those who are fallen.  We are grateful to the families who are here.  And to Kyle and all who serve in America’s Armed Forces, we want you to know that we will always be grateful for your extraordinary service to our country.

Thank you very much, everybody.  Have a great afternoon.  (Applause.)  

END
3:04 P.M. EDT

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Remarks by the President at Law Enforcement Briefing on Immigration

Room 350
Eisenhower Executive Office Building

12:01 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, everybody.  (Applause.)  Have a seat.  Have a seat.  Well, it's wonderful to see all of you.  Some of you I've had the chance to get to know working on law enforcement issues and criminal justice issues.  But I cannot thank you enough for participating today on an issue that I think is important to our economic future, to our cultural future, to our standing in the world and to our safety and security, and that's the issue of immigration.

I’m here with some of the leaders of America’s law enforcement agencies who recognize that fixing a broken immigration system isn’t just the right thing to do -- it’s also the right thing to do for safety and security in communities all across America. 

The immigration system that we have right now makes it harder, not easier, for law enforcement agencies to do their jobs.  It makes it harder for law enforcement to know when dangerous people cross our borders.  It makes it harder for business owners who play by the rules to compete when they’re undercut by those who would exploit workers in a shadow economy. And it makes it harder for law enforcement to do their jobs when large segments of the community are afraid to report crimes or serve as witnesses because they fear the consequences for themselves or their families. 

This system is not fair.  It’s not fair to workers; it's not fair to businesses who are trying to do the right thing; it’s not fair to law enforcement agencies that are already stretched thin.

Now, the good news is the Senate has already passed a bill with a wide, bipartisan majority that would go a long way towards fixing a broken system.  It would strengthen our borders even further.  And I'm sure Jeh has talked to you about the work that's been done over the last five years -- we have put unprecedented resources at the borders, and you’ve seen the results.  We have fewer folks coming in than ever before.  And the personnel that is arrayed along our borders is well beyond anything that we saw five years ago, 10 years ago, 20 years ago. So we take border enforcement seriously. 

But what this reform package would also do is create a firm but fair pathway to earned citizenship for those who live in the shadows -- and as a consequence, would give law enforcement a better idea of who’s in the country.  It would also help build trust between local communities and law enforcement and immigrant communities.  It would undermine criminal enterprises that prey on undocumented immigrants.  And it would allow law enforcement to focus on its primary mission, which is keeping our communities safe.

And these are some of the reasons why a broad, bipartisan coalition -- including law enforcement agencies like the ones who are represented today -- is pushing Congress to go ahead and get the job done, get us over the finish line and do it this year. 

I hope all of you keep it up because it’s making a difference.  A number of Republicans are realizing that blocking immigration reform is not an option, and that's the good news.  And most Americans, the majority of Americans, know this is the right thing to do.  Public opinion is on our side on this.  Unfortunately, we've got a handful of House Republicans right now who are blocking going ahead and letting legislation get to the floor. 

To their credit, I think Speaker Boehner and some of the other leaders there do believe that immigration reform is the right thing, but they’ve got to have a political space that allows them to go ahead and get it through their caucus and get it done.  I've said to them, if they’ve got ideas I'm happy to talk to them.  We're not hell-bent on making sure that every letter of what’s in the Senate bill is exactly what ultimately lands on my desk for signature, but there are some core principles that we've got to get done.  We've got to have stronger border security.  We've got to make sure that we are dealing with companies that are not doing the right thing by workers.  We've got to make sure that we've got an improved legal immigration system, because a lot of folks are getting pushed into the illegal system because the waits are so long through the legal process.  And we've got to make sure that there’s a way for people to earn some pathway to citizenship.

And keep in mind, some of these statistics you may have already heard -- it's estimated that over 80 percent of the folks who are here on an undocumented basis have been here 10 years or longer.  These are folks who are woven into the fabrics of our communities.  Their kids are going to school with our kids.  Most of them are not making trouble; most of them are not causing crimes.  And yet, we put them in this tenuous position and it creates a situation in which your personnel, who have got to go after gang-bangers and need to be going after violent criminals and deal with the whole range of challenges, and who have to cooperate with DHS around our counterterrorism activities -- you’ve got to spend time dealing with somebody who is not causing any other trouble other than the fact that they were trying to make a living for their families.  That's just not a good use of our resources.  It's not smart.  It doesn’t make sense. 

So I know I'm preaching to the choir here.  You wouldn't be here if you didn’t agree with us that this is time for us to go ahead and get moving.  But I just want all of you to know your voices, particularly over the next couple of months, are going to be critical.  I think people have come to expect that I'm in favor of comprehensive immigration reform.  I think that people anticipate that the Congressional Hispanic Caucus is going to be in favor of comprehensive immigration reform.  I think people understand that there are a lot of agricultural enterprises that know how important their immigrant workers are to them.  But it's more important in some ways to get over the hump when they hear from unexpected voices. 

I think the evangelical Christian community has shown itself to be foursquare behind immigration reform, and that's a powerful voice.  I think portions of the business community that people may not anticipate know that this is the key to our economic future.  It would lower our deficits; it would grow our economy; it would bring in some of the most skilled people around the world.  We want them to continue to come here.  That's part of our competitive advantage relative to the rest of the world.  Our population is not aging the way some other populations are because it's constantly replenished with folks who are go-getters.  And hearing from law enforcement is important and I think it lends this overall effort great credibility.

So I just want to say thank you to all of you.  But we've got this narrow window.  The closer we get to the midterm elections the harder it is to get things done around here.  Now, I know it's hard to believe that things could get harder -- (laughter) -- that this place could get a little more dysfunctional.  But it's just very hard right before an election. So we've got maybe a window of two, three months to get the ball rolling in the House of Representatives.  And your voices are going to be absolutely critical to that effort.

So I just want to say thank you to all of you.  And while I'm here, I want to thank you for a wide range of issues that we've had a chance to cooperate with you on.  Whether it's dealing with counterterrorism issues and the preparations that ensure that if and when an event happens that we're prepared, and more importantly, that we're able to prevent such activities from taking place in the first place, or dealing with natural disasters where our first responders are always right there on the scene, day in and day out your teams, your personnel are doing heroic work on behalf of America.  And we're very, very grateful for that.

So thank you, everybody.  Let’s make this happen.  (Applause.)

END              
12:10 P.M. EDT

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney and Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx, 5/12/2014

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

1:29 P.M. EDT

MR. CARNEY:  Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.  Thank you for being here.  Welcome to your daily briefing.  As you can see, I have with me a guest star, Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx is here.  He will talk to you at the top about the report -- or analysis that many of you received earlier today on the critical need to invest in our infrastructure to help build the economy today and in the future, and in doing so create first-class jobs across the country.

As we normally do, I’d like it if you would hear what he has to say, address questions on his subject matters first, and then when that’s done we’ll let the Secretary go and I’ll be here to take questions on other subjects. 
With that, I give you Secretary Foxx.

SECRETARY FOXX:  Thank you, Jay, and thank all of you.  I’d like to be here celebrating all the work that’s happening around our country to renew and reinvigorate our nation’s transportation networks.  Unfortunately, however, this may be the more dire moment the American transportation system has faced in decades.  As soon as August, the Highway Trust Fund -- the account that pays for building and repairing our nation’s roads -- will start bouncing checks.  Unless Congress acts, up to 700,000 Americans will lose their jobs over the next year in road work, bridge-building, transit maintenance. 

All of these types of projects may be delayed or shut down completely -- which means freight won’t move, which means trade will slow, which means businesses won’t hire.  And, by the way, your morning commute will be longer because the roads you’re driving on will crumble and no one will show up to fix them.

We’re already starting to see it happen.  In Nashville, Tennessee, four bridges carrying 130,000 vehicles a day -- they’ve reached the end of their useful life.  And one of them has been shut down three times since last summer because concrete keeps crumbling onto the underpass, threatening cars below. 

