EIN Presswire: Barack Obama Live Feed Press Releases

Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 2/7/2012

Wed, 08 Feb 2012 00:10:00 +0000

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

1:59 P.M. EST

MR. CARNEY: Hello.

Q You could use it up there.

Q Marshmallow gun. (Laughter.)

MR. CARNEY: A marshmallow gun? I would like one of those.

Q That’s awesome.

MR. CARNEY: It was, wasn’t it?

Q He doesn’t get out much, does he? (Laughter.)

MR. CARNEY: Was that -- that was a great event. You know, April, it is -- I saw him right afterwards. He loves this event, and he thinks it’s so important. And let’s just say that his remarks were -- went beyond what was on the printed page, because he feels -- he does feel so inspired by the kids and by the importance of science education and that sort of thing. So when he gave his advice to your editors about giving prominence to this event, he meant it sincerely.

Q The marshmallow did it, he got it.

MR. CARNEY: Yes. There were all sorts of fascinating things that those kids were working on.

Good afternoon. I hope you enjoyed the science fair event today at the White House. The President sure did. Before I take your questions, I wanted to give you a readout of another moment of the President’s day that the President enjoyed, which was this morning President Obama called New York Giants head coach Tom Coughlin to congratulate him and the rest of the New York football Giants on their recent Super Bowl victory.

The President said that the team’s victory was a testament to Coach Coughlin’s leadership and that his team demonstrated true grit and determination.

President Obama told Coach Coughlin that he looks forward to greeting him and congratulating the team in person when they come and visit the White House, and I’m sure you’ll all be here for that. Probably even the Patriots fans among you.

Q Speak for yourself, Giants fan.

MR. CARNEY: Not a Giants fan, but it was a fun game to watch.

Ben Feller.

Q Thanks, Jay. Two topics, please. On the decision -- the President’s decision to give his approval to the Democratic super PAC, as you know, he’s on record as saying that these PACs and the way they allow money to drive elections are a threat to democracy; now he’s given his stamp to exactly that kind of organization so that the Democratic PAC can keep pace with Republican ones. And his campaign says basically these are the rules, and they stink, but if we want to compete, we got to play by them.

So I guess my point is, what is the point of taking a principled stand and campaigning against something if then you switch course and abandon it for the sake of strategy?

MR. CARNEY: Well, Ben, first of all, the President’s views of the influence of the Citizens United decision haven’t changed. He strongly opposed it, as you know. He made that clear at his State of the Union address in 2010, which got a lot of attention. And he holds those views today.

He, just as recently as this weekend, discussed, as you mentioned, the fact that he wished that Washington was doing more to reduce the influence of money in politics. The fact is, is that he has been committed to working with Congress to eliminate the corrosive influence of money in Washington, and he proposed new ideas along those lines in his State of the Union address, with regards to political reform in Congress.

On his first day in office, the President issued an executive order with some of the toughest ethics rules ever imposed on the executive branch. For the first time in history, the White House began posting visitor records online in accessible, searchable format for anyone to browse or download. As of December 2011, over 2 million records were posted on the website. And this is the first administration to prohibit executive branch employees from accepting gifts from registered lobbyists.

This administration has done more than any in history to prevent undue influence over the government by lobbyists, by moneyed interests. The fact is, I would refer you -- I will refer a lot of these questions that have to do with strategic campaign decisions to Chicago. But the President obviously agrees with this decision because of what the campaign has said, is that the rules are what they are, and we can’t -- the campaign -- I mean, I’ve read the same reports you have read -- the campaign has made clear that they cannot engage in this campaign, they cannot compete effectively if there are two sets of rules -- if they play by a different set of rules.

Q So from the President’s point of view, do you not see any inconsistency in talking about the corrosive influence of money, and then encouraging donors to give to groups that collect --

MR. CARNEY: Well, let’s be clear about a couple of things. One, his views on the problems associated with this decision have not changed, and he has expressed them as recently as a few days ago and will continue to express them. Two, the President, Vice President, First Lady, Dr. Biden will not appear at any of these events associated with these organizations.

Q Why?

MR. CARNEY: That’s just a decision that was made by the campaign, by the President and the team, not to do that. Those individuals with the campaign and with the White House who appear at events -- political campaign events already for the President’s campaign will be available to appear before the super PAC, but they will not solicit funds. And again, I would refer you to the campaign for the strategic decision about why the rules are what they are, unfortunately. The Citizens United decision pertains, unfortunately -- and this President will be committed, as long as he’s in office, to trying to change that and has made clear that -- I mean, last year, let’s just remember that this is not a case of apples and apples here in our approach to this issue.

The President very strongly supported with Democrats on Capitol Hill the DISCLOSE Act, which would have required simple disclosure, something that Republicans used to be for when they opposed other campaign finance measures back in the 1990s when I covered Congress -- disclosure was the answer, they said. But then when disclosure became the call of President Obama and Democrats, Republicans opposed it. They opposed the simple idea that the American people ought to know who’s donating to these political campaigns.

So the President still supports absolutely the passage of the disclosure act. He supports measures that would change the dynamic created by the Citizens United decision, even if that requires a constitutional amendment. If that is what it would require he would support that.

So there is a huge difference between the approach this President takes and the approach taken by the Republican Party, by would-be presidential nominees of the Republican Party. And I think that distinction will be clear to voters who care about this issue.

Q Given how much he has opposed the Citizens decision, and these PACs, and now he’s saying that he’s giving his approval to this, did he wrestle with this at all before he gave thumbs up?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I think you can divine that, that this is a decision that was carefully considered, by the fact that it’s February of 2012, and you’ve already seen in the Republican Party how much money is being raised by these organizations -- hundreds of millions of dollars, or so I read, of it totally undisclosed. And I would point out that campaign officials, administration officials who appear before a super PAC that supports Democrats or the President will only appear before those super PACs that disclose their donors. They will not appear before so-called (c)(4)’s that do not disclose.

So disclosure remains an absolute priority of this President and his campaign.

Q One other topic, please. On the decision about the religious-affiliated groups and contraception, you were asked last week if there’s a debate within the administration about reconsidering, and you flatly said, no, the decision has been made. Does that absolutely remain the case, no reconsideration?

MR. CARNEY: It does. The President is committed to making sure that all women have access to these important preventive services. But I think it is important to remember what was clearly stated when this policy decision was announced and that is that we will be working with those organizations and individuals who have concerns about the implementation of this rule, and that’s why that time period of a full year beginning in August of 2012 was put into place because the President is very interested in finding the appropriate balance between religious beliefs and convictions -- and he takes those very seriously -- and his commitment to making sure that women of all faiths have access to these important health care preventive services. So that process will continue.

And I think that that point was overlooked in the initial coverage of the decision.

Q Well, just to --

Q But the end of the year -- what’s the date of the end-of-the-year period?

MR. CARNEY: August of 2013.

Q August -- you just said 2012, okay.

MR. CARNEY: It begins in 2012 I believe, and --

Q Okay, okay.

MR. CARNEY: Right.

Q Just to wrap up on this point, there’s a perception out there -- and in some cases David Axelrod’s comments led some to think that the very implementation you’ve talked about over the next year or so will lead to a different outcome, that in the rule-making, there will be some deal cut, some out given to get away from this controversy. Ultimately, no matter how it’s implemented, will the bottom line remain the same, that these organizations have to provide that contraceptive coverage?

MR. CARNEY: The President’s interest is in making sure that -- on the one side of this balance -- is in making sure that all American women, all women here, have access to the same preventive care services.

He is also concerned about and understands the religious concerns that have been raised and takes seriously the religious convictions that are behind the concerns that have been raised. And we will work in this period to see if there is a way, to try to find a way to make sure that the implementation of the policy or to see if the implementation of the policy can be done in a way that allays some of those concerns.

But there are ways to I think help resolve this issue that ensures that we provide that important preventive service, that health care coverage, to all women, and that tries -- in a way that also tries to allay some of these concerns.

Reuters. And then Jake.

Q Thanks, Jay. When did the President sign off on the decision to support Priorities USA?

MR. CARNEY: I would refer you to the campaign. I don’t know the answer to that. But I would refer you -- as I will on a lot of these -- to Chicago.

Q We’ve already asked. Can you take the question?

MR. CARNEY: I’m sorry?

Q We’ve already asked. When?

MR. CARNEY: I’ll take the question, if you’ve asked the campaign. I think they would probably have the answer.

Q They had a conference call.

Q What does he expect it to achieve?

MR. CARNEY: Again, I would refer you to the campaign about campaign tactics, strategy, how resources are raised. And that would obviously, in that case, I suppose, be a question to ask of the outside organization.

The fact of the matter is we’ve seen, as I just stated, an enormous amount of money raised by these organizations, a significant portion of it totally undisclosed. And the campaign, as I’ve read and you’ve read, has made the decision that they can’t unilaterally disarm and that they can’t play by -- play or engage in the campaign by a different set of rules as their opponents.

So, again -- but these are discussions -- this is an analysis of sort of strategic campaign decisions, and I think Chicago is the right place to take those questions.

Q What is the difference between having a White House official speaking at an event like this and actually asking for money?

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, we will comply with all the rules, all the laws that govern this. It is a long-established rule that administration officials can and do engage, in private time, in political activity. This administration, like others before it, has officials who engage in private political activity in their private time on behalf of the President’s campaign, and they will be able to do that now -- or the campaign has made a decision that they might be able to, or will be able to appear at events for these outside organizations. But they will not directly solicit funds, and they won’t participate in raising funds.

Q I just don’t understand how -- if you’re appearing at a fundraiser, how is that not soliciting funds?

MR. CARNEY: Again, I would refer you to the organizations here that are -- the campaign and the super PAC that are making these decisions.

Q But we’re talking about White House officials.

MR. CARNEY: I think there is a difference between asking for money and appearing and making the case for why the President should be reelected.

Q Let me ask you on one other topic --

Q Not much of a difference, though.

MR. CARNEY: Well, I disagree. You guys can make your --

Q One non-PAC topic. Do you guys -- does the White House have a reaction to the appeals court ruling on California’s gay marriage act?

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have a comment on litigation in general in this litigation with which we are not a party -- or to which we are not a party. Beyond that, I can say that the President has long opposed, as you know, divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples.

Jake. I’ll get to you, Chris.

Q In terms of the health care rule on birth control -- this rule doesn’t provide those health services for all women, as you said, though, right? Because there is a carve-out for houses of worship.

MR. CARNEY: Correct. There is an exemption for churches and houses of worship. And I think that the principle here is that churches and houses of worship, it’s an issue of hiring people of like faith, versus these large institutions, like universities and hospitals, where, whether you’re a nurse or a teacher, a professor, a student, a janitor, somebody in administration -- you are going to have folks of all faiths who work for those large institutions. And therefore the President believes that they ought to be able to have access -- those women ought to be able to have access to the same contraceptive services that other women will have access to.

Q Is there a middle ground somewhere where perhaps some of these religious organizations that aren’t specifically houses of worship, but are Catholic or Jewish or Baptist hospitals, charities, of a smaller size could be -- could receive the same exemption as the houses of worship? We’re talking about people who think that some methods of birth control are murder, are a sin, and the Obama administration is forcing them to be party to that. I mean, that’s the crux here.

MR. CARNEY: Well, let’s be clear -- and first of all, we understand the religious concerns here. That is why this balance was sought. That’s why the process going forward includes a transition period where this discussion will continue to see if there can be ways found that ensure that women get access to these preventive services and that those services are covered -- as they will be for all other women -- and that also takes into account these religious concerns.

But let’s be clear, the rule does not require any individual or institution to provide contraception. It requires coverage for women who work there of different faiths, or of any faith.

Q It provides them to pay for it.

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I’m not going to negotiate all the different possibilities of how this rule could be implemented in a way that might allay some of those concerns. That’s what the transition period is for.

Q Switching topics to the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice -- Dr. Susan Rice said that she was “disgusted” by the vote of Russia and China when it came to the Syria -- the U.N. Security Council resolution on Syria. Does President Obama share that view? Would he use the word “disgusted”? And why does the White House think Russia and China voted against that resolution?

MR. CARNEY: Well, we wouldn’t presume to speak for either of those two governments or any foreign government. Our views are that it was the wrong decision to block that Security Council resolution and to, in effect, by doing that give solace to and help sustain a regime that is brutally murdering its own people, and a regime that by the way is not going to last. There will be a transition in Syria.

And it is a mistake, we believe, for any country to put its eggs in that basket, if you will, because by doing that you’re alienating the Syrian people and many others in the region who are on the side of putting pressure on the Assad regime to get it to stop this behavior and to step aside so that a transition can take place in Syria.

And we are going to work with -- continue to work with international allies and partners, and with other friends of Syria -- friends of the Syrian people to continue to pressure the Assad regime so that it ceases this reprehensible behavior.

Q Would the President use the word “disgusted” as his ambassador did?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I’m not going to put words in his mouth, but the ambassador --

Q Well, she’s speaking for the White House.

MR. CARNEY: Absolutely, the ambassador -- the sentiments the ambassador was expressing reflect our great disappointment with that position taken. We will continue to obviously have these discussions with all of our partners internationally at the United Nations Security Council and elsewhere, and we will continue to work with others -- or sort of friends of Syria and the Syrian people to put the pressure that is required on the Assad regime.

Q Senator Lieberman said that it might be time for the United States to get in the business of helping to arm the opposition and take more aggressive measures. Is that something that the administration is willing to consider?

MR. CARNEY: I don’t want to speculate. I believe we don’t -- we are not considering that step right now. We are exploring the possibility of providing humanitarian aid to Syrians and we are working with our partners, again, to ratchet up the pressure, ratchet up the isolation on Assad and his regime. We’re seeing a lot of indications of a lack of control over the country by the regime, of interest by senior officials within the military and the government in separating themselves from the regime. So we believe that that pressure is having an impact.

Ultimately it needs to result in Assad ceasing the violence, stopping the brutality, and allowing for a transition supported by the Syrian people.

Q Thank you.

Q Can I do a follow-up on Syria? You talk about humanitarian aid and different option. Are there any option, any tangible options are you currently working on? Some argue that buffer zone could be one of the way, or -- Turkish Foreign Minister is coming also to D.C. tomorrow. Would you be able to tell us what are the options right now you are working on?

MR. CARNEY: Well, all I said is that we’re certainly exploring possible humanitarian aid. I mean, I think we all know what humanitarian aid is. For more details about the discussions that we’re having with other friends of the Syrian people I would refer you to the State Department. I think Secretary Clinton has discussed this publicly.

Chris.

Q How do you view the Russian Foreign Minister is today in Damascus? What’s your understanding? Is this helpful?

MR. CARNEY: Well, we’re not sure what the goals of his visit are. But the point we’re making is that Russia must realize that betting everything on Assad is a recipe for failure -- not just for Russia’s interests in Syria, but for the stability of the region and for Syria’s future. And I would just reemphasize what I said in response to the earlier question.

Chris.

Q I just want to follow up on the Prop 8 ruling. Back in 2008, candidate Obama came out against Proposition 8 that was on the ballot, calling it unnecessary. I’m just wondering if the President shares a belief that that measure is also unconstitutional.

