2012 Presidential Election

Packing up some clipboards for the campaign trail? Throw them in one of our Obama 2012 messenger bags and you’ll be good to go.

The United States of America and the Republic of Iraq are committed to forging a strong partnership based on mutual interests that will continue to grow for years to come.  Our two nations are entering a new phase in our relationship.  We have a historic opportunity to strengthen our ties beyond security and build a multi-faceted relationship through trade, education, culture, law enforcement, environment, energy, and other important areas.

Three years ago, our nations signed the Strategic Framework Agreement (SFA), affirming both sides’ desire to establish long-term bonds of cooperation and friendship.  The SFA is a lasting agreement, and one that serves as the foundation on which we are building a durable and mutually beneficial relationship.  Today, we gather again in Baghdad to reaffirm our commitment to this important partnership and to the principles of cooperation, sovereignty, and mutual respect articulated in the SFA. 

Vice President Joe Biden and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki convened the SFA’s Higher Coordinating Committee on November 30.  Together, they affirmed the significant accomplishments under the SFA thus far and charted a course for further joint efforts. 

Cultural and Education Cooperation

The Republic of Iraq seeks the cooperation of the United States in its efforts to build a stronger higher education system, expanding English language programs, and preserving Iraq’s rich cultural heritage, especially through assistance in conserving archeological sites such as the Babylon historical site, which the United States has helped preserve, and through support to the Iraqi Institute for Conservation of Antiquities and Heritage. 

Energy Cooperation

The United States is committed to supporting the Republic of Iraq in its efforts to develop the energy sector. Together, we are exploring ways to help boost Iraq’s oil production, including through better protection for critical infrastructure. The U.S. also supports Iraq through training in operations and maintenance, the provision of spare parts, and the development of the Government of Iraq’s Electricity Master Plan, which will guide Iraq’s electricity sector development over the next 30 years. 

Law Enforcement and Judicial Cooperation

The United States and the Iraq believe that an independent judicial system is an essential component of a stable, democratic Iraq.  The United States has provided assistance and professional support to develop and professionalize the Iraqi corrections system through judicial training programs for Iraqis through the Judicial Development Institute.  Under the Police Development Program, the United States will continue providing advisory and technical assistance to the Iraqi police, including an exchange program that will bring groups of Iraqi police to the United States for leadership development over the next three years.   

Political and Diplomatic Cooperation

The United States will continue to cooperate closely with Iraq in international fora in pursuit of shared interests.  The United States also reaffirms its support for efforts aimed at resolving all remaining Chapter VII issues.  In December 2010, the U.S. chaired a special session of the United Nations Security Council to bring closure to several Chapter VII issues dating to the time of the former regime in Iraq. 

Services, Technology, Environment, and Transportation Cooperation

The United States is committed to supporting the Iraqi government’s plans to improve services, develop its system of roads and bridges, and bring its airports up to international standards.  We will improve agriculture and irrigation, support trade, and generate export opportunities through exchange programs between U.S. and Iraqi businessmen.  The United States is providing Iraq the expertise it needs to design and implement an advanced banking system that will meet Iraq’s current and future needs.  The United States pledges to support Iraq in developing its health care services, improving public health, and health awareness campaigns.

Trade and Finance Cooperation

The United States and Iraq will continue their efforts to reinforce their financial and trade cooperation and to strengthen ties between our nations’ business communities.  For the first time since 1988, the U.S. participated in the recent Baghdad International Trade Fair, showcasing 85 American businesses and organizations and building on the success of the Business and Investment Conference held in Washington, D.C. in 2009.  The United States is supporting the Government of Iraq’s efforts in the financial sector by providing the technical expertise needed to develop private banks and microfinance institutions.  In this context, the United States is developing new lending products for small and medium enterprises, in addition to the roughly $50 million set aside for such loans.  Our governments are looking forward to the next meeting and recommendations of the U.S.-Iraq Business Dialogue, a forum of Iraqi and U.S. companies that promises to strengthen commercial ties between our countries. 

Security and Defense Cooperation

The United States and Iraq recognize the importance of working closely together in the area of security and defense to strengthen our two countries’ security and stability.  Through the Strategic Framework Agreement, we have committed ourselves to continuing and strengthening our cooperation, guided by our common interests and shared goals.  At the dawn of a new chapter in our relationship, the United States and Iraq stand shoulder to shoulder in increasing our efforts to build a better future for our two nations

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

2:23 P.M. EST

MR. CARNEY:  Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.  Thank you for being here.  I apologize for the delay this afternoon.