We have an infrastructure deficit in this country.  We’ve been saying that for months now.  And according to the American Society of Civil Engineers, we need $3.6 trillion in investment -- that’s an all-in number that includes things other than transportation.  But we need $3.6 trillion of investment by the time our decade is through in order to raise it to an appropriate level.  Now, that’s an all-in number, as I said -- but the thing is our infrastructure deficit is only going to get worse without action. 

We cannot meet the needs of a growing country and a growing economy by simply maintaining our current level of effort.  We must do more.  Over the next generation, this will become even more apparent because the country will demand more of its transportation system than it ever has.  By 2050, this system will need to move up to 100 million new people, and 14 billion additional tons of freight -- almost twice what we currently do.

Even if Congress today funded our transportation system at recent levels, we’d still be on the same track; we’d still be on the track towards a slower, less safe nation where rush hour becomes rush all afternoon.

So what we need right now is to rally around a set of ideas that increase annual investment, speed up our permitting and review systems at every level of government, and ensure that future transportation projects do even more to grow jobs today and long into the future.  That’s why a little over a week ago the administration sent the GROW AMERICA Act to Capitol Hill.  We did it to bring these ideas to the table.  The GROW AMERICA Act will do more than just level off the Highway Trust Fund; it would substantially increase annual funding to help us relieve congestion, alleviate freight chokepoints, and create jobs right now and long into the future.

We believe there’s a lot of room for agreement around the ideas in this bill:  Growing our overall investment; setting the global pace for safety; strengthening our freight networks; streamlining the permitting process to gets projects done faster; giving communities of economic interest a bigger voice; and opening more opportunities for private capital to invest in America’s infrastructure.  These are elements of what a 21st century transportation system looks like.

And we remain optimistic.  For more than a half century, broad, bipartisan majorities in Congress have consistently recognized that as America grows, so must our investment and transportation.  And I believe we can do so again.

So I want to thank you very much, and I look forward to your questions.

MR. CARNEY:  Nedra.

Q    But since you sent that bill to the Hill, have you seen any movement to indicate there might be some progress towards making that first one solvent?

SECRETARY FOXX:  Well, I’m encouraged by what we hear from the U.S. Senate.  As you know, Senator Boxer and several members of the Senate committees are working on a proposal.  I believe they’ve announced that that proposal become public today.  And we’ve said all along there’s got to be broad-based, bipartisan support, and it looks like they’re working their way towards that.

But again, we believe our bill is one that’s going to do dramatically important things for this country:  increasing investment, making sure that our country is moving forward with projects at a faster clip, and ensuring that we’re going to relieve some of these freight chokepoints that are going to become problems in the future.

Q    What about in the House?  Are you having any encouraging conversations there, or is it –

SECRETARY FOXX:  I have spent a lot of time and a lot of shoe leather on both ends of Capitol Hill, and what I can tell you is, is that people on both sides of the aisle want to see something get done.  But we’re going to have to work at it, and this is going to be a nine-inning game.  It’s not going to get solved in the first inning.

Q    Is there really enough time to rally around a long-term solution at this point, whether it’s yours or Senator Boxer’s or someone else’s?  Or are we really at the point where it’s down to the crunch and there’s going to be a need for some kind of stopgap just to get through the summer season?

SECRETARY FOXX:  The reality is -- and I come from local government.  I can tell you that what’s happening in local communities and in states across this country is that the cumulative effect of short-term measures is starting to stave off the pipeline of projects that this country needs to move forward.

And so we urge Congress to take a very close look at our bill.  We’re also urging Congress to share their ideas, and we’re looking forward to trying to get there.  But we think this is something that needs to be tackled; it needs to be tackled so that there’s certainty at the state and local levels, but there also needs to be substantial growth in our investment and infrastructure for us to move forward, as we need to, with so many more people and so many more goods that need to get someplace.

MR. CARNEY:  Jessica, then Chuck.

Q    I wanted to ask you about crude oil carriage on trains, which is something -- I know you’ve just ordered an emergency order on that -- and the NTSB is working on recommendations.  What do you think the best solution is to make that a safe process going forward?

SECRETARY FOXX:  Well, let’s start with the fact that on the good side of the ledger, the country is moving towards becoming the largest energy producer in the world, which is a very substantial improvement over where we’ve been, and it’s part of what the President has been working towards since he came into office. 

At the same time, all of us recognize that as we grow our ability to excavate and create more energy, we have to make sure that we’re leading the world in safely transporting that energy as well.  And that is why you’ve seen USDOT take several steps, including the steps last week of putting out an emergency order requiring shippers to notify communities when Bakken oil is moving through those communities.  We also issued a safety alert advising that Bakken oil not be transported on DOT-111 tank cars.  We, on April 30th -- I know that because that’s my birthday -- we sent a rule over here to OIRA; that’s a comprehensive rule designed to address our movement of this material by rail comprehensively, dealing with speed and other issues, including new tank car standards.

So it’s going to take a comprehensive approach.  We’re going to keep looking for ways to address this in advance of a rule coming out, but we’re going to work as hard as we can, as fast as we can to get that rule done.

Q    Mr. Secretary -- and I think we’ve had this discussion before -- but how much is election-year politics stalling this in the House, do you think?

SECRETARY FOXX:  Well, you know, look, I think the reality is, as I said before, this is a problem that has been boiling for some time -- 27 short-term measures just over the last five years that are impacting communities every single day.  I can’t speak to the politics so much as what I can tell you is, is that when you talk to state DOT directors, you talk to mayors and governors around this country, there is a palpable level of concern not only about the short term, but, frankly, about the long term because the pipeline of projects is getting slowed by the indecision.

Q    The likelihood, though, that this is probably going to be a lame duck -- that you won’t get really any movement on this until after the November elections?

SECRETARY FOXX:  Our hope is, is that Congress will act as soon as possible, and we hope that happens before the Highway Trust Fund becomes insolvent.  Beyond that, we continue to listen to Congress for clues as to when they want to take this up.  But 27 short-term measures over five years -- we’ve got to stop doing that at some point, and that’s why we put a bill out there, and that’s why we’re going to keep urging action on a long-term solution.

MR. CARNEY:  Bill.

Q    What’s the right combination of funding for the Highway Trust Fund if, for example, revenues are lower because of increased fuel efficiency?

SECRETARY FOXX:  Well, that’s one of the reasons why we’ve introduced a different mechanism.  We would continue, under our bill, to use existing gas taxes to fund about half of the bill. But the other half of it -- which is what it generates right now -- what we would also do is use pro-growth business tax reform to provide another $150 billion to support a $302 billion program over four years.

We think it’s important, because by introducing a new pay-for we also introduce new innovations in transportation -- a dedicated freight program, for instance, that focuses on where freight moves and helps relieve chokepoints and gaps in our freight systems.  We also think that we can do more to encourage states.  Just like we want to improve the permitting time at the federal level, we need carrots to be able to help the states do the same thing, and that’s what we’re trying to do with this proposal.  So with a new pay-for, we have new programs, and I think our solution is a good one and we hope Congress takes it seriously.

Q    So the business taxes would be on transportation of businesses?

SECRETARY FOXX:  Actually, it actually could be broader than that.  It could be taking some of the untaxed earnings that are overseas and plowing some of that into infrastructure.  A fix like that would generate more than just what we’re asking for, for transportation, but certainly it could fund $150 billion.

MR. CARNEY:  Phil.

Q    Mr. Secretary, one new pay-for that’s being tried in Oregon, Washington, and proposed in California is a tax per mile on vehicles -- getting rid of the gas tax, replacing it with a tax per mile.  Is that something you’re encouraging, proposing, part of?

SECRETARY FOXX:  It is not in our bill.  Our bill is paid for with pro-growth business tax reform and use of existing taxes.  And that’s what we think is the best solution for the moment.