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I’m not going to comment on litigation, particularly as here where we are not a party to it. The President’s positions on these issues writ large are well known and he’s long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples. But I don’t have anything more for you on that particular decision or any update --

Q I want to follow really quickly on that, though. You just said that the President opposes divisive and discriminatory efforts against same-sex couples, but the effort here -- the issue in question is marriage. So isn’t it inconsistent for the President to be -- not support same-sex marriage and also to be against such measures?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I don’t have any update for you on that particular issue with regards to the President’s views. I can tell you that divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples are something that this President has long opposed. And I think that the -- that’s an important point to make, that these are proactive, deliberate efforts to deny benefits and to be discriminatory.

Q Can I follow on that?

Q Can I follow?

MR. CARNEY: Let me -- I don’t want to -- I’ll bounce back and forth. Let me go to Wendell.

Q In October 2010, the President said the Citizens United decision, because it enabled these groups to keep their donors secret, was a threat to democracy itself. Does he feel that by requiring his supporting super PAC to disclose the donors, he basically removes that threat?

MR. CARNEY: The President’s concern with the Citizens United decision was broad and not just limited to that issue. It is an important point that you make that disclosure is important, and this President has been forcefully in favor of measures that would mandate disclosure despite -- unfortunately he has faced uniform resistance by Republicans in Congress to those efforts.

It is correct that as I understand this -- and we’re reaching the boundaries of my understanding of how these new outfits operate -- that there is a distinction between those that are required to disclose their donors every month, I believe, and those that are not required to disclose at all. And campaign officials, administration officials who might appear before a super PAC supporting the President would only appear before those that disclose.

Yes, Norah.

Q Jay, the President has railed against this type of funding of elections. I mean, to read back to you what he did say in the State of the Union, “I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests or, worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people.”

With the President reversing course on this, does he look hypocritical?

MR. CARNEY: Look, the President firmly believes that the effects of the Citizens United decision were as he described or predicted, and we are seeing that play out in many ways in the Republican primary process, which you all have covered or many of your colleagues have covered with the millions and millions of dollars being spent, almost entirely on negative advertising, and much of it completely undisclosed, so people --

Q But he spent 2010 --

MR. CARNEY: -- the American people don’t have -- let me finish -- the American people don’t have any idea who is backing that.

So the fact is -- and I will point you to the comments I made in response to Ben’s question about the efforts that this President has taken, that no President, no administration has taken before him, the principles that he adopts by not accepting any money from PACs or lobbyists, which distinguishes him from any of his potential Republican primary -- general election opponents -- and his efforts towards -- to get Congress to pass a disclosure act and other measures that would enhance the transparency of the process.

So again, it is an unfortunate situation, the President believes, that we find ourselves in where the rules are as they are. This decision was made, and I point you the campaign statements that I’ve seen and you have seen about the fact that -- the rules being what they are, the campaign has made clear that they cannot unilaterally disarm in a circumstance like this. So we are taking the approach -- the campaign is taking the approach that it’s taking, and the President is taking the approach that he’s taking.

Q I mean, the President spent much of 2010 on the road ridiculing these groups. I mean, he joked about the name -- they could call themselves anything, like “Moms for Motherhood” -- I mean, he really decried their influence in elections. And now he has signaled to his campaign that he would like his donors to contribute as well. You indicated, when asked about when the President made this decision -- you said, “You could divine that,” and that -- clearly since he’s made this in February of 2012. So has the President been putting off this decision? Were you indicating that he’s left it to so late in the game because he didn’t want to have to do this, but since he’s watched what’s happened in the Republican primary, he’s finally relented and said, “Right, the Republicans have so much money, I’m willing to give up on my principles because” --

MR. CARNEY: Well, look, you can throw in a lot of editorializations into your question, or you can just save them for your piece. But the -- (laughter) -- but the fact of the matter is this President’s views on Citizens United have not been shrouded in secrecy. They were clearly expressed --

Q What did you mean when you said he waited until February 2012?

MR. CARNEY: Well, hold on.

Q What did you mean?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I simply was asked, why did he -- I can’t remember the phrasing of the question -- did he spend a lot of time thinking about this? And I haven’t asked him that question, but I think you can understand, from the views that we -- that he has expressed about the Citizens United decision and the impact of that decision on the process, that he takes a dim view of it. But it is also the case -- and again, I point you to the campaign here, and I think a lot of these questions are more aptly addressed to the campaign -- that, as the campaign has said, the rules are what they are. We will continue, the President will continue to change the rules. But the fact of the matter is not only is there not a constituency among Republicans in Congress to overturn or take action against Citizens United, there is not even a constituency among Republicans in Congress to allow the American people to know who the donors are. They blocked the DISCLOSE Act.

So that is the reality that we live in, and he will continue to press for change, and he will continue to press for change even if it requires a constitutional amendment.

Q I think we’re asking a very simple question here, which is, the President, who has railed against these groups and this decision, in his State of the Union address and spoke multiple times on the campaign trail in 2010 decrying this, has now changed his mind. And so the simple question is, when did he make that decision to change his mind?

MR. CARNEY: You’re misrepresenting what I’ve said, and I assume you were in contact with the campaign. He has not changed his mind about these -- the rules, and --

Q He did not offer his public support for his own --

MR. CARNEY: Look, he’s not supporting -- he is not saying that the system is now healthy or good. He is saying -- he is making a decision, his campaign is making a decision that the rules are what they are, and they will not -- they cannot play by a different set of rules than Republicans are playing. But the situation -- these groups are --

Q He gave a signal -- he gave a signal, and his campaign manager put out an email. When did the President signal to his campaign manager that it was okay to do that?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I think we just -- the campaign announced it today, or yesterday. So --

Q The President gave the signal yesterday?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I was asked -- if that’s -- if this is the windup to asking me precisely the moment that the President made this decision, I think I’ll take that question, as I indicated about 15 minutes ago.

Yes, Julianna.

Q Thanks, Jay. Since the President is going to continue to push for changing the system, since he saw the influence of these groups back in 2010, was there more that he could have done over the last two years to change the system --

MR. CARNEY: Well, I think the President has pushed very hard for changes in the system. He, again, at the State of the Union address just a few weeks ago, put forward proposals for political reform in Congress that would help improve the system and reduce the influence of money in politics. And he will continue to work towards it.

But as I was just saying to Norah, a simple measure that would have demanded that donors are disclosed -- that the American people have the right to know who is making donations in the tens and hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars -- per person -- to these organizations got no Republican support in Congress. So -- or virtually no Republican support.

So that’s an unfortunate dynamic, but it’s not going to stop this President from continuing to try to find ways to deal with this problem. And maybe this cycle will change people’s views about the role of money in politics, because it is simply a fact that we’re seeing hundreds of millions of dollars in the system, much of it undisclosed, or some of it undisclosed, and the President’s views are that’s not a good thing.

Q And just to follow on Jeff’s question, will administration officials who are appearing at fundraisers for the super PAC -- will their names be on the invitations?

MR. CARNEY: I would refer you to the campaign or to -- or I guess in this case the super PAC. I don’t know.

Q Jay, in 2008, the President pretty clearly told the outside groups to stand down, and they did. What I’m unclear about is, up until now, he hasn’t expressly told people not to give to Priorities USA, is that correct?

MR. CARNEY: That’s my understanding. I would refer you to the campaign. I think that -- I think most of you were part of the campaign call, or could have been, earlier today.

Q No, no, I’m talking about prior to this.

MR. CARNEY: No, I understand, but I think they probably would have made clear what the announcement was today versus what it might be perceived to be.

Q Well, you would have known what his position was before today.

MR. CARNEY: My understanding is that today the only decision is that campaign officials and administration officials can appear before these organizations.

Q Right. But he never -- he did not repeat his two thousand and -- until today --

MR. CARNEY: Not that I’m aware of, Mara, but you would have to --

Q -- he never repeated his 2008 request for people not to give.

MR. CARNEY: I just said not that I’m aware of, right?

Q Okay, all right.

MR. CARNEY: Lara -- I mean Laura, sorry. Lara, Mara, Laura -- yes, Laura.

Q I was going to respond no matter what. (Laughter.) On the --

MR. CARNEY: Penelope, please, go ahead. (Laughter.)

Q On Proposition 8, the President -- is it still the -- or I should just say, in general, is it still the President’s view that same-sex marriage is an issue that should be decided by the states -- each individual state?

MR. CARNEY: However you might want to tease out an evolutionary position on this --

Q I’m just asking you what his position -- if his position has changed that states should make these decisions?

MR. CARNEY: I have no announcement of any changes in his position on this issue.

Q Well, given that that is his latest position that he’s stated, is that states should make the decision, why would he not be supportive of California making the decision through the vote in Proposition 8 to ban same-sex marriage?

MR. CARNEY: Well, because he opposes divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples. But again, I’m not commenting on specific litigation. I’m talking about his general opposition.

Q Then why wouldn’t any of the states that have banned -- all sorts of states have banned same-sex marriage. Are all of those divisive and discriminatory as well?

MR. CARNEY: I’m not -- I can’t at this moment stand here and analyze each one. I can just tell you the President’s long opposition to divisive and discriminatory efforts. And you know his position, where it stands now, on the issue of same-sex marriage, so I really don’t have much to add on that.

Q Well, but there’s a fundamental inconsistency -- correct me if I’m wrong -- if he says on one hand it’s up to the states to decide, but that those states who decide that they’re against it are divisive and discriminatory. So I just want to --

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I’m not offering a blanket -- I’m talking about general efforts that are divisive and discriminatory. I’m not making an assessment on specific states or state laws.

Q So, again, I would repeat the original question --

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have a better answer for you.

Q Well, how is this not just complete hypocrisy if he’s saying that it’s up to states to decide but he won’t back a state that does make the decision?

MR. CARNEY: Laura, I’m not going to comment on a specific litigation that is for a specific state. I can say that the President has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples. And his overall record on the issue of LGBT rights I think is well known and is one that he is very proud of.

Kristen.

Q I want to try just one more on Proposition 8. How does today’s ruling on Proposition 8 inform the President’s view on same-sex marriage, which he said is evolving?

MR. CARNEY: I just don’t have anything to add on that. The decision was made about, I don’t know, within the hour before I came out here, so I haven’t had that conversation with him.

Sam.

Q And without getting into actually --

MR. CARNEY: I don’t know. You’re asking me how his view has changed by this decision, and it happened an hour ago.

Q Have you talked to him about it at all?

MR. CARNEY: No, I have not.

Q Okay. And then one more, Jay. Speaker Boehner said of the President’s decision to support super PACs that it’s “just another broken promise.” And Russ Feingold said, “The President is wrong to embrace the corrupt corporate politics in Citizens United through the use of super PACs. It’s not just bad policy; it’s also dumb strategy.” Can you react to that and to the fact that this isn’t --

MR. CARNEY: Again, for your questions of strategy I would refer you to Chicago. And the President’s opposition to the Citizens United decision is well known. I suppose critics like the Speaker who are making this point should be also -- I think along that, they should talk about their refusal to back proposals to even require that donors be disclosed to the public and their absolute I guess support of the Citizens United decision, which allows somebody to write a $100 million check, potentially, and not disclose it.

As you know the decision that the campaign is making is for any administration official or campaign official who appears before an organization like this will only appear before those that disclose by law, and that is an important distinction.

But it is important to remember that the system as it is is not healthy, and this President has spoken out against it and will continue to work to take action to fix that.

Q But I guess what I’m asking is, hasn’t this opened him up to criticism from all sides?

MR. CARNEY: Look, I think criticism from all sides comes with the territory in politics. The President’s views are very well known on the Citizens United decision that allowed this circumstance to come about. For the strategic reasons that the campaign made this decision, I refer you to Chicago.

Sam.

Q Okay, one last try here. I’m just curious how you can be proactively -- or how the President can be proactively against divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny people civil rights, but not proactively be for the concept of marriage equality?

MR. CARNEY: Sam, I appreciate --

Q It’s good, it’s not --

MR. CARNEY: No, I --

Q It’s not a legal question, I don’t want to --

MR. CARNEY: I totally appreciate the question, but I am not here to announce a new position for the President --

Q I want you to just illuminate the current position --

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I would refer you to the comments the President has made on this issue, and I don’t have any changes to provide to you.

Donovan, and then April.

Q Thank you, Jay. I actually want to go back to contraception.

MR. CARNEY: Fabulous. (Laughter.)

Q I won’t read anything into that.

MR. CARNEY: Iran anyone? (Laughter.)

Q I actually just want to make sure I’ve got this right. It seemed like you suggested that the White House has always been open to a compromise during this grace period, but that maybe that point was overlooked in the initial coverage of the ruling. Is that a correct reading?

MR. CARNEY: On January 20th, when this decision was announced, Secretary Sebelius said, “We will continue to work closely with religious groups during this transitional period to discuss their concerns.”

That’s the point I’m making, is that in the initial coverage of the decision, the fact that this transitional period was put in place precisely to have these discussions with religious groups about their concerns was in many cases overlooked.

The point is not -- it’s not about a change in policy, it’s simply to shine a light on that announcement and the fact that this transitional period has been in place since the announcement, and that its purpose is to have these discussions so that we can see if there’s a way to ensure that we can implement the policy that provides important health care coverage of preventative services to women and also can allay some of these concerns that are expressed by religious groups, which the President takes seriously.

Q So is it -- would it be fair to say that the White House is not ruling out granting further exemptions?

MR. CARNEY: Look, the President is committed to providing -- to ensuring that the law provides the same coverage to all women of the important preventive services here that we’re discussing. There are enormous health benefits to providing those services, there are financial benefits, and the President is committed to doing that.

How the process moves forward in these discussions in terms of examining possible ways that we could potentially allay some of these concerns, there are a lot of different ideas out there, and I’m not going to sort of grade them from here, but that the whole purpose of the transition period was to have that discussion.

Yes, Brianna.

Q I was next.

Q To follow on that --

MR. CARNEY: I’m sorry. April is next, then Brianna. You are right. No, you --

Q I’m sorry -- thank you.

MR. CARNEY: You’re absolutely right. Short-term memory loss.

Q Okay, you need to get that checked. (Laughter.)

MR. CARNEY: What did she say?

Q You need to get that checked.

Q On the President’s --

MR. CARNEY: I do. (Laughter.)

Q On the President’s evolving mindset, when --

Q Which subject? (Laughter.)

Q Which subject? Prop 8, yes. Oh, okay. When will we have a firm decision on this evolution? You have strong groups -- groups that have strong thoughts and convictions on this -- LGBT groups; you have religious groups; you have civil rights groups and so many others. Will we see a decision by June or before the general election on his evolution of his mindset on this?

MR. CARNEY: I just don’t have a timetable to provide to you, April. I appreciate the question. This is -- as the President discussed when he answered this question a while back, this is a process that involves his faith and the way he views these issues, and as he said -- and I won’t go beyond that -- his views are evolving. But I don’t have an endpoint to that to announce to you or a date certain to tell you that he’ll have more to say about that issue.