I have with me the President’s Chairman — or rather the Chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers Alan Krueger, recently confirmed by the Senate.  He is here to discuss with you the economic importance of the payroll tax cut, extending and expanding it into next year, as well as the importance it has had to our economy and to 160 million Americans this year.

So what I would like to do is have him go at the top, for you to address whatever questions you have on the policy issues to him.  You may have some political questions, which are more appropriately directed towards me; I will remain here to take them for you — from you, rather.  And then I will let Alan go back to his important and difficult work, and then I will remain to take questions on other subjects.

With that, I give you Alan Krueger.

MR. KRUEGER:  Thanks, Jay.  I thought I’d say a few words about how the economy is doing and the importance of extending and expanding the payroll tax cut.  This is a critical time for the economy, and I think it’s a time where the economy can use more medicine to strengthen and sustain the recovery.

As you know, a year ago the Congress passed and the President signed a 2-percentage-point reduction in the payroll tax.  That tax cut has provided important support for the economy, especially at a time when the economy was hit with some shocks such as rising gasoline prices and supply-side shocks from the earthquake in Japan, problems in Europe.

The President has proposed expanding the payroll tax cut to 3.1 percent on the employee side, as well as cutting payroll taxes for employers, focusing the payroll tax cut for employers on small businesses and businesses that are expanding.

I think the economic argument for these proposals is quite compelling.  I think across the spectrum of economists you would find support for applying this type of medicine to the economy now.  The economy has been recovering; we’ve had nine quarters of growth.  But the pace of growth has been moderate.  We still have a great many underutilized resources.  Unemployment rate is still 9 percent.  We still have underutilized factories and resources.

Fundamentally, the economy is facing weak aggregate demand.  That’s economist-speak for not enough spending in the economy.  And I think you can trace the reasons for the weak demand directly to the problems that caused the economic crisis:  Families borrowed too much in the run-up to the crisis — they’re now paying down debt; we had a severe bubble in the housing market; and residential construction has been quite flat in the recovery — really unprecedented to have a recovery where residential construction has not been increasing.  And then on top of that, state and local governments, which retained employees when they were getting support from the Recovery Act, have been laying off workers.

So I think those are the reasons why the recovery has not been stronger, and at the same time, I think it’s important to provide insurance for the economy against further shocks, possible shocks down the road.

If the payroll tax is not extended, then the typical family with $50,000 in earnings would face a $1,000 tax increase starting in January.  What the President has proposed is extending that tax cut and expanding it so the typical family would have about a $1,500 tax cut, and as I mentioned, other components in the jobs act, the employer side, tax cuts, as well as extending unemployment benefits.

So, with that, I’m happy to take some questions.

MR. CARNEY:  Ben Feller.

Q    Thank you very much.  Are you asserting that the extension of the cut would actually make the economy better, or are you just saying that allowing it to expire would make the economy worse?

MR. KRUEGER:  I think both are true.  The President proposed extending and expanding the tax cut, so the beneficial effect that we saw from the last round would be larger.  I also think that the tax cuts on the employer side are particularly well designed.  The CBO has concluded that the type of incremental payroll tax that the President has proposed has pretty high bang for the buck, compared to other things that could be done to strengthen the economy.  And if the tax cut expires, as I said, that will be a $1,000 increase in taxes for the typical family, which would be a drag on economic growth going forward.  And you can see economists from across the spectrum who have noted that this could pose a severe drag for growth going forward if it’s allowed to expire.

Q    But if it’s extended at the same level, which is something that the Hill has talked about, 2 percent, that wouldn’t actually do anything to increase demand, increase spending.  I mean, people are already getting that cut.

MR. KRUEGER:  Well, compared to letting it expire, it certainly would support the economy.

Q    In terms of unemployment insurance, the extension that we just — because that’s the other part the President seems to be talking about — failure to extend that, would that have a similar effect on aggregate demand?

MR. KRUEGER:  If you look at CBO’s list — I think they looked at 11 different policies that are currently being considered — extending unemployment benefits, they concluded, had the biggest effect on the economy per dollar spent.  And the unemployed tend to have a very high propensity to spend their benefits, because they pay bills and little income coming in, running down savings.

So I think extending unemployment benefits as well would help to support the recovery going forward.

MR. CARNEY:  Matt.

Q    Senate Majority Leader Reid has said — has warned that the failure to extend the tax — the payroll tax cuts could push the U.S. economy into recession; some independent economists say the same.  Do you agree or disagree with that?