Q    Do you support it?

SECRETARY FOXX:  We support our bill, yes.  (Laughter.)

Q    No, would you support -- I think you know what I meant.  Do you support the tax-per-mile proposal?

SECRETARY FOXX:  We support our bill.  I know there are innovations and creative ideas that are out there at the state and local level, but given the enormity of this crisis and the growth that it requires us to put into the system, we think our solution is the best one.

MR. CARNEY:  Justin.

Q    I know that you said that you support your guys’ bill, which is valid -- the $75 billion a year -- but it seems like Senate Democrats are focusing on funding that would be about $50 billion a year closer to what’s currently been funded with inflation.  Would that be okay for you guys?  Would you be all right with that?  Or are you really kind of insisting on greater funding?

SECRETARY FOXX:  Well, I’d put it this way -- I just spent the better part of a week going to eight states, twelve cities, large and small, and I have to tell you that America has been waiting on a bigger solution.  Whether I was in Louisville, Kentucky or Anniston, Alabama, or Tallulah, Louisiana, or Dallas, Texas -- all of these places in America are places that have long to-do lists, and our ability to support those to-do lists is being limited by the year. 

And so in Washington there’s a lot of discussion about trying to get back to where we’ve been.  But out in America, folks are trying to move to the future, and that’s what we’re trying to urge.

Q    So you wouldn’t support what Senator Boxer and some others are pushing for right now?

SECRETARY FOXX:  What I want to do is be in a position of encouraging the discussion and debates and progress, because we’ve had such a run of short-term measures in the past that progress is important.  But make no mistake -- America is hungry and starving for more infrastructure investment, and we have a responsibility to articulate that as an agency, because America is growing whether we’re investing or not.  We’re going to have 100 million more people in this country, 14 billion tons of freight moving around this country.  And that long commute that folks had this morning is going to get longer if we don’t start doing something right now.

MR. CARNEY:  Jim.

Q    Mr. Secretary, just to jump to a different subject -- back in March, the FAA says there was this incident where a drone came pretty close to striking a U.S. Airways commercial plane.  Has the Department been looking at this as becoming a bigger problem?  Is this something that you’re looking at going down the road as an issue?

SECRETARY FOXX:  Absolutely.  By law, folks are supposed to notify air traffic control when they’re within five miles of an airport facility, and that’s a standing rule we have.  But this is also pointing at why we went forward with UAS test site programs this year -- we have two of six up and running right now -- so that we can establish broader guidelines in the future to avoid these types of incidents from happening. 

MR. CARNEY:  Fred.

Q    Two questions.  How do you feel about the possibility of more toll roads for federal?  And also, some previous decade -- previous administration, a proliferation of earmarks -- what kind of reassurance can you give folks that a new broad transportation plan, no matter how well-needed, is not going to lead to various earmarks, politicize that maybe that the best projects don’t need to be -- are being funded that don’t need to be funded?

SECRETARY FOXX:  Well, on the first question, there’s been a lot of interest in the toll issue, but it’s actually not how we pay for our bill.  The way we pay for our bill is the way I said we pay for it, which is pro-growth business tax reform.  And we think that we have to have a multi-tiered approach going forward to tackle the larger infrastructure deficit the country faces.

So think about it this way:  We would put a four-year, $302 billion proposal on the table.  In addition to that, we would work with not only ourselves at the federal level, but states to try to accelerate permitting process and review so that more value could be captured for the dollar.  We also would create more pathways for public-private partnerships in a variety of ways through TIFIA, through RRIF, some of our loan programs, to get more private capital invested in American infrastructure. 

So within that context, the tolling piece, which is a smaller piece of our bill, but what it basically does is it enables a given governor -- if they decide they want to pursue tolling -- to apply to the federal government and to have a decision made based on whether they’re using that toll revenue to improve the facility that they’re using or to relieve congestion.  And then at that point, if it’s acceptable at USDOT, they would have more capability to do it.  But it’s not a free-for-all and it’s not a way we pay for our bill.

Q    On the question of -- to reassure this doesn’t turn into some sort of earmark bill down the road, to make sure the proper projects get funded. 

SECRETARY FOXX:  Yes, well, I would -- I think the issue here is that we’ve got to grow our investment first.  The methods and means by which projects get done and delivered in most cases is going to be the usual way -- through the formula programs that we have existing.  Our proposal would introduce some more competitive programs, but those would be merit-based competitive programs, not ones that are pork-based.

Q    You talked about pro-growth corporate tax reform generating $150 billion.  Right now, the House just last week passed a $150 billion corporate tax cut; the Senate this week is picking up a tax-extender bill that would add $85 billion to the deficit.  It seems like they’re going in the opposite direction from where you want them to go, which is something that would generate new revenue.  Is the administration going to demand that Congress deliver something that generates that new revenue for transportation, not add to the deficit?

SECRETARY FOXX:  I’d point out that the very day that the framework that we have backing up our bill was announced back in February, the Republican chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, Dave Camp, introduced a proposal to use corporate tax reform -- using his words, “corporate tax reform” -- to pay for, in part, infrastructure investment.

And so this doesn’t seem to be an area where there lacks bipartisan interest; this is an area where there is bipartisan interest.  It’s just that we have to play this out and work hard every day to make progress on it.

MR. CARNEY:  Roger.

Q    Thank you.  Do you have any idea if you lost 700,000 people because of lack of funding, to what extent might that affect GDP for the U.S. for this year?

SECRETARY FOXX:  Well, I’m sure it will be negative, not only for the jobs that we lose, but what we lose in the course of losing projects.  One of the big reasons why we’re having some of a resurgence of manufacturing activity in this country, more than we’ve seen in the last 15 years, is because one of the things we can claim is that we have a safe, reliable, efficient transportation system.  And the more we put that at risk by not making the kind of investments we need to make as a country, the more challenged we’re going to be long term, and we’re going to lose opportunities to grow jobs in this country because of the indecision.

MR. CARNEY:  All right, Chris, last one.

Q    Thank you.  I’d like to ask something considerably off topic -- your earlier role as mayor of Charlotte.  Tomorrow, the fourth circuit court of appeals is going to be hearing arguments in a case on same-sex marriage regarding the Virginia ban, which of course will have an impact on North Carolina because those two states are on the same circuit.  You have never publicly expressed your views on this issue before.  Do you now support same-sex marriage or think it should come to North Carolina?

SECRETARY FOXX:  I support same-sex marriage.

Q    What makes you support it?

SECRETARY FOXX:  Well, you know, look, who someone loves should never be an issue at work or anyplace else.  And as a mayor, I was the first mayor to even go meet with the LGBT community.  I was, unlike my predecessor, someone who went out and went to the annual human rights campaign dinner and signed a letter.  I did a lot of things.

But this is a place where I think the country’s attitudes are shifting, and I think North Carolina got it wrong.  I hope they get it right. 

MR. CARNEY:  Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

SECRETARY FOXX:  Thank you.  I appreciate it. 

MR. CARNEY:  Thank you all for waiting.  As we say good bye to Secretary Foxx, thank him for coming here today, making a presentation and taking your questions, I can take questions on other subjects if you have any.

Nedra.

Q    Jay, two regions of eastern Ukraine have voted for sovereignty from the Kyiv government.  Would the United States recognize the votes?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, the so-called referenda to which you refer are illegal under Ukrainian law and a transparent attempt to create further division and disorder.  And in addition, an international media documented episodes of carousel voting, of pre-marked ballots, of children voting, the announcement of results before ballots could be counted.  So we do not recognize the results, and you have seen the European Union and other leaders say the same.

In addition, we’re disappointed that the Russian government did not use its influence to forestall these referenda, according to President Putin’s call on May 7 for them to be postponed.  Instead, Russian state media sought to legitimize these so-called referenda over the weekend with repetitive coverage of these votes as if they were legitimate.  And we’ve seen reports that Russian police even provided security for a polling station in Moscow. 