Q He has strong support from the LBGT community. Is he in consultation with many members of that community about this evolving mindset? When is the last time --

MR. CARNEY: The President has a lot of conversations with a lot of people, and I can’t say one way or the other whether or not he’s had that discussion with anybody. He may have, but I’m not aware of it.

Yes, Brianna. You’re next.

Q Thank you. On the contraception issue, I’m just trying to kind of discern here, is the administration open to women employed by religious employers receiving coverage for contraception in a different way than women employed by non-religious employers?

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, without getting into different potential options --

Q Not the details, I’m just talking the concept.

MR. CARNEY: But no -- but I think your question illuminates an important issue here, which is the President’s interest at a policy level is in making sure that this coverage is extended to all women because it’s important financially. It’s important to individual woman’s health and also to health writ large for the country. So within that, that’s the -- on the one side.

And the other side of finding the right balance is concerns about religious beliefs and convictions. So we will in this transition period and these discussions seek to find ways to implement that policy that allay some of those concerns. I don’t want to predict because I don’t know what all the various possibilities those discussions will entertain, or predict how successful they will be in allaying everyone’s concerns about this issue.

But that is the approach the President is taking, and that is why when the decision was initially announced that Secretary Sebelius made clear that that process was put into place.

Q You had said last week that the decision, the ruling does strike a balance. And it sounds now like you’re saying he’s working -- or you’re working -- the administration is working towards finding a balance. I mean, there seems to be distinction there.

MR. CARNEY: Well, look, I think that the decision to exempt churches and houses of worship -- an exemption that, as I noted before, doesn’t even exist in I think eight states in the country -- represents an effort to find that balance, and he believes he found the appropriate balance.

But we’re going to continue to work with religious groups to try to allay their concerns as we implement a policy that provides this coverage to women across the country.

Q But on the issue of religious employers, because, I mean, I’ve spoken with and a ton of people here have spoken with people who are concerned about this. Maybe they don’t even -- the issue of contraception isn’t really an issue for them, but when it comes down to telling a religious employer of their religious persuasion what they can and cannot do that really bothers them, and so they want to know if there’s been a change, if there’s a distinction.

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, Brianna, I think that there’s a discussion that will take place about these issues. The President’s commitment is ensuring that this health care coverage is provided to women, and I think there are -- one important point to make, as we have this discussion, is that 28 states already require insurance companies to provide contraceptive services. Eight states, as I noted in the past, provide no exemption, not even the exemption that the policy announced by Secretary Sebelius provides, for churches and houses of worship.

So that is an important context within which to view the policy decision as well as this period of transition as we discuss the various concerns that have been raised.

Q Can I talk about Egypt?

MR. CARNEY: Do I want to talk about Egypt? Sure. (Laughter.)

Q Why in the world would the United States give $1.5 billion to Egypt at this time (inaudible)? And any update on the Americans?

MR. CARNEY: More editorializing from -- well, I think that -- I don’t have any update on I believe the situation that you’re referring to. I would refer you to the comments I made yesterday about our serious concern, grave concern about the crackdown on NGOs within Egypt, our concern about the Americans involved in this, and the fact that we are discussing our concern with all levels of the Egyptian government. And I would point you to the comments I made yesterday about the fact that we have made clear that the consequences of this action could potentially affect our relationship and could potentially affect the aid that we provide. But I don’t have anything more to say on that.

Steve.

Q Earlier you said something like you’re going to explore the possibilities of humanitarian aid for Syrians. How exactly would that --

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have anything more for you on that. I think that -- I don’t have mechanisms for that. But simply, I would point you to the Secretary of State’s comments about continuing to work with friends of the Syrian people, friends of Syria, to put pressure on the regime, to assist Syrians who are simply looking for a peaceful transition to democracy here for a post-Assad Syria, and the efforts that we’ll be involved in, working with our partners and allies, to see if we can help in that regard, even as we continue to ratchet up the pressure on the regime to get it to stop killing its own people.

Q Well, are you actively working on creating the group, friends of Syria group?

MR. CARNEY: Again, I think I can point you to the extensive comments by the Secretary of State.

Alexis, last one.

Q A quick question on super PACs. Do you have a policy personally, are you going to participate in campaign speaking -- appearing before Priorities USA?

MR. CARNEY: I don’t. I haven’t been asked. Maybe -- I think I’ll probably just be here talking to you guys. (Laughter.)

Q For free.

Q Is it the case -- is it your understanding up until this point no one from inside the White House has already spoken to a pro-Obama super PAC?

MR. CARNEY: That’s my understanding, yes.

Q That they have not done so? Was there a previous edict at that point?

MR. CARNEY: My understanding is that that is the change that has been made clear today, that there is a decision --

Q But there was an affirmative “do not speak”?

MR. CARNEY: Again, I would refer you to the campaign, but that is my --

Q No, but I’m asking you a White House question.

MR. CARNEY: Right, and I would -- but the campaign has done a lot more work on this issue. But that is my understanding, yes, Alexis.

Q Okay. And the last question on this question -- a couple weeks ago, David Axelrod, who obviously worked here, talked very pejoratively about Mitt Romney’s use of what he called the “dog whistle” to in an uncoordinated way signal to his super PACs what he wanted them to do -- “go get my” whatever. So what is different about the President’s effort today to signal that he would give this reluctant endorsement? Is that a dog whistle, too?

MR. CARNEY: Well, look, I think the distinction -- there are a couple of distinctions. One -- I’m not sure I understand the context of your question because I don’t remember those remarks, but two distinctions. One -- and whether they answer your question you’ll have to decide -- but the President will not be appearing before these groups. The Vice President will not be appearing before these groups. Neither will the First Lady or Dr. Biden. The groups that administration officials might be appearing before, and campaign officials might be appearing before, will be only those that disclose.

And in terms of the strategy behind that and why that decision was made within the context of this election season and this campaign season, I would refer you to Chicago.

Thanks, all.

Q Thank you.

END 2:50 P.M. EST

Readout of the President’s Call with Coach Coughlin of the New York Giants

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 22:10:00 +0000

This morning, President Obama called New York Giants head coach Tom Coughlin to congratulate him and the rest of the team on their recent Super Bowl victory. The President said that the team’s victory was a testament to Coach Coughlin’s leadership and that his team came across with true grit and determination. President Obama told Coach Coughlin that he looks forward to shaking his hand and congratulating the team in person when they visit the White House.

Remarks by the President at the White House Science Fair

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 21:14:22 +0000

East Room

11:53 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you so much. Thank you, everybody. Everybody have a seat.

Well, welcome to the White House Science Fair. (Applause.) It is -- I just spent some time checking out some of the projects that were brought here today, and I’ve got to say, this is fun. It’s not every day that you have robots running all over your house. (Laughter.) I am trying to figure out how you got through the metal detectors. I also shot a marshmallow through a air gun, which was very exciting. (Laughter.)

Science is what got several of our guests where they are today, so I just want to make a couple of introductions. We’ve got a real-life astronaut and the head of NASA, Charles Bolden, in the house. (Applause.) We have the Administrator of the EPA, Lisa Jackson is here. (Applause.) The Director of the National Science Foundation Subra Suresh is here. (Applause.) My science -- there’s Subra, over here -- my science advisor, John Holdren, is in the house. (Applause.) We’ve got a couple of people who’ve dedicated themselves to making science cool for young people. We’ve got Neil deGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye the Science Guy. (Applause.)

Now, it is fitting that this year’s fair is happening just two days after the Super Bowl. I want to congratulate the New York Giants and all their fans. (Applause.) I just talked to Coach Coughlin; I’m looking forward to having the Giants here at the White House so we can celebrate their achievements. But what I’ve also said -- I’ve said this many times -- is if we are recognizing athletic achievement, then we should also be recognizing academic achievement and science achievement. If we invite the team that wins the Super Bowl to the White House, then we need to invite some science fair winners to the White House as well. (Applause.)

Now I’m going to talk about how great all of you are in a second. But before I do, I want to give the parents a big round of applause because they work hard to help you succeed, and I know this is their day. They’re really proud of you. As a parent, I know that seeing your kids do extraordinary things brings the greatest happiness that a parent can have. So congratulations to all the parents of all these incredible young people. (Applause.)

But parents aren’t the only ones who helped you get this far. Every one of you can think of a teacher, or maybe a couple of teachers, without whom you would not be here. So I want you to promise that the next time you see those teachers, that you give them a big thank you, not just for yourselves but also from me. Because teachers matter. They deserve our support. And I want to make sure that we are constantly lifting up how important teachers are to making sure that not only you succeed, but this country succeeds. So give teachers a big round of applause. (Applause.)

Now, as I was walking around the science fair, I was thinking back to when I was your age. And basically, you guys put me to shame. (Laughter.) What impresses me so much is not just how smart you are, but it’s the fact that you recognize you’ve got a responsibility to use your talents in service of something bigger than yourselves.

Some of you, that means developing new products that will change the way we live. So Hayley Hoverter -- where’s Hayley? There she is, right over here -- invented a new type of sugar packet that dissolves in hot water. It’s flavorless, it’s colorless, and potentially could save up to 2 million pounds of trash each year -- and that’s just at Starbucks. (Laughter.) So MasterCard has already awarded her $10,000 to help turn her idea into a business.

Some of you are here because you saw a problem in your community and you’re trying to do something to solve it. Benjamin Hylak -- where’s Benjamin? There’s Benjamin right here -- was worried that folks at his grandmother’s senior center were getting lonely. So he built a robot with a monitor and a video camera, so it’s like a moving Skype. And it moves around the center, and it allows seniors to talk to their kids and their grandkids, even when they can’t visit in person. So inventions like Benjamin’s could make life better for millions of families.

For some of you, the journey you took to get here is just as inspiring as the work that you brought with you today. There’s a rocketry team from Presidio, Texas -- where’s my team here? Where are you? Stand up, guys. Stand up. This is part of the fourth-poorest school district in the state of Texas. And I was told that teachers cooked food to sell after church, supporters drove 200 miles to pick up donuts for bake sales, they even raffled off a goat -- (laughter) -- is that right? Just so they could raise enough money for the rocketry team to compete. And the majority of the kids at the school are ESL, English as a second language. And the presentation they made could not make you prouder. So way to go. (Applause.)

There’s a group of young engineers from Paul Robeson-Malcolm X Academy. And nobody needs to tell them the kinds of challenges that Detroit still faces. Where’s my team from Detroit? In the house -- there they are. Stand up. (Applause.) They believe in their city, and they’re coming up with new ideas to keep Detroit’s comeback going.

And there’s Samantha Garvey -- where’s Samantha? Just saw Samantha. There she is. Stand up, Samantha. (Applause.) Samantha spent years studying mussel populations in the Long Island Sound. And when she learned that she was a semifinalist for the Intel Science Talent Search, when she found this out her family was living in a homeless shelter. So think about what she’s overcome. She wants to, by the way, work maybe for NOAA or EPA. So this is Dr. Lubchenco, she’s the head of NOAA. (Laughter.) Lisa Jackson, right there, head of EPA. (Laughter.) You might just want to hook up with them before you leave. (Laughter and applause.)

The young people I met today, the young people behind me -- you guys inspire me. It’s young people like you that make me so confident that America’s best days are still to come. When you work and study and excel at what you’re doing in math and science, when you compete in something like this, you’re not just trying to win a prize today. You’re getting America in shape to win the future. You’re making sure we have the best, smartest, most skilled workers in the world, so that the jobs and industries of tomorrow take root right here. You’re making sure we’ll always be home to the most creative entrepreneurs, the most advanced science labs and universities. You’re making sure America will win the race to the future.

So as an American, I’m proud of you. As your President, I think we need to make sure your success stories are happening all across our country.

And that’s why when I took office, I called for an all-hands-on-deck approach to science, math, technology and engineering. Let’s train more teachers. Let’s get more kids studying these subjects. Let’s make sure these fields get the respect and attention that they deserve.

But it’s not just a government effort. I’m happy to say that the private sector has answered that call as well. They understand how important it is to their future. So today, led by the Carnegie Corporation, a group of businesses and foundations is announcing a $22 million fund to help train 100,000 new science and math teachers. A coalition of more than 100 CEOs is expanding innovative math and science programs to 130 sites across the country. And other companies are partnering from -- everybody from Will.i.am to Dean Kamen -- to make sure we celebrate young scientists and inventors and engineers, not just at the White House, but in every city and every town all across America.

And many of these leaders are here today, and I want to thank them for doing their part. We’re going to do everything we can to partner to help you succeed in your projects. And I’m proud to announce that the budget I unveil next week will include programs to help prepare new math and science teachers, and to meet an ambitious goal, which is 1 million more American graduates in science, technology, engineering and math over the next 10 years. That is a goal we can achieve. (Applause.) That’s a goal we can achieve.

Now, in a lot of ways, today is a celebration of the new. But the belief that we belong on the cutting edge of innovation -- that’s an idea as old as America itself. I mean, we’re a nation of tinkerers and dreamers and believers in a better tomorrow. You think about our Founding Fathers -- they were all out there doing experiments -- and folks like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, they were constantly curious about the world around them and trying to figure out how can we help shape that environment so that people’s lives are better.

It’s in our DNA. We know that innovation has helped each generation pass down that basic American promise, which is no matter who you are, no matter where you come from, you can make it if you try. So there’s nothing more important than keeping that promise alive for the next generation. There’s no priority I have that’s higher than President -- as President than this.

And I can’t think of a better way to spend a morning than with the young people who are here doing their part and creating some unbelievable stuff in the process. So I’m proud of you. I want you to keep up your good work.

I’m going to make a special plea to the press -- not just the folks who are here, but also your editors -- give this some attention. I mean, this is the kind of stuff, what these young people are doing, that’s going to make a bigger difference in the life of our country over the long term than just about anything. And it doesn’t belong just on the back pages of a newspaper; we’ve got to lift this up. We’ve got to emphasize how important this is and recognize these incredible young people who are doing things that I couldn’t even imagine thinking about at 5th grade or 8th grade or in high school.

And so pay attention to this. This is important. This is what’s going to make a difference in this country over the long haul. This is what inspires me and gets me up every day. This is what we should be focusing on in our public debates.

And as for all the folks who are here, don’t let your robots wander off anywhere. (Laughter.) All right?

Thank you, everybody. Appreciate it. Congratulations. (Applause.)

END
12:07 P.M. EST

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Visit of Brazilian President Rousseff

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 21:12:11 +0000

On April 9, President Obama will host President Dilma Rousseff of Brazil for meetings at the White House as part of the Leaders’ on-going dialogue regarding the growing partnership between the United States and Brazil across a wide range of issues. The Presidents will have the opportunity to follow up on progress made under the three presidential dialogues launched during President Obama’s March 2011 visit to Brazil – the Strategic Energy Dialogue, the Economic and Financial Dialogue, and the Global Partnership Dialogue. These meetings will also provide the two Leaders the opportunity to again meet with the U.S.-Brazil CEO Forum and continue efforts to grow commercial, economic, education, and innovation ties between our two countries.