MR. KRUEGER:  I think what’s clear is that extending the payroll tax cut will strengthen the recovery.  Without it, it will be a drag on economic growth.  The forecasts, if you look at private sector forecasts, are for fairly moderate growth, perhaps not strong enough to bring down unemployment without the extension of the payroll tax cut, which is why the President proposed extending it and expanding it.

Q    Enough to cause a recession or not?

MR. KRUEGER:  What I can say, from looking at the evidence, is that this is the medicine that we can use in the near term to help strengthen the recovery and to help to provide insurance against shocks that might be coming.

Q    And you mentioned the problems in Europe, obviously the eurozone debt problems.  How much of a drag on the U.S. economy and on GDP growth do you expect for the rest of this year as well as for next year?

MR. KRUEGER:  A number of economists have pointed out that the problems in the eurozone are a potential threat to the U.S. economy and economies worldwide through both financial channels and through our exports — about 20 percent of our exports go to Europe.  I think if one looks at the potential problems for economic growth coming from Europe, it even strengthens the argument for strengthening our own demand here at home.  The payroll tax cut is I think an extremely sensible way of doing that.  So, looking around at the developments in the world I think helps to strengthen the argument for the President’s proposal.

MR. CARNEY:  Jake.

Q    Given that the payroll tax goes to the Social Security trust fund, are you not concerned at all, A, that this will have an effect possibly on the solvency of the Social Security trust fund?  And also, B, why do this every year?  What you’re calling for — what the President is calling for, the tax increase will just be delayed until January 2013.  Why not just do a whole structural change so that we don’t have to have this same conversation every year?

MR. KRUEGER:  Well, on your first question, I don’t think this jeopardizes the Social Security trust fund or the solvency of Social Security.  The trust fund is made whole by general revenues.  The Social Security chief actuary has stated that this does not affect the solvency of Social Security.

Moreover, the President proposed a way to pay for the extension and expansion of the payroll tax cut as well as the other components of the American Jobs Act, so over the 10-year period, the budget would be held neutral with respect to these cuts.

On the second question, looking at the pace of recovery, looking at the threats that we face today, I think it’s critical that we extend the payroll tax cut and expand it.  Down the road, we expect that the economy will be stronger and that the natural process of recovery takes over –

Q    In 2013, do you expect?

MR. KRUEGER:  Let me just say that recovery has been more sluggish than one might expect coming out of a recession because of the nature of the problems that created the crisis — because consumers built up so much debt that they’re working their way down, because of problems in the housing market.  We’re seeing the economy heal; it’s just not healing fast enough.  So these measures would help to sustain the recovery and, down the road, such measures won’t be necessary.

Q    Can I just do a quick follow-up?  I’m sorry.  It seems the language that many in the White House and the administration are using about whether or not the payroll tax cut extension would be paid for is shifting a little bit in terms of how important it is that the pay-for is actually passed in combination with the extension.  Would the President sign legislation that extended the payroll tax cut if it weren’t paid for?

MR. KRUEGER:  The President proposed a way to do this and a way to pay for it.  The Senate Democrats came up with an alternative way to pay for it, which the President has said that he could support.  I think both of those approaches are sensible approaches.  And I think what we need to do is look for a way to extend the proposal — extend the tax cut, which makes economic sense.

MR. CARNEY:  Norah, and then Mara.

Q    It appears the Joint Tax Committee has said that about a third of small businesses would be taxed additionally if you have the pay-for — the so-called “millionaires tax.”  Wouldn’t that be hurtful to the economy, that pay-for, in terms of it hurting small businesses in that way by taxing them additionally to pay for this?

MR. KRUEGER:  The tax on incomes above a million dollars a year I think would hit very few small businesses.  The vast majority — one figure I saw was 99 percent of individuals with small business income would not be affected by this.  So the vast majority of employers would be unaffected by what was proposed to pay for the payroll tax extension.

MR. CARNEY:  Mara.

Q    Mitch McConnell has said that you’re proposing to put a permanent tax on millionaires in exchange for this temporary tax cut.  What would be the effect of the surtax on millionaires, the economic effect?

MR. KRUEGER:  Well, the way to analyze economic effect is to say, when does the tax cut take effect?  When does the tax increase to pay for it take effect?  Those are not at the same time.  The tax cut would be immediate.  It would be for virtually all working families, focused on families with moderate incomes. 