In the meantime, the Ukrainian government is proceeding with plans to hold OSCE-led roundtables on constitutional reform and national unity, including with Ukrainians from the eastern and southern regions of Ukraine.  And we call on Russia to support this effort.

The focus of the international community, including Russia, should be on supporting the Ukraine government’s efforts to hold a presidential election on May 25.  But we note that the OSCE has reported that Ukraine is successfully implementing all the necessary procedures and requirements for free and fair elections, which will allow all Ukrainian people a voice in the future of their country.

As you’ve probably seen, recent independent polls have shown that a substantial majority of Ukrainians intend to vote on May 25.  Any efforts to disrupt this democratic process will be seen clearly for what they are -- as attempts to deny the rights of Ukraine’s citizens to express their political will freely.

Q    But would you acknowledge that these votes today aren’t really a good sign, going into this May 25th election, that there’s going to be an expression of national unity with that vote?

MR. CARNEY:  I would say that the fact that Russia did not use its influence to forestall the referenda to follow up on what President Putin said when he announced that he believed these votes should not be held on the day that they were held is disappointing, and so has been the coverage in Russian state media of what happened over the weekend in Ukraine -- which suggests that there has not been a significant change in attitude by Russia towards the efforts by separatists in Ukraine to breed chaos and to prevent the effective carrying-out of national elections on May 25.

Our focus is on ensuring, with the international community and the Ukrainian government, that those elections are held and that they are free and fair, and that Ukrainians from every region of the country are able to express their free will through a legitimate balloting exercise and the selection of a new President.  This is an important process, and that is the means by which Ukrainians can express their will.  They can also do so through the OSCE-led roundtable that the Ukrainian government supports and has drawn up plans to proceed with.  Another important indication of the seriousness of purpose of the Ukrainian government -- the significant restraint that the Ukrainian government has shown; the openness the Ukrainian government has shown to the concerns of ethnic Russians, Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the east and south of Ukraine who seek perhaps greater autonomy from the center.

The process that the Ukrainian government supports is the legitimate way by which these concerns can be addressed.  Holding illegal referenda, annexing countries by force -- annexing, rather, sections of a country by force, as Russia did in Crimea -- that’s not the way to proceed.  It’s certainly not a way to proceed that’s recognized under international law.

Q    There’s a new video that’s purporting to show the kidnapped Nigerian girls.  Has the U.S. verified this video?  And does it give any clues that could help find them?

MR. CARNEY:  We have seen the video, Nedra, and we have no reason to question its authenticity.  Our intelligence experts are combing over every detail of it for clues that might help in the ongoing efforts to secure the release of the girls.  As you know, President Obama has directed his team to do everything it can to support the Nigerian government’s efforts to find and free these girls. 

I can report to you that our interdisciplinary team with representatives from the State Department, the Department of Defense, the FBI and others is up and running now at our embassy in Nigeria, helping to support the Nigerian government by providing military and law enforcement assistance as well as intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance support.  And we continue to work closely with our international partners, including the UK and France, and to press for additional multilateral action through the U.N. Security Council via sanctions on Boko Haram.

Yes.

Q    France announced today that it’s going to go ahead with a contract to sell helicopter carriers to Russia.  And I’m wondering what the White House reaction is to this sale and whether the White House feels this undercuts the Western message on sanctions and on Ukraine.

MR. CARNEY:  I don’t have a specific reaction to that report.  What I can tell you is that we have worked very closely with our European partners and our G7 partners on a coordinated approach to escalating the costs to Russia for its approach to the challenges in Ukraine, for its transgressions of international law with the annexation -- the illegal annexation of Crimea, and for the efforts that Russia has engaged in that have helped to destabilize the situation in eastern and southern Ukraine.

You have seen the United States and our partners in Europe, and our partners on the G7 take significant actions to impose sanctions on individuals and entities.  And that effort continues even today, I believe, if you saw the EU actions that were announced, and the EU’s clear support for elections on May 25.  You’ve also seen from our European allies comments that clearly support the position that the United States holds, which is that any attempt to disrupt those elections on May 25 in Ukraine will be met by more severe sanctions -- the imposition of more severe sanctions, and that that is something that our European partners support. 

I think that you have seen, in the way that the President has approached this, an effort to make sure that we are coordinating with our partners so that the actions we take have a broad and significant impact on Russia, and Russian officials understand that the escalation of efforts to destabilize Ukraine will be met with an escalation in costs.

Q    And yet, it’s obviously very difficult for partners as this sale makes clear.  And I guess I’m wondering how confident is the White House that partners are going to be there if it comes time to ramp up the sanctions.

MR. CARNEY:  I would simply point you to the statements of European leaders, including Chancellor Merkel and others, that underscore the broad support that exists in Europe for the position adopted by the United States, which is that we ought to work together in a coordinated fashion to impose higher costs on Russia if Russia takes actions that further destabilize the situation in Ukraine.  You’ve seen that already.  You’ve seen that coordination to this date.  And I expect you’ll see it, if it is necessary to impose further sanctions, if Russia continues to engage in activities that undermine stability in Ukraine, that in any way undermine the implementation of elections on May 25.  And I think that there’s ample evidence to support that position.

Jim.

Q    Getting back to the U.S. team in Nigeria, I know last week you mentioned that they’re well-versed when it comes to hostage situations and intelligence expertise.  Just curious -- has that team’s scope been broadened in any way since last week, in light of the First Lady’s comments over the weekend and the social media push coming from the White House?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think from the First Lady’s speech over the weekend as well as -- or her address over the weekend as well as what the President has said, and everything that members of the administration have said, you understand that the President and the First Lady and others believe that we ought to be doing everything we can to assist the efforts of the Nigerian government to find and free these girls.  And we are.  The scope of that assistance has been outlined, and it includes military and law enforcement assistance, advisory assistance, as well as intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance support.  And we are actively engaging in that effort now.

I think it’s important to note that when we talk about assisting in the effort to locate the girls, we are talking about helping the Nigerian government search an area that is roughly the size of New England.  So this is no small task, but we are certainly bringing resources to bear in our effort to assist the government.

Q    And when you talk about surveillance and reconnaissance, what are we talking about in terms of assets?

MR. CARNEY:  If you ask the Department of Defense, they can provide more detail about the assets that are being brought to bear.  Each of the agencies -- State, DOD, FBI -- can give you more details about what assets are being brought to bear; which personnel were brought from outside Nigeria.  There were obviously existing personnel at our embassy in Nigeria but some came from AFRICOM and some came from Washington. 

And we can provide a little more detail on what the composition -- in fact, I can provide a little more detail on the composition because I asked for it and here it is.  There are five State Department officials -- including a team leader, two strategic communications experts, a civilian security expert, and a regional medical support officer; ten Department of Defense planners and advisors who were already in Nigeria and have been redirected to provide support to the kidnapping response; seven additional DOD advisors from AFRICOM; four FBI officials with expertise in safe recovery, negotiations, and preventing future kidnappings.  So they are digging in on the search and coordinating closely with the Nigerian government, and we obviously want to do whatever we can to assist that effort.

Q    And this sounds like a bit of a ramping-up of resources since what you described last week.  Did something change in terms of you just didn’t want to talk about exactly what you were doing last week?  Or was there just maybe a recalculation as to how much should be provided?

MR. CARNEY:  No, Jim, in fact, the offer of support was made, it was accepted.  The idea of standing up this interdisciplinary team was presented and accepted, and that team is now in place.  And it includes the ability to provide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance support.  I’m not going to get into details of what that support looks like, but that was always envisioned as part of the broader effort.

Q    Folks may think that that means UAVs of some sort.