President Obama looks forward to discussing cooperation on a host of other bilateral, regional, and multilateral issues, especially as he looks towards his participation in the Summit of the Americas in Colombia in April and the G-20 in Mexico in June.

$22M Fund to Kick-Off Effort by Cross-Sector Partnership to Hire, Develop, Retain Excellent STEM Teachers

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 16:00:00 +0000

$22M Fund to Kick-Off Effort by Cross-Sector Partnership to Hire, Develop, Retain Excellent STEM Teachers

Fund Announced in Response to White House Announcement on STEM Education at 2nd White House Science Fair

PR Newswire

WASHINGTON, Feb. 7, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Responding to President Barack Obama's announcement about the critical shortage of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) teachers first made in his 2011 State of the Union address and reinforced today at the second White House Science Fair, the 100Kin10 partnership announced an initial $22 million fund to help support the creative and strategic efforts of the partnership's more than 115 members to meet their respective—and measurable—commitments to bring more, excellent STEM teachers to American classrooms.

One year into the 100Kin10 initiative, which was created in response to the country's need for 100,000 excellent STEM teachers, partners have already made commitments to train over 40,000 STEM teachers in five years and to support and retain tens of thousands more.

Led by Carnegie Corporation of New York and Opportunity Equation, the movement is inspired by a vision of a future—shared by partners from federal agencies to states, museums to universities, teacher residencies to school districts, non-profits to corporations—where all students have the STEM literacy necessary to be full participants in the nation's economy and democracy.

"The country is at a critical juncture: Our need for STEM capacity in every part of our economy far outpaces our ability to train and keep great STEM talent," said Talia Milgrom-Elcott, program officer at Carnegie Corporation of New York who, with Maya (Agarwal) Lundhagen of Opportunity Equation, is leading the 100Kin10 effort. "100Kin10 takes the best of open, networked, bottom-up problem-solving and applies it to the complex challenge of securing and supporting 100,000 excellent STEM teachers in a decade. With the $22 million, funders are signaling to the country that solving this problem is a priority and that we can't use conventional means to do it."

The fund, contributed by 14 philanthropic, corporate, and community partners—including Carnegie Corporation, Google, Freeport McMoRan and the S.D. Bechtel, Bill & Melinda Gates, and Michael and Susan Dell foundations—will help make possible many of the partners' innovations in STEM teacher preparation and retention.

In addition to the fund, 100Kin10 partners are making more than 100 individual commitments, such as:

California State University will prepare 1,500 new math and science teachers annually through 2015, half of whom will teach in high-need schools for at least three years and 10% of whom will earn dual certification, addressing the needs of hard-to-staff schools.
National Math and Science Initiative will prepare 4,000 new STEM teachers from 31 UTeach sites by 2015.
Google will design a high-profile recognition program for the top 5% of STEM teachers nationwide.
Teach for America will recruit 11,000 STEM Corps members by 2015 and connect other qualified applicants to additional STEM teaching opportunities.
DonorsChoose.org will inspire 50,000 citizens to sponsor projects in math and science classrooms over the next two years, delivering $15M in critical classroom resources and helping 600,000 students nationwide.
University of Chicago will create a framework for organizing the learning that results from "100Kin10" investments and coordinate research among partners on key questions about STEM teacher recruitment, preparation, induction and development.

The complete list of 100Kin10 partners and their commitments is available at the 100Kin10 website, showcasing the breadth and depth of work being done to increase the supply of excellent STEM teachers; hire, develop and retain excellent STEM teachers; and build the 100Kin10 movement.

Note to Editor: On February 21 in Washington, D.C. 100Kin10 will convene its first Partner Summit. The Summit is designed to both celebrate and foster further collaboration among the more than 100 organizations that have made commitments toward the goal of 100Kin10.

Carnegie Corporation of New York is a philanthropic foundation created by Andrew Carnegie in 1911 to do "real and permanent good in this world." In education, the Corporation works to create pathways to opportunity for many more students by promoting systemic change and innovation in secondary and higher education. www.carnegie.org

The Opportunity Equation initiative promotes equity and excellence in mathematics and science education. A partnership between the Institute for Advanced Study and Carnegie Corporation of New York, Opportunity Equation engages national and local decision makers and thought leaders to carry out the recommendations of the Carnegie Corporation of New York-Institute for Advanced Study Commission on Mathematics and Science Education in its 2009 report, The Opportunity Equation: Transforming Mathematics and Science Education for Citizenship and the Global Economy. www.OpportunityEquation.org.

SOURCE Carnegie Corporation of New York

A BMCC Professor Compares the Candidate's Options -- Romney's Dilemma: Keep Swinging, or Dial it Back?

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:14:09 +0000

A BMCC Professor Compares the Candidate's Options -- Romney's Dilemma: Keep Swinging, or Dial it Back?

PR Newswire

NEW YORK, Feb. 7, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- As primary season continues, will Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney temper his message? Or will he continue hitting Newt Gingrich hard?

To view the multimedia assets associated with this release, please click http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/a-bmcc-professor-compares-the-candidates-options----romneys-dilemma-keep-swinging-or-dial-it-back-138812204.html

Either strategy has drawbacks, says political theorist and BMCC political science professor Geoffrey Kurtz. Romney's dilemma, according to Professor Kurtz, is to decide when it's in his best interest to come out swinging, and when he'd be better off dialing back the anti-Gingrich invective and making his appeal to the broader American audience.

"Even if he winds up as the Republican nominee, a long, negative primary campaign will almost certainly make him a less attractive candidate to the Americans in general," Kurtz says.

As November approaches, a second problem is whether Romney "is a good match for the American mood," says Kurtz. "Someone like Romney, who made his fortune in the finance sector, and is a son of privilege, doesn't fit the national mood. That could hurt him in the general election."

Not that Obama isn't also vulnerable.

"It's not clear that a former college law professor like Barack Obama fits the national mood either," say Professor Kurtz. "So we might find ourselves choosing between two candidates who have a hard time speaking to some of the discontent that American voters feel right now."

One way or another, that discontent will be a powerful factor in the coming election campaign. But with nine months to go before Election Day, there is no way to foretell the outcome with anything approaching certainty.

Stay tuned as BMCC professors and political analysts take the pulse of this contentious race.

Borough of Manhattan Community College (BMCC) of the City University of New York (CUNY) enrolls over 24,000 degree-seeking and 10,000 Continuing Ed. students a year, awarding Associate Degrees in 28 fields.

Contact: Barry Rosen
212-346-8503
brosen@bmcc.cuny.edu

SOURCE Borough of Manhattan Community College

President Obama to Host White House Science Fair

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:10:00 +0000

Administration and Private Sector Announce over $100 Million in Commitments and Additional Steps to Prepare 100,000 New Science, Technology, Engineering and Math Teachers

Today, President Obama will host the second White House Science Fair celebrating the student winners of a broad range of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) competitions from across the country. The President will also announce key additional steps that the Administration and its partners are taking to prepare 100,000 effective math and science teachers and to meet the urgent need to train one million additional STEM graduates over the next decade.

“When students excel in math and science, they help America compete for the jobs and industries of the future,” said President Obama. “That’s why I’m proud to celebrate outstanding students at the White House Science Fair, and to announce new steps my Administration and its partners are taking to help more young people succeed in these critical subjects."

The President hosted the first-ever White House Science Fair in late 2010, fulfilling a commitment he made at the launch of his Educate to Innovate campaign to inspire boys and girls to excel in math and science. Over the past year, the President met with the three young women who won the Google Science Fair, met a student robotics team on his bus tour through North Carolina and Virginia, and made a surprise appearance at the New York City Science Fair. The second White House Science Fair will include over 100 students from over 45 states, representing over 40 different STEM competitions that recognize the talents of America’s next generation of scientists, engineers, inventors and innovators. More than 30 student teams will have the opportunity to exhibit their projects this year, almost twice as many as the first White House Science Fair. The President will view exhibits of the student work, ranging from breakthrough research to new inventions, followed by remarks to an audience of students, science educators and business leaders on the importance of STEM education to the country’s economic future. For a sampling of the exhibits that the President will see, as well as more information on all the students, competitions and organizations being honored, click here.

President Obama believes that being an excellent STEM teacher requires deep content knowledge and strong skills in teaching that content. That’s why the President issued a national challenge to prepare 100,000 effective teachers with such skills in math and science over the next decade. Key steps being announced today to meet that goal include:

• A new $80 million investment to help prepare effective STEM teachers: The President’ upcoming budget will request $80 million for a new competition by the Department of Education to support effective STEM teacher preparation programs, such as those that allow students to simultaneously earn both a STEM degree and a teaching certificate, and provide undergraduates with early and intensive experiences in the classroom honing their skills.

• A new $22 million investment from the philanthropic and private sector to complement the Administration’s efforts: After the President issued his call to action to recruit and prepare 100,000 effective STEM teachers, over 115 organizations, led by Carnegie Corporation of New York and Opportunity Equation, came together to form a coalition called “100Kin10” to help reach the President’s goal. Today, 14 of those organizations – including Carnegie, Google, the S.D. Bechtel, Jr., Bill & Melinda Gates, Freeport McMoran, and Michael and Susan Dell Foundations – are announcing a $22 million fund to invest in STEM teacher preparation and support. In addition, other 100Kin10 partners are making over 100 individual commitments, such as:

o National Math and Science Initiative will prepare 4,000 new STEM teachers from 31 UTeach sites by 2015;

o Teach for America will recruit 11,000 STEM Corps members by 2015 and connect other qualified applicants to additional STEM teaching opportunities;

o Donors Choose will inspire 50,000 citizens to sponsor projects in math and science classrooms over the next two years, delivering $15M in critical classroom resources and helping 600,000 students nationwide;

o Google will share its talent management practices to help find, grow, and retain outstanding STEM teachers by partnering with districts and organizations for comprehensive reform and hosting talent academies with administrators and decision-makers;

o California State University will prepare 1,500 new math and science teachers annually through 2015, half of whom will teach in high-need schools for at least three years and 10% of whom will earn dual certification, addressing the needs of hard-to-staff schools, and

o University of Chicago will create a framework for organizing the learning that results from “100Kin10” investments and coordinate research among the partners.

A complete list of partners and their commitments is available at www.100Kin10.org.

• A STEM focus in upcoming Race to the Top competition: The President strongly believes that systemic reform at the state and district level will be critical to our success in improving STEM education and providing for excellent STEM teaching, such as creating alternative pathways for STEM professionals to enter the classroom and expanding opportunities for “hands-on” STEM learning for children, especially those from underrepresented groups. To ensure that STEM remains a component of systemic education reform, the Department of Education will again include a focus on STEM criteria in the upcoming Race to the Top competition.

• New policies and investments to recruit, support, retain and reward excellent STEM teachers: To improve the teaching and learning of STEM and encourage our best STEM teachers to stay in the profession, we must implement a system that recognizes and rewards teacher excellence. That’s why, this year, the Department of Education will devote a portion of its upcoming $300 million Teacher Incentive Fund competition to support state and local efforts to improve compensation, evaluation, and professional development systems for STEM educators. In addition, the Department of Education will provide new incentives to improve the quality of teacher preparation programs by targeting TEACH Grants to students attending top-tier schools, and focusing on a smaller number of more meaningful outcome indicators about their quality and impact on teacher performance. Concurrently, the National Science Foundation will continue to emphasize the quality of teacher preparation programs and plans for innovation in its Noyce Fellowships program.

In addition, President Obama believes that the United States must once again lead the world in college attainment, and that a larger number of those graduates need to be prepared to compete for high-paying STEM occupations. A report released today by the President’s Council of Advisors in Science and Technology (PCAST) concluded that one million additional STEM graduates are needed over the next decade to fill the growing number of jobs that require STEM skills. The report finds that:

• Fewer than 40 percent of students who enter college intending to major in a STEM field complete a STEM degree;

• Increasing the retention rate from 40 to 50 percent would provide three-quarters of the million STEM graduates needed; and

• Colleges and universities can significantly increase their retention rates by improving faculty instructional practices, helping students rapidly improve their entry level math skills, and creating multiple pathways to excel in STEM, particularly for underrepresented groups.
Key steps being announced today to meet the need for 1 million more STEM graduates include:

• A priority on undergraduate STEM education reform in the President’s upcoming budget: The President will announce more than $100 million in investment by the National Science Foundation to improved undergraduate STEM education practices through its programs such as Widening Implementation and Demonstration of Evidence-based Reforms (WIDER), Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (TUES), and programs that impact community colleges and minority-serving institutions. This will support the development, identification and scale-up of educational practices that increase the number of STEM graduates and the quality of their preparation. In addition, the Department of Education’s proposed First in the World competition will include a STEM priority.

• A new K-16 education initiative jointly administered by Department of Education and the National Science Foundation: In addition, to support comprehensive reform efforts in K-16 education, the President’s budget will fund a jointly administered initiative to improve mathematics education, with $30 million from the Department of Education and $30 million from the National Science Foundation. This initiative will develop, validate and scale up evidence-based approaches to improve student learning at the K-12 and undergraduate levels through a “tiered-evidence framework” to maximize of impact of mathematics education investments.

In addition, responding to the President’s call to action to leading companies, foundations and others to do more to get boys and girls engaged and excelling at STEM education, additional private sector commitments being announced today include:

• CEO-led coalition Change the Equation expanding high-quality STEM programs to over 130 new sites, impacting 40,000 students: A little over a year ago, President Obama announced the launch of Change the Equation, an effort by over 100 CEOs to come together to dramatically improve STEM learning by leveraging their investments, unique capabilities, and voice. Change the Equation announced today that 24 Change the Equation member companies have come together to expand five effective STEM programs in more than 130 new sites. These new sites benefit nearly 40,000 students nationwide, over half of whom are in low-income schools. The programs are igniting learning and enthusiasm in students and teachers alike by exposing them to more exciting and rigorous learning opportunities in science, technology, engineering and math. More information is available at the Igniting Learning website, www.ignitinglearning.org. In its first year, Change the Equation also released powerful Vital Signs reports on the condition of STEM learning in every state, harnessed the best thinking of the coalition to develop tools to foster effective philanthropy, and advocated for stronger state policies to improve STEM learning.

• A new campaign to get students imagining the future, and excited about science: As part of the President’s Educate to Innovate campaign, Time Warner Cable has already committed over $100 million to connect a million more students to compelling hands-on after-school science opportunities. As a key next step, Time Warner Cable is announcing today - as part of its philanthropic STEM initiative, Connect a Million Minds, and in partnership with i.am FIRST, founded by artist, entertainer and entrepreneur will.i.am - a new competition for kids. Kids will be challenged to use their creativity and imagination to invent something that could make a difference in their own lives (or even people and communities around the world), and demonstrate how STEM can bring their ideas to life. Starting February 21st, kids can submit their ideas online at www.wouldntitbecoolif.com, with the finalists being able to pitch their ideas live to will.i.am, inventor Dean Kamen and other guest judges. Fahrenheit 212, a leading design and innovation firm, will help bring the winning idea to life. Other campaign partners include FIRST and the Boys & Girls Clubs of America.