So then look at what’s the marginal propensity to spend out of income for the different groups that are affected by the tax cut and the way that it’s paid for.  The families that would be affected by the tax cut tend to have a higher marginal propensity to spend, which would provide more support for the economy right away.  Those in upper-income groups with incomes above a million dollars a year tend to have a lower marginal propensity to consume.  So I think if you’re thinking about how is this going to affect the economy in the short run and the long run, this is the right fiscal path for strengthening the economy now and ensuring that it’s done in a fiscally responsible way.

Q    And can you just clarify something?  You said it would be a $1,000 tax increase if this isn’t passed, but it would be a $1,500 tax cut if it is.  How can that be?

MR. KRUEGER:  The question is what baselines you use.  So if you compare the status quo, if the payroll tax cut is not extended, that would mean starting in January an increase in payroll taxes for virtually all workers of 2 percent.  For a family earning $1,000 — earning $50,000, that equates to a $1,000 tax increase.  What the President has proposed is extending and expanding the payroll tax cut, so the 3.1 percent compared to if it’s allowed to expire.

MR. CARNEY:  Let’s do Ed, then Laura.

Q    Can I just ask — the President wants to extend unemployment benefits.  You did a study a few months ago suggesting the longer people are out of work the less time they end up spending looking for work.  So how does that square with trying to give people more benefits and stay unemployed longer?

MR. KRUEGER:  And I hope you’ve read the study.

Q    Not the entire –

MR. KRUEGER:  That’s all right.

Q    It was written about extensively.

MR. KRUEGER:  So there’s a lot of research on the effect of extended unemployment benefits, unemployment benefits more generally.  I think there’s a fair amount of consensus in the economics profession that there are tradeoffs involved, that particularly if you look at normal times when we’re close to full employment, that higher benefits or extended benefits do have some effect on search activity.

That effect is greatly reduced now when we have over four job seekers for every vacancy.  The effect of any individual perhaps taking more time to find a job that’s suitable for him or her is going to have less effect when there are other job seekers available for those positions.  That’s on the one hand.

On the other hand, another effect of unemployment benefits is that it provides critical income support for families when they’re going through a very difficult time.  I mentioned earlier that the unemployed tend to have a high marginal propensity to spend out of benefits that they receive to pay for their mortgages, and that helps to prevent foreclosures, and pay for food and so on, which supports the economy more generally.

The CBO, when it looked at this and weighed these different factors, came to the conclusion, which I think is a sensible conclusion, that extending unemployment benefits provides the biggest bang for the buck in terms of strengthening consumption in the economy and creating jobs, taking all of those factors into account.

MR. CARNEY:  Laura.

Q    Thank you.  I want to follow up on Jake’s question, which was whether the White House would accept a payroll tax cut or the UI extension without it being paid for.  You mentioned that the President had a proposal and the Senate Democrats have a proposal and that they both make sense, but I think what I’d like to know is whether it would be okay to do it without either one of those and just — would that be one acceptable outcome, given the economics involved?

MR. KRUEGER:  I don’t want to go into what might happen when the Senate still hasn’t voted on the bill that Senator Casey has proposed; they’re going to vote on that later this week.  I can tell you that from my perspective, and I believe from the administration’s perspective, doing this in a way that makes economic sense is the way to proceed.  And I’m sure that the President would consider whether it’s a sensible economic strategy going forward.

But I think it’s first important that the Senate consider the legislation that’s before it, which does pay for this with a way that the Senate Democrats have proposed.

Q    And some would say that it makes economic sense to — in a recession to have some upfront spending, even if it does increase the deficit long term.  Would you agree with that?

MR. KRUEGER:  You know, I would need to look at what the proposals are and wait until that point.  But hopefully Jay can have me back.

MR. CARNEY:  I’ll definitely have you back.

Q    That was what — so you don’t have –

MR. CARNEY:  Well we’re not going to –

Q    In a perfect world, you don’t — I mean, does it make sense in this economy to actually find a pay-for for this?

MR. KRUEGER:  I don’t want to go into specifics about what kind of — finding a pay-for.  Some pay-fors make sense, some don’t.  All I can tell you is, I think at this point the right fiscal path for the country is to try to support the economy in the short run, and to do it in a fiscally responsible way, which is over a period of, say, a 10-year window — which is common — to have it be paid for.  That’s what the President has proposed.

Q    But you’re open to not –

MR. CARNEY:  Let’s just do –

Q    You’re open to not paying for it? 

MR. CARNEY:  Let me just take it.  I think I’ve gotten this, Alan’s now gotten it three times.  We’re not going to speculate about what might happen if Senate Republicans do not hear the call of the vast majority of the American people to vote in favor of extending and expanding the payroll tax cut, and paying for it in a way that is entirely economically responsible and broadly supported by the American people, Americans of all political persuasion.