MR. CARNEY:  Yes, but I’m not going to get into the details of how that support is supplied or what technology might be used, if any.  But we have teams in place -- the individuals that I just listed -- who have expertise in these matters and can provide the advice and assistance to the Nigerian government that we offered and they have accepted.

Q    And not to belabor this, but when the First Lady made her comments in the weekly address on Saturday, was there a conversation that was had here in the White House about just how to ramp up attention, how to draw more attention to this?  And was that why the decision was made to have the First Lady go out and make this presentation?

MR. CARNEY:  As I think you saw from both the weekly address and communications via Twitter on this matter, she is deeply concerned -- as is the President -- about the fate of these girls and broadly concerned about what these girls represent in terms of the power and importance of making sure that girls around the world are educated. 

The opposition to allowing girls to get the education that they deserve is opposition to progress, opposition to economic empowerment, opposition to health and security for millions and millions and millions of people around the world.  And this is a profoundly important idea.  And these girls are suffering specifically and individually, but they are also suffering on behalf of a broader proposition, which is that whether you’re a girl or a boy, you should have all the rights to education that can be attained in the country in which you live.  And I think that’s a principle that obviously the President and First Lady support, and it’s a principle that most Americans, I think -- I would daresay all Americans support.

Chuck.

Q    Jay, two questions.  One, we’re nearing I think the three-month mark on a vacancy in the ambassadorship to Russia.  I know normally that’s not a long period of time.

MR. CARNEY:  I’ve taken myself out of the running.  (Laughter.)

Q    I understand that.  Normally, that’s not a long period of time for a vacancy, but considering the current situation, how much closer is it?  Because the leading candidate is currently the ambassador to Ukraine -- is that what’s slowing things down?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I don’t have any comment on short lists or candidates for any position that’s currently in need of being filled except to say that a position like that is one that the teams in place to review personnel decisions act aggressively on, and that we will move on when the time is right and when everything is in place. 

Q    Has it been a hindrance not to have an ambassador there?

MR. CARNEY:  I think we have an excellent team at our embassy in Moscow, and I don’t believe that that’s been a hindrance.  The fact of the matter is, because of the crisis in Ukraine we have had more high-level, direct conversations between U.S. and Russian government officials probably in a short period of time than has been had in a long time as a general matter.  The President and President Putin have spoken frequently.  Foreign Minister Lavrov and Secretary Kerry have met and spoken frequently. 

Unfortunately, Russia has -- against the will of the international community, the United States, the European Union, the G7 and pretty much most of the world -- decided to engage in practices that violate flagrantly international law, that violate a sovereign nation’s territorial integrity, and that seem to seek to destabilize the free and fair presidential elections that have been called for May 25 in that country.  So I can tell you on this personnel matter that it will be acted on as soon as the President is ready to name someone.

Q    On the VA, when it was clear HHS was struggling to implement the health care law, the website, the White House decided to send in an emergency team, led by Jeff Zients, outside group from here.  Anything under consideration to do the same thing at the VA, considering that the crisis appears to be arguably a lot worse, exponentially, than what was taking place at HHS of coming in and trying to send -- if you’re not going to get rid of the current team, then sending in some sort of emergency group?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I don’t have any personnel announcements to make on the VA except to say that the President takes the situation, as he has said, around the Phoenix office very seriously.  And that’s why he directed Secretary Shinseki to investigate, and Secretary Shinseki has invited the independent Veteran Affairs Inspector General, Office of Inspector General, to conduct a comprehensive review. 

The President remains confident that Secretary Shinseki is focused on this matter, and he’s confident in Secretary Shinseki’s ability to lead the Department and to take appropriate action based on the IG’s findings. 

On the broader issues, I think it’s important to note that this administration, with Secretary Shinseki’s leadership, has aggressively addressed the challenge posed by the backlog at VA -- a backlog that was enhanced in its size in large part by the decision to have a predisposition towards acceptance for those who would have claims over Agent Orange exposure and claims over PTSD.

Q    How can you say that definitively about aggressively taking action when the issue in Phoenix and with another whistleblower actually has to do with lying about the backlog?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think that the numbers broadly reflect an aggressive approach, and that includes --

Q    -- considering what happened in Phoenix it could be all of this --

MR. CARNEY:  Well, you’re talking about an individual matter that is under investigation, and we take it very seriously, as does Secretary Shinseki.  And we look forward to a full review by the independent inspector general and for the results of that review.  I would say that since the beginning of fiscal year 2014, 759,724 claims have been completed, which is 162,831 more than the number of claims completed this time last year, which shows an enhanced focus and dedication to providing our veterans with the service and care that they deserve.

Q    -- go back to that six-year problem.  I mean, actually, it’s been longer than that with the VA --

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I think, as Secretary Hagel and others noted, this is obviously a challenge that has been long in the making, and that’s a broad issue that has --

Q    But are you thinking -- is there any taskforce back there about trying to come up and say, you know what, we got to get in --

MR. CARNEY:  I don’t have any personnel announcements, Chuck.  What I can tell you is that we’re very concerned about the reports.  We look forward to the independent IG’s review of it.

Q    So you’ll wait until there’s an IG before you guys decide whether to fix this yourself?

MR. CARNEY:  I just don’t have any -- well, no, I don’t have any personnel announcements to make.

Jon.

Q    To follow up on that -- do you think that the VA has done a good job in addressing this issue of backlog of claims overall?  What grade would you give them?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, Jon, what I would say is the VA has aggressively addressed the challenge posed by the backlog -- a backlog that was put under considerably additional stress by the correct decision to recognize those with claims related to exposure to Agent Orange from the Vietnam War generation, and those with claims related to PTSD from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.  That put a lot more stress on the system but it was the right thing to do.  And since the high-water mark, in terms of the backlog, especially those claims that had been waiting for more than a certain number of days, there has been substantial progress in the reduction of the size of the backlog.

I don’t have all the data with me right now, but I can assure you, as the number I did just provide to you demonstrates, that this has been something that has gotten the attention of obviously Secretary Shinseki, but also the rest of the administration.  And it’s something that the President feels very strongly about.

Q    But just to get on Chuck’s point, the issue in Arizona is that it seems that there was a cover-up to try to hide the true size of the backlog.  Now, we don’t know if that was something just limited to Arizona; if it happened elsewhere.  But are you confident you can trust the statistics that you have; that in fact, VA has made, as you said, progress, a lot of progress in dealing with this backlog if at least in this one instance the suggestion is that the numbers may not be right?

MR. CARNEY:  I can’t prejudge, obviously, a review that’s being undertaken with regard to a specific office and allegations around that office.  What I can say is, yes, we are confident that there has been significant progress made in reducing the size of the backlog.  And that has been a focus at the VA and of the entire administration -- because of the fundamental conviction reflected in the fact that the President has made sure that funding is increased for the VA throughout his time in office -- that we have a commitment to our veterans for the service they’ve provided our nation, and that includes especially our wounded veterans and our disabled veterans who need the care that they deserve.

Q    Okay.  And then just two other quick ones.  This issue of the memos outlining the legal case for targeting American citizens with drone strikes, the David Barron memo or memos --  do you have a response to the calls from Senator Rand Paul and others to make those memos public?  I know you’ve offered to show them in a classified setting, but will you release those memos publicly? 

MR. CARNEY:  What I can --

Q    How many of them are there?  I mean, I know some of them are --

MR. CARNEY:  Sure.  What I can tell you is a couple of things.  First, on the Senator Paul op-ed in which he does call for the memos to be made available to senators, we have made the memo available -- the memo in question available to members before the vote.

Q    I think he wants it released publicly.

MR. CARNEY:  He also called for the public release, and what I can tell you is that the Justice Department is reviewing the Second Circuit opinion on this matter, and I would refer you to them for how they’re evaluating their options. 

So there has been a court opinion on the specific question of public release of this memo, and the Justice Department is reviewing that, and that’s something that I would refer you to them on.  But it is the case -- and it’s an important point to make -- that for all the senators who would vote on the judicial nominee, the memo has been made available for any of the 100 U.S. senators to review. 