• Expanding the pipeline of talent by getting more STEM students to college with their “Posse”: Today, the Posse Foundation, an effective program to bring under-represented, urban students from diverse backgrounds to college and help them graduate, is announcing a commitment to create a “STEM Posse” in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New Orleans, New York and Washington D.C. To meet its goal, Posse has already secured support from five universities: Brandeis University, Franklin & Marshall College, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Texas A & M University and Bryn Mawr. The Posse Foundation started because of one student who said, “I never would have dropped out of college if I had my Posse with me.” Since its founding in 1989, Posse has sent 4,223 urban public high school students to college in multicultural teams of 10 students—Posses – with a persistence and graduation rate of 90 percent. The Posse Foundation piloted its first “STEM Posse” at Brandeis University in 2008, with promising early results of 100 percent graduation, with the majority of participants interested in pursuing graduate or professional degrees in a STEM field.

• Cognizant’s “Making the Future” afterschool & summer program: Cognizant is announcing the launch of its first two Making the Future Afterschool & Summer Programs this month at the DreamYard Art Center in Bronx, NY and the Newark Museum in Newark, NJ. These programs are part of Cognizant’s Making the Future program, created in collaboration with the New York Hall of Science, Maker Faire, and the Maker Education Collaborative, and is designed to unleash the passion of young people in STEM disciplines by creating fun, hands-on learning opportunities. The DreamYard program will feature hands-on “maker” projects blending STEM and the Arts for 12-14 year olds in the Morrisania neighborhood, a culturally and historically rich area of the poorest congressional district in the nation. The Newark Museum will provide a school time STEM apprenticeship for 9th and 10th graders from the Big Picture Learning High School in Newark, NJ. Cognizant is working with community organizations to bring the program to hundreds of communities across the US over the next 5 years.

Business Coalition Igniting Learning in Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology for Thousands of Youth

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:41:40 +0000

Business Coalition Igniting Learning in Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology for Thousands of Youth

PR Newswire

Successful School-Business Partnerships Featured at White House Science Fair

WASHINGTON, Feb. 7, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- At the White House Science Fair on Feb. 7, students participating in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) programs supported by Change the Equation member companies are among students from across the country who will be recognized for their STEM feats.

These students exemplify the "extraordinary accomplishments made possible when students are exposed to high-quality, engaging and hands-on STEM learning opportunities," said Linda Rosen, CEO of Change the Equation (CTEq), a non-profit organization dedicated to mobilizing the business community to improve the quality of STEM learning in the United States. Together, CTEq member companies made available for the first time a set of proven, highly-effective STEM programs to tens of thousands of students.

Fountain-Fort Carson High School (CO) student Arimus Wells credited the National Math and Science Initiative (NMSI) for providing his school access to Advanced Placement math, science and English courses. The NMSI program was made possible through the financial support of CTEq-member company ExxonMobil.

Wells enrolled in all the senior level AP courses offered and said they have "greatly benefited my academics by providing me with the ability to exercise my intellect and think critically about various issues. I have been able to experience a quality education that will adequately prepare me for future endeavors." Wells plans to pursue a degree in urban planning and public policy with a minor in business administration.

East Mecklenburg High School (NC) freshman Kayla Burriss has been part of her school's new Academy of Engineering, which was made possible through business support and involvement. The small school-within-a-school learning community will equip high school students with the science and math skills to study engineering in college. Kayla's mother, Michelle Paige, who is accompanying her daughter to the White house Science Fair said, "I have definitely seen a change in Kayla. She talks about her engineering course and has begun to change her goals and is looking toward the future. Kayla has increased confidence and excitement about what she can do and when she completes her goals she will be the first one to graduate from college in her family."

This is one of nearly a dozen career academies in high schools throughout the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools system, which were created by the nonprofit National Academy Foundation. Seed funding for the Academy of Engineering was made possible by the AT&T Foundation, with additional support provided by other CTEq-member companies Xerox, Verizon, and Motorola.

One of the goals for East Mecklenburg's Academy of Engineering is to increase the number of minority and female engineers, a shared goal of the CTEq membership said Rosen. "A deliberate effort among the coalition is to bring more high-quality STEM learning opportunities to minorities and female students, both of whom are underrepresented in STEM professions."

The programs created at these two schools represent a small fraction of the corporate philanthropy directed toward increasing the number of high-quality STEM learning opportunities nationwide. In September 2010, President Barack Obama issued a challenge to the CEO members of Change the Equation to bring a handful of excellent, research-based learning programs to 100 new sites within a year.

CTEq member companies handily exceeded the president's challenge and expanded five high-quality STEM programs to 134 schools, reaching nearly 40,000 additional students across America. Igniting Learning (www.ignitinglearning.org) showcases the U.S. business community's commitment to create enthusiasm and deepen the STEM knowledge and skills of both students and teachers through these five programs:

Advanced Placement Training and Incentive Program (APTIP)
Engineering is Elementary
FIRST (For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology)
K-8 Math Progressions
National Academy Foundation

A full list of the CTEq's members participating in this scaling up effort is below.

Change the Equation (CTEq) is an unprecedented non-profit, non-partisan initiative of business leaders who are connecting and aligning their philanthropy and advocacy to transform science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) learning in the United States. www.changetheequation.org.

CTEq Members Participating in Expansion Effort:

Agilent
Advanced Micro Devices
BAE Systems
Bechtel
Cognizant
Comcast
Deloitte
EMC(2)ExxonMobil
Google
Hewlett-Packard
IBM
Intel
Lockheed Martin
Motorola
Northrop Grumman
Proctor & Gamble
Raytheon Company
Synopsys
Texas Instruments
Time Warner Cable
Verizon
Xerox
ThermoFisher Scientific

SOURCE Change the Equation

Statement by the Press Secretary on the Visit of Danish Prime Minister Thorning-Schmidt

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:11:54 +0000

President Obama will host Prime Minister Thorning-Schmidt of Denmark for a meeting in the Oval Office on Friday, February 24. Denmark and the United States are close NATO allies and the President looks forward to thanking the Prime Minister for Denmark’s important contribution to the NATO mission in Libya and for its continuing commitment to the ISAF operation in Afghanistan. The two leaders will discuss preparations for the upcoming NATO Summit in Chicago, including proposals for supporting the transition in Afghanistan, increasing Alliance defense capabilities, and advancing NATO’s relationships with key partners. With Denmark currently holding the European Union presidency, the President and Prime Minister will talk about the recent European summit and the latest steps that Europe is taking to address its sovereign debt crisis. The President and the Prime Minister will also discuss common efforts on counterterrorism, counterpiracy, green growth, economic development, Arctic cooperation and support for the democratic transitions in North Africa and the Middle East.

President Obama to Host White House Science Fair

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 22:12:24 +0000

Event Will Highlight Winners of National Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) Competitions

WASHINGTON, DC -- On Tuesday, February 7th, President Obama will host the second White House Science Fair celebrating the student winners of a broad range of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) competitions from across the country. The President will also announce key steps that the Administration and its partners are taking to help more students excel in math and science, and earn degrees in these subjects.

At the fair, the President will view exhibits of student work, ranging from breakthrough research to new inventions, followed by remarks to an audience of students, science educators and business leaders on the importance of STEM education to the country’s economic future.

The President hosted the first-ever White House Science Fair in late 2010, fulfilling a commitment he made at the launch of his Educate to Innovate campaign to inspire students to excel in math and science. As the President noted then, “If you win the NCAA championship, you come to the White House. Well, if you're a young person and you produce the best experiment or design, the best hardware or software, you ought to be recognized for that achievement, too.” In addition, over the past year, the President met with the three young women who won the Google Science Fair, met a student robotics team on his bus tour through North Carolina and Virginia, and made a surprise appearance at the New York City Science Fair.

Senior Administration Officials Attending
John Holdren, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, Director, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)
Subra Suresh, Director, National Science Foundation (NSF)
Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Charles F. Bolden, Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
Jane Lubchenco, Administrator, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
Patrick Gallagher, Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
Carl Wieman, Associate Director for Science, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)
Stephen Van Roekel, Federal Chief Information Officer
Harold Varmus, Director, National Cancer Institute

Additional Information on the Exhibits, Students and Competitions at the White House Science Fair
The second White House Science Fair will celebrate over 100 students from over 45 states, representing over 40 different competitions and organizations that work with students and inspire them to excel in STEM. More than 30 student teams will have the opportunity to exhibit their projects this year, almost twice as many as the first White House Science Fair.

A sampling of the exhibits at the White House Science Fair include:

• Student “Making” and Starting Small Business to Sell his Invention. Fourteen year old Joey Hudy from Phoenix, Arizona is already a Maker Faire veteran. He invented an Extreme Marshmallow Cannon and an LED Cube Microcontroller Shield, which he has exhibited at Maker Faires in New York, San Francisco, and Detroit. He received 2 Editors Choice Awards from Maker Faire, and has started a small business selling the microcontroller (Arduino) shield kits on several websites. As the World's Largest Do-It-Yourself Festival, Maker Faire is the premier event for grassroots American innovation.

• Designing a More Efficient Way to Collect Solar Energy. Aidan Dwyer, a middle school student hailing from Northport, New York, won first place in the American Museum of Natural History’s 2011 Young Naturalist Award for his study of a more efficient way to collect solar energy. Modeling the natural design of tree limbs which Aidan predicted must serve a benefit for the trees to optimize sun collected to feed photosynthesis in the short, dark days of winter, Aidan worked to devise a potentially more efficient way to collect solar energy.

• Seventeen-Year Old Girl Designing Targeted Cancer Treatment. Angela Zhang, a seventeen year old senior from Monta Vista High School in Cupertino, California, won the $100,000 Grand Prize in the Individual category of the Siemens Competition in Math, Science and Technology for using nanotechnology to eradicate cancer stem cells. Cancer stem cells (CSCs) are responsible for initiating and driving tumor growth yet are often resistant to current cancer therapies. In her research, Angela aimed to design a nanosystem to target drug delivery to these cancer stem cells, which could potentially help overcome cancer resistance, minimize undesirable side effects, and allow for real-time monitoring of treatment efficacy.

• Teenage CEO Inventing Dissolvable Sugar Packets to Reduce Waste. Hayley Hoverter, a 16 years old student from Downtown Business Magnet High School in Los Angeles, California, won first place at the 2011 Network For Teaching Entrepreneurship's National Challenge for her idea for patent-pending ecologically conscious dissolvable sugar packets. Hayley, now CEO of Sweet (dis)SOLVE, started her business as a part of the Network for Teaching Entrepreneurship’s (NFTE's) business plan competition.

• Improving the Environment One Community at a Time. Isabel Steinhoff, Rico Bowman, Genevieve Boyle, and Mina Apostadiro, of Kohala Middle School in Kapaau, Hawaii, took first place in the grade 6-8 division of the Siemens “We Can Change the World” Challenge, for their household battery recycling effort to collect 6,000 batteries in 60 days. The team, named 6000 in 60, embarked on a campaign to improve their community’s use and disposal of batteries by giving local people information on the environmental harm of batteries disposed improperly along with providing local opportunities for recycling.

• Fifteen-Year Old Student Modeling Brain Control of a Robotic Arm. Anand Srinivasan, a fifteen-year old sophomore from Roswell High School in Roswell, Georgia, qualified as a top 15 Finalist in the 2011 Google Science Fair. Anand used data recorded via electroencephalography (EEG) from his brain and, after coupling it with the custom software that he wrote, used it to control a home-built robotic arm. Anand believes that this technology could be put to use for amputees and patients suffering from paralysis and muscular dystrophy.

• Team of Girl Scouts Seeking Patent on Prosthetic Hand Device Which Enables a Young Girl to Write. A group of middle school-aged Girl Scouts from Ames, Iowa, including Gaby Dempsey, Mackenzie Gewell, and Kate Murray developed a patent-pending prosthetic hand device, winning them the inaugural Global Innovation Award at the FIRST LEGO League competition, beating out nearly 200 other submissions. Their invention was in response to the need of a little old girl in Duluth, Georgia, enabling her to write for the first time although she was born without fingers on her right hand. Their patent pending BOB-1 has earned the girls the Heartland Red Cross Young Heroes Award, scholarships at Iowa State University College of Engineering, recognition on the Floor of the Iowa and the US House of Representatives, and the title of finalists for the 2011 Pioneer Hi-Bred Iowa Women of Innovation Awards.

• Using Genes to Improve Farming. Dyersburg High School senior, Maryanna McClure, made Tennessee Future Farmers of America history by becoming the first student from the Tennessee FFA Association to win the National FFA Agriscience Fair, placing first in Division II of the Zoology event, for her study of Cotswold sheep genetics. Maryanna breeds, raises, and markets sheep and their fleece and was inspired to do a project to research how to breed the natural color of sheep back into the industry. The National FFA Agriscience Fair is a competition for FFA members grade 7-12 who conduct a scientific research project pertaining to the agriculture and food science industries.

• Young Women Rocketing to Nationals. Janet Nieto and Ana Karen of Presidio, Texas were members of the Presidio High School Rocketry Team that competed as a National Finalist in the Team America Rocketry Challenge (TARC) in 2009, 2010, and 2011. Gwynelle Condino, a 7th grade student at Lucy Franco Middle School, also of Presidio, Texas, is the leader of her TARC team this year. All three girls have successfully competed in a number of rocketry challenges and have attended the NASA Student Launch Initiative Advanced Rocketry program.

• High School Student Developing System to Detect Nuclear Threats. The Davidson Academy of Nevada student Taylor Wilson, 17, of Reno, Nevada conducted research on novel techniques for detecting nuclear threats and developed an environmentally friendly, cost-effective, and highly sensitive system capable of detecting small quantities of nuclear material. Taylor’s system, which won him the Intel Foundation Young Scientist Award and Best of Category in Physics, could be used as a monitor at ports to scan cargo containers for Uraniam-235, Weapons Grade Plutonium, and Highly Enriched Uranium.

• Young Students Developing a Sanitizing Lunchbox. Sixth graders Ma’Kese Wesley and Isis Thompson and their LEGO robotics team from the ACE Collegium Campus in Kansas City, Missouri researched ways in which they could improve food safety. Their invention, a UV-light lunchbox, sanitizes food between when it is packed in the morning and a student opens to eat it at lunchtime. A UV light, which is turned on by a darkness-detecting sensor when the lunchbox is closed, kills bacteria that could make the food unsafe to eat. The FIRST LEGO League competition aims to engage kids ages nine to fourteen in engineering.

• Succeeding at Science Even in Difficult Circumstances: Samantha Garvey, 18, of Bay Shore, New York, attends Brentwood High School -Sonderling Center in Brentwood, New York. From a field of over 1,800 applicants, Samantha has been named a semifinalist for her Intel Science Talent Search 2012 environmental sciences project examining the effect of physical environment and predators on a specific species of mussel. Despite personal obstacles, Samantha believes her education will bring her and her family a better life.

• Student Designing a Robot to Connect Senior Citizens with their Families. Concerned with the loneliness of seniors at his grandmother’s senior living center, fourteen-year old Salesianum High School (Wilmington, DE) student Benjamin Hylak of West Grove, Pennsylvania, built an interactive robot, which qualified him as a BROADCOM Masters 2011 Finalist. His telepresence robot which moves around the center and allows seniors to connect via Skype with their family and friends when they are unable to visit in person, earned him second place in the BROADCOM Masters Engineering Category.