So that vote hasn’t happened yet.  We certainly hope that enough senators vote for it, that it will then move to the House, pass there, and be signed into law by the President.  It would certainly be nice if a simple majority of senators were allowed to vote on this, pass it and send it to the President — send it to the House and the President’s desk.  We certainly know that a vast majority of the American people support it.

So we’re not going to speculate about endgames if certain things do or don’t happen in the Senate.  I got a couple more for Alan because I have a hard out for me.  (Laughter.) 

MR. KRUEGER:  Knew there was a reason you wanted me.

MR. CARNEY:  Mark.  Yes.

Q    Can I ask you about the national debt?  It topped $15 trillion a couple of weeks ago, and it’s now bearing down on 100 percent of GDP.  Does that worry you?

MR. KRUEGER:  I think it’s very important that we get on a sustainable fiscal path.  I think it’s also important we measure the debt in the right way, looking at net debt held by the public.  But hold that aside.  The President has proposed — in September gave a proposal to the super committee or joint committee of Congress to help put us on a fiscally sustainable path.  And I think that as we strengthen the economy in the short run, we need to do two things at once:  We need to strengthen the economy in the short run, and we need to return to a fiscally sustainable path.

Q    If Congress just extends it at the 2 percent, would that lower the unemployment rate next year?

MR. KRUEGER:  I think if you look at independent estimates from across the spectrum, they would predict that extending the payroll tax cut or expanding it would lead to stronger economic growth and more employment than would otherwise be the case.

Q    But just the extension, just the 2 percent, that would lower the unemployment rate?

MR. KRUEGER:  I think that that would create more jobs compared to the situation if it’s not extended.

Q    What would that do to the actual rate?  I’m sorry.

MR. KRUEGER:  If you compare it to what the unemployment rate would be if it were not extended, I think because we would have more job growth by extending it, all else equal, it would lead to a lower unemployment rate.  But the important thing is to compare it to how does it affect economic growth, how does it affect job growth, compared to extending it versus not extending it.

MR. CARNEY:  Let me do one more. 

Q    To follow on that then, would the White House consider, regardless of the pay-for, simply extending the payroll tax cut without an expansion?  I haven’t heard that.

MR. KRUEGER:  I’m going to rewind what Jay said.

MR. CARNEY:  Yes.

MR. KRUEGER:  The Senate is considering a bill later this week, which has a way to pay for it.  The President proposed a way to pay for it.  And we’re open to economically sensible ways of trying to strengthen the economy and do it in a fiscally responsible way.

MR. CARNEY:  Thank you, Alan.  Appreciate it.  Thank you all.  I will now let Alan get back to his economic work, and will take your questions on other issues.  I, regrettably, have to leave here in about 15 minutes.  Before I take questions, I just wanted to note, as I’m sure all of you saw, that the Vice President landed in Baghdad earlier today on a visit, I think his eighth as Vice President, and an even higher number since he was a senator or in the last eight or 10 years.

I just want to note that President Obama, when he was running for this office, made clear that if elected he would end the war in Iraq responsibly.  What we’re seeing happen in these final six weeks of the year is the fulfillment of that promise, where we’re withdrawing the remaining U.S. forces from Iraq and we are ending that war responsibly and giving the Iraqi people the chance for a better future that they deserve and also maintaining an important strategic relationship with Iraq.

I would note that having, as you know, worked for the Vice President during his first two years here, that it was a measure of the President’s seriousness about Iraq and seriousness about fulfilling his commitment that he asked the Vice President to take on day-to-day management of this policy, which is why he has traveled, as you know, so often to Iraq over the last nearly three years.

And with that, I will take your questions.  Jake.

Q    I’ve heard from a lot of Democrats in the last few weeks who are concerned about President Obama possibly granting an exemption to Catholic churches, hospitals and universities from the requirement that all insurance plans cover contraception.  I’m wondering if you could shed any light on this decision.  I know the President has not yet made a decision, but I think these Democrats, a lot of them in the abortion rights community, are concerned that this is even being discussed.  Could you explain why the President is considering an exemption, and what’s going into his decision-making?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, part of the process, Jake, as you know, was seeking and receiving public input before the guidelines that were announced by the Secretary of Health and Human Services would go into effect.  That process did result in public input, as well as resulted in numerous comments from various folks who have concerns about this issue. 