When it comes to the nominee himself, David Barron is an exceptionally qualified judicial nominee.  He’s a respected member of the Harvard Law School faculty, a former acting assistant attorney general at the Department of Justice, and a former Supreme Court clerk.  He will bring outstanding credentials, legal expertise and dedication to the rule of law to the federal bench.

The administration is working to ensure that any remaining questions members of the Senate have about Mr. Barron’s legal work at the Department of Justice are addressed.  As I think I mentioned last week, last year, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee had access to the memo.  And I would note that in his committee vote, Mr. Barron received unanimous democratic support.  And we are confident he will be confirmed to the first circuit court of appeals, and that he will serve with distinction.

Q    How many memos are there?  How many memos in which he was the principal author outlining that legal case? 

MR. CARNEY:  There was one memo in question that I have referred to and that has been made available to U.S. senators.

Q    Are there others?

MR. CARNEY:  Are there other memos that he drafted?  I don’t know.  Again, there is a memo in question that has been the subject of a Second Circuit decision and I know that that memo has been made available to all U.S. senators.

Q    Okay, and then just one more.  The President, at the DCCC dinner, used this factoid -- since 2007, they -- meaning the Republicans -- have filibustered about 500 pieces of legislation that would help the middle class.  Does he stand by that number?

MR. CARNEY:  I didn’t see the comments or the context.  There’s no question that there has been historic obstructionism by Republican-led Congress, in the House in particular, but I don’t have the context for it.

Bill.

Q    What’s been the contribution so far of the U.S. team in Nigeria?  Are they using -- for instance, are they using technology to help find these girls?  Like, maybe drones?

MR. CARNEY:  As I mentioned earlier, we have experts in a variety of areas, including investigations, including reconnaissance and surveillance.  I don’t have a catalog of the equipment they might be using or what the specific resources they’re bringing to bear there.  They are there to advise and assist the Nigerian government in an effort that the Nigerian government is leading to find and free those girls.

Q    So they’re actively involved in the search?

MR. CARNEY:  They are actively involved in working with the Nigerian government to provide the advice and the expertise that they can provide to assist in that effort.  So in that sense, yes, they’re actively involved.

Ed.

Q    Jay, I wanted to ask you about Tim Geithner’s book that came out today.  One aspect of it is he kind of has this thrust in there that he did not feel comfortable reading some White House talking points about Wall Street bonuses because he felt there was nothing the administration could really do to get those bonuses to go -- get them back, and that he felt uncomfortable, thought it was politics being played.  What do you say?

MR. CARNEY:  I didn’t see that.  What I can tell you is that Secretary Geithner’s book I think reflects the enormous challenges that this administration faced and the incredibly significant decisions that were made by the President and implemented by his team to prevent what was already the worst recession in our lifetimes from becoming a Great Depression.  And I think the numbers reflect the success in that effort, including the trend lines that essentially were in place when President Obama took office when it came to job loss, when it came to contraction of the economy and the reversal of those numbers because of the decisions that President Obama made and that Secretary Geithner was elemental in advising him on and implementing on his behalf and on behalf of the American people. So President Obama is enormously grateful for the years of service that Secretary Geithner provided to the country.

Q    He also writes specifically about being prepped for Sunday shows one weekend and he says, “I objected when Dan Pfeiffer wanted me to say Social Security did not contribute to the deficit.  It was not a main driver of our future deficits, but it did contribute.”  Why do you think a top White House aide would suggest to the Treasury Secretary that he say something --

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I’m pretty sure I was in that, and I think what Dan and others have said is what we say constantly publicly because it’s a fact is that Social Security is not the main driver of our deficit.  It is certainly not the driver of our near- and medium-term deficit challenges.  And we have always taken an approach, which is to pursue Social Security on a separate track from some of the other entitlement programs that are contributing, principally through health care costs to our --

Q    But Secretary Geithner says he agrees with you, that it was not the main driver.  What he is saying --

MR. CARNEY:  And that, I am sure, is the point that Dan was making.

Q    Okay, but he says, “I objected when Dan Pfeiffer wanted me to say Social Security did not contribute to the deficit.”  Not that it’s the main driver, but that it did not contribute at all.

MR. CARNEY:  Well, again, I am very confident that as I and Dan and virtually everyone else has said, as well as economists have said repeatedly -- he said that the point was that Social Security, as a matter of fact, is not the main driver of our deficit.  It is certainly not the main driver of our near- or medium-term deficits. 

What you have seen, because of the policies implemented by this President, is the sharpest reduction in our deficits in more than 50 years.  And we have done that even as we have enacted policies that have allowed the economy to grow, albeit not fast enough, and to create millions of jobs, although not as many as we would like. 

And that’s why we have to continue to be focused on expanding opportunity for the middle class and making the kind of investments that Secretary Foxx was talking about earlier today from this podium -- the kind of investments that have long  enjoyed bipartisan support, that helped put people to work right away and helped create the kind of economic foundation that we need for further growth in the future.  We look forward to working with Congress in order to enact those kinds of policies so that the recovery from the recession that we’ve seen since those dark days chronicled in Secretary Geithner’s book continues and expands.

Cheryl.

Q    If there are not 60 votes today to move forward in the Senate on the energy efficiency bill, how will the White House move forward with its agenda -- with regulation and executive actions?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, the President is committed, as you know and as he has said many times, to moving forward on an agenda that maximizes our energy security, that ensures that we are approaching our energy needs through an all-of-the-above approach, that we are taking the action that we can take to reduce carbon pollution.  And he’ll continue to do that.  He’s taken executive action and he looks forward to working with Congress where Congress is willing to work with him.  But he will not rest even if Congress won’t act. 

Alexis.

Q    Can I follow up on Jon’s question about the drones memo?  Can you just clarify, what is it that the President wants the Justice Department to clarify?  Because he was the consumer of the memo with the White House Counsel’s Office and he has the power to declassify, so are you saying --

MR. CARNEY:  It’s a legal case, Alexis.  It was a decision from a court.  The Department of Justice is party to that case, is reviewing that decision and reviewing its options going forward.  I don’t have a preview or a prejudgment about what DOJ will decide.

Q    So just to clarify, would it be correct to say that the President, working with the Justice Department, is considering making -- would that be correct to say considering making --

MR. CARNEY:  Well, that would not be what I said, so I can tell you and what I will say is that the Justice Department is reviewing its options in light of the decision by the Second Circuit.

Q    But it’s a possibility?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, no, the Justice Department is reviewing its options, and I refer you to them for more details. 

Scott.

Q    Thanks, Jay.  Back on the kidnapped girls -- how much discussion has there been inside the White House on whether or not the high-profile weighing in on this subject -- the First Lady’s weekly address, the hashtag campaign featuring her and other prominent administration officials -- actually helps facilitate the release of the girls, as opposed to just highlighting an issue that the President and others find very important -- that is, women’s rights, girls’ rights, girls’ education globally?  In other words, is there a practical -- do you believe that applying this kind of international pressure on a kidnapping will help convince the kidnappers to act in a -- by releasing them?

MR. CARNEY:  No, I wouldn’t say that.  I think that highlighting the situation there and the tragedy that the abduction of those girls represents helps focus attention on the matter and helps I think focus the attention of those who would want to assist in the finding and recovery of those girls.

What we believe we can do when it comes to actually locating them and releasing them, having them released, is provide a kind of assistance that we’re providing to the Nigerian government and that I catalogued earlier.  But we’re not anything but realistic about the challenge here.  It’s extremely difficult, as I noted earlier.  The area that the Nigerian government is looking for the girls in constitutes roughly the size of New England. 