• Building an Award-Winning Robot and Learning Entrepreneurial Lessons. Morgan Ard, Titus Walker, and Robert Knight, III, 8th grade students at Monroeville Jr. High School in Monroeville, Alabama won high honors at the South BEST robotics competition. BEST teams mimic industry by designing and developing a product and delivering it to market, including a marketing presentation, engineering notebook, trade-show style exhibit booth and robot competition. Through the experience, these middle school students not only learned the innovation and engineering necessary to develop an award-winning robot, but the marketing and business skills that spark true entrepreneurial spirit.

• Writing a Video Game that Focuses on Saving the Environment. Eleven year old Hannah Wyman who attends St. Anna's School in Leominster, Massachusetts, won the grand prize in her age group (9-12) for her video game Toxic, in Microsoft's first-ever U.S. Kodu Cup. In Hannah’s game, which is now available for free on the Kodu Game Lab site, a player must solve puzzles and collect coins in order to remove soot from trees, zap pollution clouds to clean the air, and convince friends to plant more trees, all in an effort to save the environment.

• Developing a Portable Disaster Relief Shelter. Jessica D’Esposito, Colton Newton and Anna Woolery from Petersburg, Indiana are representing the Pike Central High School InvenTeam, one of fifteen schools selected nationwide. They won a grant from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to develop a lightweight, portable disaster relief shelter, designed to be complete with a water purification system and a renewable energy source to power an LED light, which could be used after disasters such as hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, or tornadoes to house people who have been displaced.

• Detroit Students Imagining the Energy Efficient City of the Future. The Paul Robeson/Malcolm X Academy student team from Detroit, Michigan, competed in the Michigan Regional Contest of the National Engineers Week Future City Competition for the second year in a row. Lucas Cain Beal, Jayla Mae Dogan, and Ashley Cassie Thomas, all aged 13, were part of a team that won the Excellence in Engineering Award at the 2012 Michigan Regional Competition focused on designing a city around the theme of "Fuel Your Future: Imagine New Ways to Meet Our Energy Needs and Maintain a Healthy Planet." After being named Best Rookie Team in 2011, the students had to overcome losing their school to a fire. Despite the adversity and having to merge with another school, the students were energized to take on the Future City challenge again, saying “(Future City) helps me make a better city to live in.”

• Re-Designing a Helmet to Better Protect U.S. Troops. Eleven-year old Jack Dudley of Stone Hill Middle School and Sydney Dayyani of Belmont Ridge Middle School are members of a Virginia team that designed a military helmet to protect soldiers from traumatic brain injuries on the battlefield due to improvised explosive devices (IEDs). Both young students have previously competed in national science competitions and this past year won first place in the 2011 Toshiba/NSTA ExploraVision competition with their HEADS UP! Helmet. The helmet is a redesign of the standard-issue military helmet and is equipped with bullet and shrapnel-stopping gels and highly sensitive temperature and air pressure sensors to notify medical personnel of the presence and level of brain injury.

• Designing a Mine Detecting Device. Marian Bechtel, a 17-year old Hempfield High School student from Lancaster, Pennsylvania was inspired to take on the serious issue of abandoned landmines which are still found in many places around the world and investigated an innovative method for safe demining. Marian’s design could lead to a simple, cheap, and reliable humanitarian demining tool and earned Marian honors as a Finalist at the 2011 Intel International Science and Engineering Fair. Marian also won a second place award from the American Intellectual Property Law Association, a merit award from the Society of Exploration Geophysicists, a $1,000 award from the U.S. Army, and has recently been named an Intel Science Talent Search 2012 finalist.

• Developing A Concussion-Detecting Helmet to Combat Sports Injuries. Fifteen year old Peninsula High School (Rolling Hill Estates, CA) freshman Braeden Benedict from Rancho Palos Verdes, California developed a low-cost impact detection device for use on youth and high school contact sport helmets. Braeden’s invention, winning him the top prize of America’s 2011 Top Young Scientist at the 2011 Discovery Education 3M Young Scientist Challenge, will allow coaches and trainers to be alerted that a player has received a hit with enough force to cause a concussion.

• Student Programmer Creating Dynamic Educational Video Game. Jasper Hugunin, a thirteen year old eighth grade student from Island Middle School on Mercer Island, Washington, developed a video game which introduces players to programming concepts as they provide instructions to guide a robot through increasingly challenging mazes. This clever design of “Robot Commander” won Jasper the Playable Game, Open Platform and Playable Game, and Incorporating STEM Themes categories at the National STEM Video Game Challenge.

• Exploring Improvements to Cancer Treatments by Overcoming Chemotherapy Resistance. Shree Bose, a 17-year old senior at Fort Worth Country Day School in Fort Worth, Texas, took top honors at the 2011 Google Science Fair for her discovery of a way to improve ovarian cancer treatment for patients when they have built up a resistance to certain chemotherapy drugs. Her conclusions hold tremendous potential for the improvement of cancer chemotherapy treatment and for future research. Shree has presented her research at numerous international competitions and has been honored as one of Glamour Magazine's 21 Amazing Young Women of 2011, spoken at TEDxWomen 2011, and served as a panelist at Google Zeitgeist.

Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 2/6/2012

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 22:10:00 +0000

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

12:39 P.M. EST

MR. CARNEY: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thanks for coming to the White House for your daily briefing. Before I take questions let me read a brief announcement.

On Wednesday, February 29th, President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama will host a dinner at the White House to honor our armed forces who served in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation New Dawn, and to honor their families. This dinner, an expression of the nation's gratitude for the achievements and enormous sacrifices of the brave Americans who served in the Iraq war, and of the families who supported them, will include men and women in uniform from all ranks, services, states and backgrounds, representative of the many thousands of Americans who served in Iraq.

The White House has been working with military and civilian leaders from the Department of Defense on this tribute, and we will release more details regarding the dinner when they become available.

Q Are you describing this as a state dinner --

MR. CARNEY: I'm sorry?

Q Is that a fair description, the sort of shorthand of saying a state dinner style?

MR. CARNEY: No, I think it's unique to the kind of dinner it is. A state dinner has to do with heads of government, heads of state, but --

Q I understand the definition, but is it fair to -- similar formality?

Q Will it be fancy like that?

Q Is it buffet? (Laughter.)

MR. CARNEY: When we have --

Q I mean, using that shorthand would be incorrect or correct?

MR. CARNEY: I think state dinner probably is not quite accurate. And we'll have more details to describe it for you. It's really focused on the men and women who served in Iraq and in all stations within the armed services. So I think one distinction might be that state dinners are about the elevated and important guests that we have visiting from other countries, and these would be for all those who served.

Q In Iraq?

MR. CARNEY: In Iraq, yes, this is Iraq.

Q A couple of hundred people?

MR. CARNEY: I don't have the number on it.

Q What's the date again?

MR. CARNEY: February 29th.

Q Black tie?

MR. CARNEY: I don't have that either. I think the folks in uniform tend to wear their uniforms. But I don't have any dress or menu or entertainment.

With that, I'll take questions. Ben. Or I'll take more questions, rather.

Q Thanks, Jay. Questions on Iran and Syria -- first on Iran. Is what the President did today on broader sanctions and also the prospect of more sanctions this spring an indication that the White House is at all worried that Israel will act on its own on a military front before these really -- these sanctions have a chance to kick in?

MR. CARNEY: No, I think that it is reflective of the policy that we’ve taken for quite a long time now in reaction to Iranian behavior, which is essentially a dual-track, where we continue to have an offer to the Iranians that if they get serious about their international obligations, if they respond to the letter from Lady Ashton about starting negotiations with the P5-plus-1, if they agree to give up their nuclear weapons ambitions, then there is an option for them to rejoin the international community.

Meanwhile, because they haven’t done that and they've so far refused to do that, and they continue to pursue a course that is dangerous, we will ramp up the effort to isolate and pressure the regime, working with our international allies.

I think the President addressed the question regarding Israel during his interview with Matt Lauer over the weekend.

Q Right. But I mean, given that the development has happened today, or we learned about it today, about the additional sanctions --

MR. CARNEY: I can assure that the -- remember, Ben, that we have been -- there has been a steady increase in our sanctions activity, and this is part of that escalation and it’s not related to -- specifically to that issue or the questions about it.

Q That issue about the Israel -- the Israeli --

MR. CARNEY: Correct.

Q On Syria -- since we last saw you, the U.N. Security Council rejected the peace plan supported by the United States, pushed hard for by the United States. Violence has continued. Obviously we had the closing of the embassy. And the President said in the NBC interview that he thinks that the noose is tightening on the Assad regime. I’m just wondering, what is that based upon? It seems to a lot of outsiders that Assad is operating freely.

MR. CARNEY: Well, there's no question that he is operating with gross disregard for the health and safety and welfare of his own people. He is killing his own people. And as we witness this, it only reinforces the need for the international community to act, and reinforces the disappointment we have with members of the United Nations Security Council who did not vote with the rest of the international community in favor of the anti-Syria resolution -- the anti-Syrian regime resolution.

The fact of the matter is that the pressure on Assad continues to intensify. He’s been -- he has dwindling financial resources. He has dwindling access to what he needs to continue to govern. His regime has lost control of parts of the country. There are a number of indications of the desire to depart from the regime by senior Syrian government and military officials. These are telltale signs that Assad's future is very limited at best.

And we continue to work with the international community to do everything we can to enhance the pressure on him, to make it clear to everyone that they should not want to place a bet on the Assad regime because that is a losing bet -- and it is a losing bet in pure realpolitik terms, but it's also a losing bet, obviously, in terms of being on the right side of the people of Syria.

Q One last one on this. Given that killing that you've described, is the President personally frustrated with those who block the international effort, particularly China and Russia?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I think that what I just said reflects our view, which is that those who voted against the resolution need to realize that betting everything on Assad is a recipe for failure -- not just for the interests of those countries, but for the stability of the region and for Syria's future.

What we've seen, the video that we've seen just most recently coming out of Syria demonstrates the appalling actions of the government forces. And you have a great number of countries -- obviously the United States, Europe and Arab countries -- who see this for what it is. And we will continue to work with our international partners to make that case.

Q China was part of the double veto that was passed in the Security Council against the Syria resolution. And of course this is one -- a little over one week before Chinese Vice President Xi visits Washington. What, if anything, will President Obama have to say to the Vice President about this subject when they meet?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I don't have an agenda in terms of the discussions for those meetings. I think that we've made clear our disappointment that those votes were cast. There's obviously a range of issues to be discussed in our bilateral relationship with China that will be discussed during that visit.

Q Would this have an impact on relations -- with either China or Russia.

MR. CARNEY: Well, I think, again, we've -- this is about what the international community's response to Syrian actions should be. It has been -- there has been a great deal of collective action taken against the Syrian regime thus far; there will be greater action taken. And we're going to work with all the friends of Syria and the Syrian people to continue to pressure the Assad regime, to continue to make clear that Assad's days are numbered. I think that we will also, obviously, continue to work with the Chinese and the Russians on a host of other issues, even as we press this point, obviously.

Q Secretary Clinton did call on, as you mentioned, the friends of Syrian democracy to band together to help the Syrian opposition, political opposition. Is there any thought being given to giving assistance, military assistance, to the rebels that are fighting Assad?

MR. CARNEY: We believe that the right solution in Syria is a political solution. And there remains an opportunity for that to be achieved, for that transition to democracy to take place. That’s why we felt, and we continue to feel, it's so important for the international community to act in the way that a Security Council resolution would have embodied. And we'll continue to work with our international partners in this regard -- because the best solution here is a political solution. Broadly speaking, we take no options off the table. But our focus is on using our diplomatic, economic and other means to help bring about and usher in a democratic transition.

Q Can we talk about Egypt?

MR. CARNEY: Sure.

Q Do we know how many Americans are actually in Egypt of those named in the judge's order?

MR. CARNEY: Bill, I don’t want to get into specifics about the order. We're deeply disturbed by the crackdown against NGOs in Egypt, including the filing of charges against Americans. Groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, and many others, both American and Egyptian, have done nothing wrong. Their only assignment is to support Egypt in its transition to democracy.

These groups and individuals associated with them do not fund political parties or individual candidates. Many of these groups have worked in Egypt for several years, and so their activities are not new. Moreover, they also served as observers for the recent parliamentary elections at the request of the government of Egypt.

Now, we continue to communicate at all levels with the Egyptian government on our grave concerns regarding the crackdown against NGOs in Egypt. We have underscored how serious a problem these actions are. We have said clearly that these actions could have consequences for our relationship including regarding our assistance programs. So we'll continue to work with the Egyptians.

Q What would it take to trigger a cutoff of the $1.5 billion of U.S. aid?

MR. CARNEY: I don't want to speculate about what that would be. We've made clear that we take this very seriously, that it could have consequences -- these actions could have consequences for our relationship, including our assistance programs. But I don't want to speculate about what actions might precipitate a response on our part along those lines, except to say that we take this very seriously.

It is important to remember that these institutions have been over there for a number of years, they're all over the country promoting democracy, and that the individuals here have done nothing wrong.

Q Some of the people who were named are actually in the United States, some of the U.S. citizens, but some, obviously, are over there and we know that some are in the embassy. Do you have any idea how many?

MR. CARNEY: Bill, I don't want to get into specific numbers or names. There are some Americans who have opted to stay in the embassy compound in Cairo while waiting for permission to depart Egypt. I just don't feel that it's wise to get into more details on that.

Q So at what level are discussions about these people continuing?

MR. CARNEY: I think at every level and very high levels. You know that the President spoke with General Tantawi a number of days ago, and discussions from that level on down continue because we take this issue very seriously.

Q But he hasn’t spoken to any of the top leadership --

MR. CARNEY: I don't have any new communications involving the President to read out to you now. But you can be sure that we are engaging with the Egyptian government on this issue at every level.

Q Get to Iran?

MR. CARNEY: Sure.

Q Can we stay on the same -- stay in the region? So yesterday in the interview with Matt, the President said --

MR. CARNEY: He's Matt to you. (Laughter.) He means Matt Lauer. (Laughter.)

Q So weird, just having a nice conversation here. Mr. Carney. (Laughter.) The interview with Mr. Lauer, the President seemed to -- I guess correct me if I'm wrong -- it sounded like the President was contradicting the intelligence report that the folks gave to Capitol Hill earlier in the week about this idea that Iran is looking for a way to attack the United States, which came out in an intelligence briefing to Congress. The President seemed to say that wasn’t the case. So what's -- it just sounded like a contradiction as far as the intelligence community is concerned.

MR. CARNEY: You know I'm not going to get into, with any detail, discussions of intelligence regarding Iran or anywhere else from here. The President made clear that -- and I will just refer you to his comments about what he assesses and we assess their current intentions and capabilities to be. That doesn’t mean that we don't hear from a variety of channels, including very public ones, the negative intentions of certain Iranian leaders towards the United States and statements that can be bellicose or hostile. However, I would just point you to what the President said about what his and our assessment of that capacity right now.

But it is -- Iran is a very dangerous place, it's a dangerous regime, and we take specifically the refusal to abandon their nuclear ambitions very seriously.

Q When the President said Israel hasn’t made a decision yet about attacking Iran, it should be implied that the United States has made a decision that it's not going to happen in the next three months?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I wouldn't imply anything at all except to the explicit comment the President made, which -- well, two things -- one, we have greater military and intelligence cooperation with Israel than we have ever had, and that what he told NBC was that he believes that Israel has not made a decision about what action to take or whether or not to take the action that's been discussed.

Q Has the United States made a decision?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I'm not going to get into that kind of assessment. What I will say is that we believe that the course that we're pursuing with regards to Iran is the right one; that the sanctions have had significant impact on the Iranian economy. They have helped exacerbate tensions within the Iranian leadership that are now quite apparent, whereas when President Obama took office, Iran was unified and the world was not with regards to Iranian nuclear ambitions; the opposite is now true. And that has had, I think, the effect of making clear to the world that the problem here is Iranian behavior.

Now, we will continue to pursue that course and press for change in behavior by the Iranian regime, even as, as the President has made clear on a number of occasions, we do not remove any options from the table.

Q Are you taking credit for that? Are you taking credit for the tensions within the Iranian leadership?

MR. CARNEY: I’m just saying that they contribute to --

Q No, no, I know. But are you saying that your policies have helped exacerbate the tensions?

MR. CARNEY: Contribute to -- there is no question that the impact of the isolation on Iran and the economic sanctions on Iran have caused added turmoil within Iran. And that has had an impact at a variety of levels, most demonstrably on the economy and on the currency.

But, again, the unity that Iran enjoyed, if you will, with regards to this issue three years ago has gone, and the -- by contrast, the international community has united behind the position that the President has taken with our allies and partners to pressure Iran, to try to force Iran to change its behavior.

Q Can we go back to --

MR. CARNEY: Hold on one second. Let me go to Wendell.

Q Jay, on Israel, can I --

MR. CARNEY: Can I just go -- I’m going to work my way back to you, Connie. Thanks.

Q So Syria and Egypt -- Secretary Clinton has called for -- suggested the formation of a contact group of like-minded nations to step up the pressure on Assad’s regime. Have you begun preparing for that? How would it work?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I would refer you to the State Department for more details. I think that we have been working very closely with a number of partners and allies both in the region and around the world as we have worked to put pressure on Assad, and we’ll continue to do that. We’re carefully considering a full range of options, and we’ll work closely with our allies and others to help the people of Syria put an end to this criminal regime.

Q You don’t want to suggest how that might be more effective than what we’re doing now?

MR. CARNEY: I think that we’re pursuing a variety of means to put pressure on the Assad regime, to isolate it further. I mean, the fact is Assad is running out of money, and we will make sure -- we will work, rather, to make sure that he is unable to finance his continued crackdown. And that involves coordination with our allies and partners -- those who believe, as we do, that it’s time for Assad to go, because the Syrian people deserve a transition to democracy.

Q And what about weapons and the ability to sell weapons to the Syrians?

MR. CARNEY: Again, we believe that a political solution is the right course here and that that opportunity remains. And that's why we need to act. That's why we felt that the United Nations Security Council should act. But we are continuing to work with our international allies and partners who believe, as we do, that the behavior of the Assad regime is unacceptable and reprehensible.

Q And on the charges against NGOs in Egypt, can we assume that prosecution would cross a line?

MR. CARNEY: Wendell, I don't want to, again, speculate about what actions would prompt what reactions. We are deeply concerned about the crackdown against NGOs. We're concerned about the ability of Americans to -- who have done nothing wrong -- to leave the country. And we are working at every level of the Egyptian government to resolve this issue.

Q Does the Egyptian government know what would affect U.S. aid? Has it been made clear to them?

MR. CARNEY: I think we have made clear, both in our public statements and in our private communications, how seriously we take this and that these actions could have consequences for our relationship and for our assistance programs.

Q On Syria, two days ago, the U.S. failed to get action at the highest global diplomatic forum there is, the Security Council. Have you given up on the Security Council? Do you think there's a chance that you could go back to the Security Council? And what does it do to have you evacuate the American embassy in Damascus today? What point does that make?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I'll start with the second part. As you know, we've been drawing down our personnel at the embassy for some time because of security concerns, and that is why we have closed that embassy today. Ambassador Ford and all American personnel have now departed the country. That's a reflection of the situation in Syria with regards to the safety of those individuals.

We will continue to work at every level to coordinate with those who believe, as we do, that action needs to be taken; that we cannot -- that it is not the right course to help prop up the Assad regime, that we need to continue to put pressure on him and his cronies, if you will, and to further isolate him, limit his access to financial resources, and therefore make it harder and harder for him to maintain this crackdown. As you know, he's lost control of part of the country already. And we will work with all friends of Syria -- of the Syrian people, rather -- to mount the pressure on Assad going forward.

Q With that kind of political resolution of it, President Obama is willing to wait it if takes weeks, months, a year?

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I don't want to speculate on how this will play out. I will simply say that we need to act to allow a peaceful political transition to go forward before the regime's escalating violence puts a political solution out of reach.

Jon-Christopher.

Q Jay, can you be specific at all about any conversations that the President might have had with his allies, including Prime Minister Cameron or President Sarkozy or Chancellor Merkel?

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have any new conversations to read out. We are obviously coordinating with all of our international allies and partners both at the United Nations and within the region. But I don’t have any specific conversations to read out to you.

Jackie.

Q When Prime Minister Netanyahu comes to this country to speak to APEC, will he also be meeting with the President? And if not, why not?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I just don’t have a scheduling update for you on that, but I'm sure we'll have something for you in due time.

Connie.

Q Thank you. The President said something very important the other day. He said the U.S. was walking in lockstep with Israel -- I believe that was his quote. Does that mean that the U.S. is coordinating with Israel on any strike against Iran?

MR. CARNEY: I'm not going to -- I don’t recall the quote being quite as you described it. What I would say is, the President made clear that our level of cooperation with Israel, militarily and in intelligence matters, has never been higher. We've made that point repeatedly, because I think it demonstrates this country's commitment to Israel's security.

But it does not -- obviously, Israel is a sovereign country and it has very legitimate concerns about Iran's development of a nuclear weapons capacity. And we share those concerns -- there is no question.

Yes.

Q Can I ask you a question about a domestic issue, the contraception coverage debate? It seems like the backlash not just among Catholic clergy but also liberal Catholics is growing. And I'm wondering if the White House miscalculated when it seems to have not taken into account the reaction you would get, even from erstwhile allies of yours on this issue; and if there was any effort made to find a kind of middle ground, like asking employees of Catholic institutions to go out and buy a rider for contraceptive coverage if they want that?

MR. CARNEY: Mara, what I think is the case is that early on, after this decision was made, there was some misreporting about what it is and what it isn’t. I think lost in the initial reports is the fact that this policy provides for an exemption for churches and houses of worship -- and exemption that doesn’t exist in eight states in this country, including places like Georgia and Wisconsin. It did not make clear that there are 28 states that require these kinds of preventive services to be included in insurance policies for women, as this policy does.

We sought a lot of opinion as this policy process took place and -- behind the idea of trying to find the right and appropriate balance between religious concerns, on the one hand, and the need to provide health care coverage to women across the country. And here, I think is an important point to note, is that, again, churches, houses of worship are exempted from this policy. Those institutions --

Q What about Catholic --

MR. CARNEY: -- where women of all faiths, many faiths, work need to have the same kind of coverage that all other American women have.

So we will continue for the coming year -- as I think also was a little bit lost in the coverage of this -- to work with those religious institutions to try to implement this policy in a way that ensures that women have access to preventive care, but tries to allay the concerns of these institutions -- because we take very seriously people’s religious beliefs and their objections. And that is the balance that we have sought in this policy, and it is the balance that we'll seek in these conversations going forward.

Q But in these conversations going forward, are you going to consider something like, I think the state of Hawaii has a opportunity for women to go and purchase a rider just for contraception if they want to --

MR. CARNEY: I don’t -- that’s sort of beyond my policy expertise in terms of what kinds -- what could be contained within the conversation. But I want to make clear that the President’s -- or the Secretary’s decision, and the President concurs with it, is that this coverage needs to be available to all American women.

Q Are you looking at other ways of providing it that might have --

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, we will work with institutions to try to implement this is in a way that assures that the coverage is provided and that attempts to allay the concerns that are there.

Q Now that we're on domestic topics -- on the unemployment numbers that came out on Friday, unaligned economists cheered them as very good news -- not to diminish that. Still, there are 19 million underemployed or unemployed Americans. How concerned is the White House that these numbers will inevitably have to take a dip before we see real recovery as these people reenter the workforce?

MR. CARNEY: I think there are -- some of those who I suppose don’t wish us well politically have tried to make a point about this. And the facts are that in these most recent numbers this is not an issue of people leaving the workforce, that the numbers are positive across the board. Now, what we have said --

Q But that’s a reality. That’s not a political point to score. I mean, that’s a reality that people stopped looking for work and then they have to reenter. So that not’s point-scoring.

MR. CARNEY: Well, let’s look at some of the facts, which include that a number -- a large percentage of that is due to younger people getting more education, which in the end is an economic positive. There are also -- there is a fact that this increase in the number of people leaving the workforce has been a trend and a fact since 2000 because of an aging population -- which is not to say that this is wholly -- it's not something that I would wholly disregard as an issue. But the underlying fact here is that job creation remains the paramount objective in our economic policy, and should be the paramount objective of Congress as well.

I think I have -- if those folks in the back are with me -- I have a slide I can point to you --

Q We’ve seen that.

MR. CARNEY: If I might -- maybe not, we’ll see.

Q Doesn’t it seem familiar from tweets and --

MR. CARNEY: I mean, the issue here is that everything we can do --

Q Oooh --

Q Who does the clicking on that? (Laughter.)

MR. CARNEY: It’s a magic clicker. Look, I think what’s important to note here is the size of the hole we were in and the steady progress that has taken place since the President’s policies have taken effect. And we need to continue to work with Congress, for example, to extend the payroll tax cut through the end of the calendar year. As the President said and has said, we need to do that without drama and without delay, and Congress needs to make sure that it doesn’t do anything to muck up the progress that we have made so far.

Q When the President was speaking to Mr. Lauer, he used the term -- (laughter) --

Q Someday it will be Sir Lauer.

MR. CARNEY: Matthew to his mother. (Laughter.)

Q -- he used the term "deserve." I think he said, "I deserve a second term." Does anyone deserve to be President? What did he --

MR. CARNEY: The point the President was making, I think, is one that this chart elucidates, which is that he has worked every day since he was sworn into office on his number-one priority, which he articulated even before he ran for President -- it was why he got into politics to begin with -- which is to ensure that those struggling to stay in the middle class, to better their lot, and those struggling to get into it, have been under pressure for quite a long time. And he's determined, as President, to do everything he can to change that dynamic.

And when he came into office, we were in economic free-fall, as you know.

Q -- but the use of that word?

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, the context was based on his performance and his administration's performance on economic policy. The question was, do you deserve reelection, and the issue is, since he came into office, a terrible trend has been reversed. The problem is that the hole was so deep caused by the Great Recession that we still have a great deal of distance to travel.

And that's why we cannot reverse course. We cannot allow Congress to muck up the progress we've made. We must extend the payroll tax cut. We must extend unemployment insurance. And we must do the other things that the President put forward in the State of the Union that ensure that we have an America built to last -- that American manufacturing continues to rebound; 50,000 of those jobs, private sector jobs created last month were in American manufacturing, a sector that had been in chronic decline for many, many years.

We need to continue to develop the skills for American workers that will allow them to compete in the 21st century. And we need to make sure that we do all of it as we return to the kind of American values that ensure that everybody gets a fair shot and that everybody plays by the same set of rules.

Q And this can be a quickie. The Department of Justice has been working with states' attorneys general to get a housing settlement with some of the big banks, so they get off the hook on some things in exchange for creating a fund to help out hurting homeowners. Is the administration making calls to some of the AGs who have refused to sign on to urge them to sign on?

MR. CARNEY: I don't have an update for you on the so-called housing settlement. I think it's important to note that, as I understand it, the settlement that we're talking about here has to do with robo-signing and those issues, and not the broader set of issues involved in mortgage-backed securities and that sort of thing. But I don't have a progress update for you on that or any kind of details in terms of our engagement on the issue.

Yes, Roger.

Q Back to yesterday and the Super Bowl -- (laughter.)

Q Sorry, Jay --

Q Well, that gets to my question --

MR. CARNEY: Well, I was born here, so I'm a Redskins fan. I know it's complicated, because I'm a Red Sox fan, but that's because I didn't have a baseball team growing up.

Q You mean the team that beat the Giants twice?

Q On the Chrysler ad featuring Clint Eastwood --

MR. CARNEY: That's right, the Redskins did beat the Giants twice. Go figure.

Q Did the White House or the campaign have any role in the creation of that ad, or advising on that ad, or consulting on the ad?

MR. CARNEY: No.

Q Were you pleased with the ad?

MR. CARNEY: It was news to me when I saw it. Look, I think --

Q Do you consider it an in-kind contribution from Clint Eastwood?

MR. CARNEY: I mean, the answer to your question, Roger, is no. The ad points out, I think, what is significant -- a company that has rebounded obviously wants to sell more cars, and that's what advertising is about. But it does point out a simple fact, which is that the automobile industry in this country was on its back, and potentially poised to liquidate three years ago, and this President made decisions that were not very popular at the time that were guided by two important principles: One, that he should do what he could to ensure that 1 million jobs would not be lost; and two, that the American automobile industry should be able to thrive globally if the right conditions were created, and that included the kinds of reforms and restructuring that Chrysler and GM undertook in exchange for the assistance from the American taxpayer.

He was not willing to allow -- did not believe it was necessary to allow the American automobile industry to collapse and disappear. And so he made the decisions he made, and believes they were the right decisions.

Andrei.

Q Thank you, Jay. Back to Syria, please. Of course, the Russians and probably the Chinese, too, say that they are not supporting the Syrian regime. What they are supporting is the international legal regime -- the international legal norms that exist in relations between states. They do not want anyone, including the United States, to pick a regime they don't like, inside rebelling against that regime or trying -- you understand what I am talking about. Basically what you just presented to us was a rhetorical political, even economic aggression against a regime. My question is very simple: What are the specific legal grounds on which you do this, you base this -- in the absence of a resolution?

MR. CARNEY: Andrei, I would refer you to the United Nations, to our mission there, and to the State Department. What you saw, and what you see today, is a broad international consensus against the behavior of the Assad regime, the brutal killing of the Syrian people. We think that's wrong. And we agree with many of our partners and allies around the world and in the region when we say that. I think, again, the images that we've seen just this weekend demonstrate that the kind of behavior being carried out by the Syrian forces under the control of the Assad regime is vile and unacceptable.