But we’re going to do everything we can to assist that effort, and that includes the assistance that we’ve -- the specific personnel and advice and assistance we’re providing, and it includes engaging as we have in an effort to raise awareness of this issue -- although, I think, it’s fair to say that it has been getting a lot of attention separate and apart from the focus the President and the First Lady have put on it.  And it should, because I think, as I noted earlier, this is a tragedy for these girls, for these families, but it also speaks to a broader issue when it comes to the rights of girls and women around the world and the essential value of education when it comes to the rights of girls and women, and the economic advancement of them, their families and their nations.

Q    Jay, still on the Nigerian -- the Boko Haram leader today said that those girls are not going to be freed until his detained members are.  What’s the White House reaction to that?

MR. CARNEY:  I don’t have a specific reaction beyond noting how heinous this abduction is and noting that we are working with the Nigerian government by providing advice and assistance in the effort to find and recover those girls. 

Q    -- telling the Nigerian government, in our view, you shouldn’t negotiate with these guys, or you should negotiate with these guys?

MR. CARNEY:  I don’t have a readout of conversations that I’m sure are taking place in great detail when it comes to the advice that we’re providing and the assistance that we’re providing.  I can tell you that we believe the girls ought to be released and we are working with the Nigerian government to provide whatever assistance we can with that aim. 

Roger.

Q    The Syrian opposition leader is in town today and he’s supposed to be meeting with the President.  Can you tell us, number one, when that meeting is?  And second, will the U.S. reconsider the request for weapons?

MR. CARNEY:  In fact, the Syrian opposition leader is meeting with National Security Advisor Susan Rice this week, along with other National Security Council staff.  I don’t have any scheduling announcements for the President at this time, though I certainly wouldn’t rule out the possibility that he might stop by and meet with President Jarba. 

As a general matter, the U.S. is pleased to welcome the delegation of Syrian National Coalition for Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, which arrived last week in Washington and is visiting through May 14, led by President Jarba.  This is the coalition’s first visit to the United States since being established in 2012.  And, as I just noted, Susan Rice -- Ambassador Rice will meet with President Jarba this week, along with other NSC staff, as part of our commitment to empower the moderate Syrian opposition and bolster its efforts to assist those in need inside of Syria.  The U.S. is taking additional measures to support the coalition, local communities inside Syria and members of the moderate armed opposition.

Last week, the State Department announced that we have made the determination that the coalition’s representative offices in the U.S. are foreign missions under the Foreign Missions Act.  We also announced we are working with Congress to provide more than $27 million in new, non-lethal assistance, bringing the total of non-lethal support we have committed and are providing to the Syrian opposition to nearly $287 million. 

So, again, I can’t rule out that the President will meet with President Jarba, but it’s not on his schedule and the meeting that is scheduled is with Ambassador Rice.

Q    Is there any inclination to reconsider military assistance? 

MR. CARNEY:  Well, we provide a variety of assistance, and I’m not going to get into detail on every single type of our assistance.  So I think -- I’m not sure of the question you’re asking, the specificity that you’re applying to it.  We obviously provide a significant amount of assistance to the Syrian opposition.  We also provide and are the leading provider of humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people. 

Q    On Ukraine, does the White House believe that the government in Kyiv did everything that it could to convey a message of unity to the east and south?  Or in the last several days, was there more that they could have done to head off recent events?

MR. CARNEY:  We have commended the Ukrainian government for their restraint, for the approach that they have taken in general to the crisis and to the efforts to destabilize their nation that separatists and Russia have engaged in.  And that includes their efforts to reach out through the establishment of OSCE-led roundtables for discussions about constitutional reform and regional autonomy that they seek to engage in with Ukrainians from the east and the south.  I think that represents the approach that they’ve taken, the reasonable and restrained approach that they’ve taken as a general matter to some remarkable provocation.  So we commend them for that.

Steve.

Q    On Iran, the U.S. team is heading off to Vienna this week to begin the process of drafting up a possible nuclear deal with Iran.  Does the President still put chances of a deal at around 50 percent, 50/50?

MR. CARNEY:  I certainly don’t have an update to what he said in the past about the prospects for reaching a deal.  It is absolutely his view that we are doing the right thing by testing whether or not Iran is serious about reaching a deal through the P5-plus-1 process.  And you’re correct that the P5-plus-1, EU and Iran are meeting in Vienna this week at the political directors level, which comes after technical experts from the P5-plus-1 and Iran met in New York last week. 

As has been the usual practice, the expert group meets regularly for technical discussions and then to prepare for subsequent discussions, and then to prepare for subsequent discussions at the political directors level.  That’s what’s occurring now.  The previous rounds were used to review all of the issues and to understand each other’s positions.  And the next step is to begin to see if a text can be drafted, and that is something that presents obvious challenges. 

So we approach this as we have from the beginning, with the firm belief that resolving this issue through diplomacy is far preferable to the alternative, but also mindful of the fact that the success of any negotiation will come from concrete commitments and concrete actions fulfilling those commitments by Iran.

Q    Just on Ukraine, if the separatists of these areas that had referendums this week go ahead and thwart voting in the Ukrainian elections, would that be seen as satisfying that criteria that the President and Angela Merkel established that Russia could face sectoral sanctions if it disrupted the elections?  In other words, does Russia’s refusal to use its influence to allow the elections to take place equal disrupting the elections?

MR. CARNEY:  Without sort of parsing all the different possibilities that are contained within your question, I will say that it is absolutely the case that if there are efforts to disrupt the elections and Russia is responsible for those efforts or responsible for failing to use its influence to prevent those efforts, that that will be viewed very dimly by the international community, by the United States and, as Chancellor Merkel said, by Germany and other members of the EU.  And we have committed to escalating the cost to Russia if Russia engages in efforts to destabilize the May 25 elections.

Thanks very much.

END
2:36 P.M. EDT

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Statement by the President on the Conclusion of Indian Elections

I congratulate the people of India on concluding their national elections today.  India has set an example for the world in holding the largest democratic election in history, a vibrant demonstration of our shared values of diversity and freedom.

The United States and India have developed a strong friendship and comprehensive partnership over the last two decades, which has made our citizens safer and more prosperous and which has enhanced our ability to work together to solve global challenges.  We look forward to the formation of a new government once election results are announced and to working closely with India’s next administration to make the coming years equally transformative.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Statement by the President on National Small Business Week

Today marks the beginning of National Small Business Week, a time to highlight the crucial role that America’s small businesses play in our economy. Employing millions of Americans and creating nearly two out of three new jobs, America’s small businesses are the backbone of our economy. More than that, our small businesses represent what is best about America – that with hard work and ingenuity, anyone – no matter their background – can build a better future for themselves and their families. 

That’s why we have cut taxes for small businesses 18 times and we remain committed to simplifying the tax code for small businesses.  Additionally, the Small Business Administration continues to support hundreds of thousands of businesses through loans all across the nation.  But there’s more work to do, and my administration will continue to do everything we can to help our businesses grow and succeed, including taking steps to invest in our infrastructure, support access to credit to more small businesses and reform our immigration system. During National Small Business Week, we renew our commitment to helping our businesses hire more workers, sell more products and continue to grow the foundation of our American economy.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Remarks by the President and the Vice President Honoring the National Association of Police Organizations TOP COPS

East Room

5:39 P.M. EDT

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the White House.  I especially want to welcome my old friend, Tommy Nee, and Bill Johnson and everyone in the National Association of Police Organizations.  Ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by saying congratulations to all of you assembled behind us.

It’s a genuine honor to be in the presence of the “best of the best.”  Each year you guys come down here -- and, Tommy, you bring down the best -- and you're an inspiration.  You're not only an inspiration to us, but you're an inspiration to all your fellow law enforcement colleagues all across the entire country.

And the President and I, we recognize the bravery that you display simply by putting on that shield every morning.  That, all by itself, is an act of bravery.  Strapping on your sidearm, kissing your husband or your wife goodbye at the door, walking out knowing -- because most of you are experienced -- knowing that you don't know with any degree of certitude what’s about to greet you.  You have no idea -- except some of it may not be good.

The officers we have here today have been singled out for going above and beyond the call of duty, and we commend each and every one of them.  And from my perspective, there’s no greater honor that a law enforcement officer could have than being recognized and nominated by his fellow officers -- because you all know what real courage is.  You all know what kind of steel in your spine it takes to make the decisions that the men standing behind me have made.

We also know that there are thousands and thousands of more law enforcement officers out there on the job today and every day who are taking risks that are hard for ordinary people to imagine.  They take risks to protect the community, protect the people they don't know, protect people they’ve never met.  But they go out there and you all do it anyway, regardless of whether or not -- where they’re from, who they are, whether you know them or not.

And today is a day for them as well, all those officers -- a day that every man and woman in uniform should feel extremely proud -- proud of themselves, not just the men and women standing behind me.  Today is a day the entire community of police officers should understand that America appreciates what you're doing, that this President and I appreciate what you're doing.

We owe the families, because every single day, as I said, you kiss your husband or wife goodbye, your son or your daughter, you know there’s that little, nagging feeling inside you -- that nagging feeling that I wonder what’s going to be meeting them today.  And that's a sacrifice.  It's a sacrifice that goes without adequate recognition.

Ladies and gentlemen, it's my great honor and privilege to present to you a man who fully recognizes that sacrifice, who’s committed to law enforcement in his bones.  And every action he has taken as President has been designed to protect those of you behind the shield, and the shield in front of the families that they represent. 

Ladies and gentlemen, it's my honor and privilege to present to you the President of the United States of America, Barack Obama.  (Applause.)    

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, everybody.  It is a great honor to be here -- one of my favorite events that we do every single year.  And let me start by thanking Joe Biden not only for being a great Vice President -- which he is -- but also being a lifelong friend of law enforcement.  (Applause.)  Now, he and I have a special reason for loving law enforcement, because we have the unusual privilege of being surrounded by law enforcement every minute of every day.  (Laughter.)  And they also protect the people we love most in the world -- our families.  So we’re incredibly grateful to them and to all the law enforcement officers who serve and protect families and communities across the nation every single day.

Some of the public servants who make sure America’s police officers have what they need to do their jobs are also here today, and I just want to recognize them briefly.  First of all, Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson is here.  (Applause.) Attorney General Eric Holder is here, as well.  (Applause.)  Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton is here.  (Applause.)  And I want to thank everybody from the National Association of Police Organizations, including your outstanding president, Tom Nee.  (Applause.) 

But, most of all, we’re here to welcome and congratulate our guests of honor, America’s Top Cops of 2014, and to thank their families -- their spouses, moms, dads, sons, daughters who love and support these heroes every single step of the way.  So give them a big round of applause.  (Applause.)  We know it takes a lot of courage to be a cop, but it also takes a lot of courage to love a cop -- (laughter) -- and to send them off to work every single day with a hug and a prayer for their safety.  So all of you are heroes in my book, as well. 

The 53 officers, detectives, patrolmen, special agents, and troopers that we celebrate today are America’s Finest -- the best of the best.  They hail from different parts of the country, and different events brought them here today.  But they share one important thing in common.  When the moment came -- when the shooting started, or a bomb went off, or a hostage was taken, or a child screamed for help -- they did not hesitate.  They went into action.  They ran toward the danger -- not away from it.  And they risked their lives to save the lives of others.

Now, I got a chance to spend a little time with these guys before they came out here.  When you talk to them -- and this has been true every time we’ve done this, every single year -- they’ll always say, I was just doing my job, insisting that they didn’t do anything extraordinary.  And they’re right about one thing:  There are heroes in every force, in every city, in every town across the nation.  And everyone standing up here owes something to police officers who aren’t here, somebody who pushed them to do their best and had their backs when they needed it.  So this is also a celebration for all law enforcement who are doing their jobs out there bravely and diligently, and we want to thank them for keeping us safe.

Having said that, even if these guys won’t admit it, there is something special about these guys.  This is the sixth year that I’ve welcomed Top Cops to the White House, and every year, their stories are incredible.  There are no exceptions.

There’s somebody on the loose here!  (Laughter.)  Oh no!  She was making a break for it.  (Laughter.)  That was great.  Did you see her?

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Yes, I saw her.  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  She was moving.

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  She could move quickly.  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Here are some of the reasons these officers are here today. 

Surviving a violent ambush in the pitch-black woods while confronting an escaped felon convicted of sexual assault.  

Engaging in hand-to-hand combat to take down someone seen trying to blow up a gas station near a major international airport. 

Storming an underground bunker to rescue a kidnapped five-year-old boy. 

Braving a hail of gunfire to protect victims of domestic violence.

One of these officers, in protecting the public, took out a suspected cop-killing bank robber with what was described as a one-in-a-million shot.  Another stopped a shooter by returning fire through the windshield of his patrol car -- while making sure to wear his seat belt.  (Laughter.)  One jumped a fence during his own Father’s Day celebration when a boy screamed that someone was trying to kill his mom.  He saved both the mother and her son -- and now that little boy says he’s thinking about becoming a cop as well.

And there are officers here who were in the thick of two attacks last year:  the shooting at the Washington Naval Yard and the bombing at the Boston Marathon.  On those awful days -- and we all remember them -- amid the smoke and the chaos, the courage of these officers shone through.  And their quick thinking and level-headedness undoubtedly saved lives.  Their willingness to put themselves in danger to protect others answered the prayer of Americans watching all across the country.

So heroism like this can come with great sacrifice.  Some of the officers here today sustained serious injuries in the line of duty.  They were shot or stabbed.  Some lost friends, even a partner.  Some are still recovering. 

There’s one person who should be here today but isn’t -- Officer Dennis Simmonds of the Boston P.D.  Last year, Officer Simmonds was injured in an explosion during that gun battle after the Boston Marathon bombing.  And just a few weeks ago, he died while on active duty.  Dennis’s partner, Officer Jean Gerard Jean-Louis, is here.  So are members of his family, including his parents, Dennis and Roxanne.  And our sorrow at your loss is matched only by our gratitude for your son’s service and sacrifice.  I told the family before I came out here he will not be forgotten.

So what these officers do is dangerous.  They do it because it’s important.  Maintaining the public safety is the foundation of everything that is good that happens every single day in America.  It’s why parents can send their kids to school and adults can head off to work, and community centers and houses of worship can open their doors to one and all, and businesses can start and thrive.  And that’s why people can cast their votes and express their views without fear.  It’s one of the reasons people travel and do business in these United States. 

And that’s why Americans everywhere owe a debt to our nation’s law enforcement.  And we have to do our part by making sure all of you have the resources and protections and support that you need to do your job well.  That’s our end of the bargain.  That’s what I’m going to keep on fighting for every day that I have the honor of serving as your President.  And that’s what Joe Biden is going to work every day as long as he has the honor of serving as your Vice President.   

So on behalf of all the American people, thank you.  There are people alive today because of you.  You may not even know their names, but we do, and we’re proud of you.  

God bless you.  God bless your families, and God bless the United States of America.  Please give them a big round of applause.  (Applause.)

END
5:51 P.M. EDT

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Presidential Nominations and Withdrawal sent to the Senate

NOMINATIONS SENT TO THE SENATE:
Robert Stephen Beecroft, of California, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Arab Republic of Egypt.

Stuart E. Jones, of Virginia, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Career Minister, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Republic of Iraq.

Lisa Afua Serwah Mensah, of Maryland, to be Under Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development, vice Dallas P. Tonsager, resigned.

WITHDRAWAL SENT TO THE SENATE:
Tommy Port Beaudreau, of Alaska, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Interior, vice Rhea S. Suh, which was sent to the Senate on January 6, 2014.