So that is why we supported the United Nations Security Council resolution, and it's why we'll continue to work with our allies and partners to further isolate and pressure the Assad regime, to allow the Syrian people the opportunity to choose their own future. That's the approach we take.

Q Jay, if I may, one additional question. I actually wanted to ask you about -- to remind you that lynching -- lynching is illegal in the United States. You need to have a court of law. But I will not ask about that. I will ask you about -- can you tell me --

MR. CARNEY: Andrei, I feel like it might be 1982 and it's --

Q Maybe, I don't know. Lynching is illegal. Many like-minded people form a posse, hunt somebody down --

MR. CARNEY: Andrei, do you have a question?

Q I have a question. The question is, can you assure me that you are not working inside Syria through your special forces -- whatever it is -- the working military?

MR. CARNEY: I'm sorry, what's the question? Are we --

Q Is the United -- can you tell me that United States is not taking any military steps to undermine the government --

MR. CARNEY: I think we've made very clear that we are pursuing a political and diplomatic course with regards to Syria. And we will continue to do so.

Alexis.

Q Jay, you were talking about Congress. What, if anything, is new on the status of marching towards the expiration date for the payroll and UI and Medicare? We're a couple weeks away from that. What's been going on here to try to work towards a solution that doesn't end up with an 11th-hour crisis with the negotiations?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I think that we've made clear, the President has made clear, that Congress needs to act without drama and without delay to ensure that the payroll tax cut is extended through the end of the year, that the unemployment insurance benefits are extended, and that the so-called doc fix is extended.

I mean, the kind of economic growth that I was just pointing out to you and the kind of job creation that we saw in January needs to be continued. And in order to help that process forward, we in Washington shouldn't take steps that undermine economic growth and job creation. And certainly a failure to extend the payroll tax cut for 160 million Americans would be just the sort of step that could do that.

So we're in conversations with folks on the Hill. This is a process being led by the Hill. It should be fairly simple. We'll see if that is in fact the case. But we believe that everyone in Congress -- Republicans and Democrats alike -- should see it as the right thing to do to make sure that 160 million Americans don't have their taxes go up on March 1st, and to make sure at a macro level that steps are taken that ensure that we continue positive economic growth, and we continue positive job creation.

Jerry, and then Leslie.

Q Jay, yesterday Governor O'Malley mentioned that some of the reaction to the President's HHS policy was rooted in politics as opposed to in conscience. Does the President accept that premise?

MR. CARNEY: I didn't see those comments, and --

Q It was on CNN. He was talking about the bishops’ letters, and said that many of the bishops are Republicans.

MR. CARNEY: I didn’t see that. I think that we have worked to find the appropriate balance between religious beliefs and the need to provide preventive services to American women, and to ensure that American women have access to those services regardless of where they work. And we have carved out an exemption for churches and other houses of worship, and we will work, going forward, with institutions where the employer is affiliated with a church, for example, but where many, many of the employees are of all faiths, to find a way to ensure that the policy is implemented and that all women have access to these services that also deals with the concerns that have been expressed.

Q Right. But when you were answering the question to Mara you said that part of the reason that people are upset about this is because it’s been misreported. What he was saying is that it’s also people with a political ax to grind --

MR. CARNEY: Again, I didn’t see that. I didn’t watch all the Sunday shows, and I just don’t -- I don’t have a -- I think what we see here is the need to find the appropriate balance between concerns on the one hand and the obligation to provide services to all American women.

Eleanor.

Q You seem to be suggesting that you’re looking for some sort of a balance, that this isn’t a done deal. And as part of that, how do you answer criticism that government is forcing religious institutions to pay for services they find morally objectionable?

MR. CARNEY: I really don’t have any more of an answer, Eleanor. I think that we decided, the administration decided, the President agrees with this decision, that we need to provide these services that have enormous health benefits for American women, and that the exemption that we carved out is appropriate. And we will continue to have discussions about ways that the implementation can be done that might address some of these concerns. But the policy itself is clear.

Q The argument is over the fact that people don’t consider it appropriate.

MR. CARNEY: Well, I understand that there have been objections and that some people disagree with us, and we are going to work with institutions that have concerns here. But I think it’s important to note that we believe that these services are important and that American women deserve to have access to that kind of insurance coverage regardless of where they work.

Leslie.

Q Jay, I wanted to go back to Syria. Secretary Clinton’s remarks yesterday, she mentioned that the U.S. is going to seek regional cooperation on more sanctions, including to dry up the source of funding in arms shipments -- will work to expose those who are still funding the regime and sending them weapons. Can you elaborate on who the U.S. has identified in terms of sending the weapons --

MR. CARNEY: I won’t -- I can’t elaborate on identifying countries or individuals. But I think that what I’ve been saying here should echo what Secretary Clinton said about our approach going forward in trying to further isolate and pressure the Assad regime.

Last one.

Q A question on China’s Vice President Xi’s visit. Ben Rhodes said the other day the economy will definitely be on agenda. And also, Jake Sullivan, from State Department, say North Korea and Iran would be on agenda. So what else will be on the agenda? And also, what will the President say to Mr. Xi on Iran?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I don’t want to preview the President’s conversations or whatever comments he might make, or the Vice President’s. The fact is that we have an important and multilevel bilateral relationship with China and a number of issues are always on the agenda when we sit down with Chinese leadership, and that will be the case with this visit as well.

Thank you, all.

END
1:24 P.M. EST

President and First Lady Host Dinner Honoring Troops Who Served in Iraq

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 20:11:33 +0000

On Wednesday, February 29, President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama will host a dinner at the White House to honor our Armed Forces who served in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation New Dawn and to honor their families. This dinner --- an expression of the nation's gratitude for the achievements and enormous sacrifices of the brave Americans who served in the Iraq War and of the families who supported them --- will include men and women in uniform from all ranks, services, states and backgrounds, representative of the many thousands of Americans who served in Iraq. The White House has been working with military and civilian leaders from the Department of Defense on this tribute, and will release more details regarding the dinner when they are available.

Message-- Blocking Property of the Government of Iran and Iranian Financial Institutions

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 17:12:26 +0000

TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES:

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") that takes additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared in Executive Order 12957 of March 15, 1995.

In Executive Order 12957, the President found that the actions and policies of the Government of Iran threaten the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States. To deal with that threat, the President in Executive Order 12957 declared a national emergency and imposed prohibitions on certain transactions with respect to the development of Iranian petroleum resources. To further respond to that threat, Executive Order 12959 of May 6, 1995, imposed comprehensive trade and financial sanctions on Iran. Executive Order 13059 of August 19, 1997, consolidated and clarified the previous orders. To take additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared in Executive Order 12957 and to implement section 105(a) of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-195) (22 U.S.C. 8501 et seq.) (CISADA), I issued Executive Order 13553 on September 28, 2010, to impose sanctions on officials of the Government of Iran and other persons acting on

behalf of the Government of Iran determined to be responsible for or complicit in certain serious human rights abuses. To take further additional steps with respect to the threat posed by Iran and to provide implementing authority for a number of the sanctions set forth in the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-172) (50 U.S.C. 1701 note) (ISA), as amended by CISADA, I issued Executive Order 13574 on May 23, 2011, to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to implement certain sanctions imposed by the Secretary of State pursuant to ISA, as amended by CISADA. Finally, to take additional steps with respect to the threat posed by Iran, I issued Executive Order 13590 on November 20, 2011, to authorize the Secretary of State to impose sanctions on persons providing certain goods, services, technology, information, or support that contribute either to Iran's development of petroleum resources or to Iran's production of petrochemicals, and to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to implement some of those sanctions.

I have determined that additional sanctions are warranted, particularly in light of the deceptive practices of the Central Bank of Iran and other Iranian banks to conceal transactions of sanctioned parties, the deficiencies in Iran's anti-money laundering regime and the weaknesses in its implementation, and the continuing and unacceptable risk posed to the international financial system by Iran's activities.

The order also implements section 1245(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) (NDAA) by blocking the property and interests in property of Iranian financial institutions pursuant to IEEPA.

The order blocks the property and interests in property of the following:

The Government of Iran, including the Central Bank of Iran;

Any Iranian financial institution, including the Central Bank of Iran; and

Persons determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, 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.

The prohibitions of the order do not apply to property and interests in property of the Government of Iran that were blocked pursuant to Executive Order 12170 of November 14, 1979, and thereafter made subject to the transfer directives set forth in Executive Order 12281 of January 19, 1981, and implementing regulations thereunder. In addition, nothing in the order prohibits transactions for the conduct of the official business of the Federal Government by employees, grantees, or contractors thereof.

I have delegated to the Secretary of the Treasury the authority, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to carry out the blocking-related 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 have also delegated certain functions and authorities conferred by section 1245 of the NDAA to the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of State in consultation with other appropriate agencies as specified in the order.

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

BARACK OBAMA

Executive Order -- Blocking Property of the Government of Iran and Iranian Financial Institutions

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 17:10:00 +0000

EXECUTIVE ORDER
- - - - - - -
BLOCKING PROPERTY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF IRAN
AND IRANIAN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) (NDAA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, in order to take additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared in Executive Order 12957 of March 15, 1995, particularly in light of the deceptive practices of the Central Bank of Iran and other Iranian banks to conceal transactions of sanctioned parties, the deficiencies in Iran's anti-money laundering regime and the weaknesses in its implementation, and the continuing and unacceptable risk posed to the international financial system by Iran's activities, hereby order:

Section 1. (a) All property and interests in property of the Government of Iran, including the Central Bank of Iran, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person, including any foreign branch, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in.

(b) All property and interests in property of any Iranian financial institution, including the Central Bank of Iran, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person, including any foreign branch, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in.

(c) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person, including any foreign branch, of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported,

withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, 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 this order.

Sec. 2. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the type of articles specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to section 1 of this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in Executive Order 12957, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 1 of this order.

Sec. 3. The prohibitions in section 1 of this order include but are not limited to: (a) the making of any
contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; and

(b) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

Sec. 4. (a) The prohibitions in section 1 of this order apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date of this order.

(b) The prohibitions in section 1 of this order do not apply to property and interests in property of the Government of Iran that were blocked pursuant to Executive Order 12170 of November 14, 1979, and thereafter made subject to the transfer directives set forth in Executive Order 12281 of January 19, 1981, and implementing regulations thereunder.

Sec. 5. (a) Any transaction by a United States person or within the United States that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

Sec. 6. Nothing in section 1 of this order shall prohibit transactions for the conduct of the official business of the Federal Government by employees, grantees, or contractors thereof.

Sec. 7. For the purposes of this order: (a) the term "person" means an individual or entity;

(b) the term "entity" means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization;

(c) the term "United States person" means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States;

(d) the term "Government of Iran" means the Government of Iran, any political subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including the Central Bank of Iran, and any person owned or controlled by, or acting for or on behalf of, the Government of Iran;

(e) the term "Iran" means the territory of Iran and any other territory or marine area, including the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf, over which the Government of Iran claims sovereignty, sovereign rights, or jurisdiction, provided that the Government of Iran exercises partial or total de facto control over the area or derives a benefit from economic activity in the area pursuant to international arrangements; and

(f) the term "Iranian financial institution" means a financial institution organized under the laws of Iran or any jurisdiction within Iran (including foreign branches), any financial institution in Iran, any financial institution, wherever located, owned or controlled by the Government of Iran, and any financial institution, wherever located, owned or controlled by any of the foregoing.

Sec. 8. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render those measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in Executive Order 12957, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 1 of this order.

Sec. 9. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order, other than the purposes described in section 11. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate any of these functions and authorities to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order.

Sec. 10. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to exercise the functions and authorities conferred upon the President by section 1245(d)(1)(A) of the NDAA and to redelegate these functions and authorities consistent with applicable law. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby further authorized to exercise the functions and authorities conferred upon the President by section 1245(g)(1) of the NDAA to the extent necessary to exercise the other functions and authorities delegated in this section and may redelegate these functions and authorities consistent with applicable law.

Sec. 11. The Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Energy, and the Director of National Intelligence, is hereby authorized to exercise the functions and authorities conferred upon the President by section 1245(d)(4)(D) of the NDAA and to redelegate these functions and authorities consistent with applicable law. The Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, is hereby further authorized to exercise the functions and authorities conferred upon the President by sections 1245(e)(1) and 1245(e)(2) of the NDAA and to redelegate these functions and authorities consistent with applicable law. The Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, is hereby further authorized to exercise the functions and authorities conferred upon the President by section 1245(g)(1) of the NDAA to the extent necessary to exercise the other functions and authorities delegated in this section and may redelegate these functions and authorities consistent with applicable law.

Sec. 12. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Sec. 13. The measures taken pursuant to this order are in response to actions of the Government of Iran occurring after the conclusion of the 1981 Algiers Accords, and are intended solely as a response to those later actions.

Sec. 14. This order is effective at 12:01 a.m. eastern standard time on February 6, 2012.

BARACK OBAMA

DiploNews Reviews the State of Cyberwar in the U.S.

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 12:35:00 +0000

DiploNews Reviews the State of Cyberwar in the U.S.

As part of its ongoing efforts to deliver timely analysis to its clients, DiploNews recently reviewed the state of the United States' trajectory towards recognizing cyberwar as a space for the Defense Department to operate in both in policy and law

PR Newswire

PARIS, Feb. 6, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- As a country that is used to being dominant in the more traditional sense, the U.S. has been working to come to grips with a new sense of supremacy as a result of cyber threats, says a report released today by DiploNews. Even with a team of people responding to a threat, all it takes is one skilled person to continue to execute a cyber attack unaffected and even unnoticed. Thus, the possibilities for supremacy do not favor those with the most money, staff, or equipment. Instead, supremacy belongs to the one with the most knowledge and who can hide himself and his work the best.

According to the DiploNews report, the U.S. has taken steps towards allowing cyberwarfare. The most recent step includes a bill President Barack Obama signed into law in early January, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. This bill includes an amendment in which Congress affirms that the Defense Department may wage cyberwar in the manner it deems fit while respecting existing laws and policies.

However, challenges remain in defining how the U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM) will use these policy and legal definitions in practice. Among these include: defining when a cyber attack has crossed the line from a civil offense to one that warrants a military response, identifying and locating the aggressor, responding with an underdeveloped international legal regime for defining and punishing cyber crimes, and defining precisely how responding to an attack or potential attack will manifest in practice. DiploNews finds that, in remaining opaque in where it intends to draw the line in the sand, the U.S. is remaining flexible, fighting asymmetric threats by being asymmetric itself.

To read the complete report, go to:
http://www.diplonews.com/reports/2012/20120205_L_CyberWar.php

About DiploNews:

DiploNews's global team of information and intelligence professionals provides an audience of decision-makers and news consumers around the world with a unique monitoring and insight into geopolitical and diplomatic developments. The company uses a wide array of human and electronic sources directly treated by our analytical center.

Contact:

Charles Rault, Editor and Founder
DiploNews
contact@diplonews.com
http://www.diplonews.com
+1 (202) 559 0729

This press release was issued through eReleases(R). For more information, visit eReleases Press Release Distribution at http://www.ereleases.com.

SOURCE DiploNews