The President has — this decision has not yet been made.  You can be sure that we want to strike the right balance between expanding coverage of preventive services and respecting religious beliefs.  And that’s the balance that will be sought as this decision is made.

Ben.

Q    Believe it or not, I had a quick follow-up on the payroll tax. 

MR. CARNEY:  Sure.

Q    I know you don’t want to comment about a Senate vote that hasn’t happened yet, and I’m not asking about that.  I understand your point on that.  What I’m asking is about the President’s point when he unveiled the payroll tax at the end-of-September speech.  He said then that every idea in his plan will be paid for, and he has said it dozens of times since then.  I’m just wondering if he stands by that, that he has proposals, including this payroll tax extension, he wants Congress to pass them and he wants them to be paid for.

MR. CARNEY:  I will repeat what Alan said and add a little bit to it.  As you noted, in September the President put forward a comprehensive proposal, the American Jobs Act, that included within it the extension and expansion of the payroll tax cut for 160 million Americans — a tax cut that goes right to hardworking middle-class Americans, a tax cut that has given this year an average of $1,000 extra in the average family’s wallet, and would, if expanded next year, result in a $1,500 tax cut. 

That’s very important for those families, to help them make ends meet as we continue to emerge from the worst recession in our lifetime, since the Great Depression.  And it’s important for the economy, because as Alan noted earlier, the payroll tax cut is widely viewed by economists — independent economists and forecasters to have a very positive impact on economic growth and job creation.

The President believes that the best way to do this is the way that he put forward, with the pay-for that he put forward.  He also believes that the pay-for the Senate Democrats have put forward meets the principles that he laid out.  And he looks forward to the Senate voting on the proposal that Senator Casey has put forward later this week.  It’s the responsible thing to do.

And as I think I noted the other day, if only Senate Republicans who say they will vote against this express as much passion about the need to cut taxes for the middle class as they express to protect tax cuts and protect the incomes of millionaires and billionaires, we might be able to get this done without much hullabaloo.  I mean, this after all — is anyone here surprised that we’re in a debate with Republicans about whether or not to cut taxes is the right thing to do for the middle class?  I thought they were for tax cuts.

The President has put forward this tax cut and expanding it for the middle class, for 160 million working Americans, and we’ll have a vote on that later this week.  And what you all are telling me is that Republicans are going to vote against it.  They have to explain that. 

And the reason they’re going to vote against it they say so far is because they don’t want it to be paid for in a way that the vast majority of Americans support that asks millionaires and billionaires to pay a little bit extra — millionaires and billionaires who, as you know, based on the CBO study and many others, have done exceptionally well, have seen their slice of the American pie grow as the middle class has been squeezed.  So we certainly hope that Senate Republicans will hear the call of their constituents, reconsider their vote later this week, and pass this with more than 60 votes and send it to the House.

Q    Nothing you just said responds to Ben’s question, which was does he still stand by his statement?

MR. CARNEY:  That is the President’s preferred choice.  You’re asking me — if only it were the case that what this President wanted he got in whole and in full.  And certainly that’s what we would ask of the Senate, that they would pass the American Jobs Act in its entirety as written by the President, proposed by the President.  Unfortunately, thus far, this has not happened.
 
We have had one modest but important success working with the Congress on one element of the Jobs Act, and that was the assistance to veterans, to hiring veterans.  We hope that Congress will act on the payroll tax cut and expansion.  I’m not going to speculate about what Congress might do, and as Alan said, what pay-fors they might come up with if they vote this down, this very responsible provision or proposal that will come forward in the Senate later this week.

Ed.

Q    You can’t say whether the President would sign a bill that is paid for or not?

MR. CARNEY:  We don’t know what the end game is yet.  And there is no value in this process or ultimately for the American people who want and deserve this tax cut to negotiate an end game here before we’ve even had a vote.  So I’m not going to go any further on that. 

Ed.

Q    You do it all the time.  You put out veto threats.

MR. CARNEY:  I don’t have a bill — the bill that Ben is talking about and others have now asked in a variety of occasions, a hypothetical bill that puts forward either an extension or an expansion of the payroll –

Q    Without a pay-for?

MR. CARNEY:  — does not yet exist.  We put out SAPs when there are bills to put out SAPs on.

Q    That’s the idea of rolling back the sequester –

MR. CARNEY:  There is a bill on — in the Senate that will be voted on later this week and we fully support that bill.

Ed.

Q    I want to make sure before we lose you, we get you reacting to Iran.  The U.N. Security Council condemned the fact that the government there did not help secure the British diplomatic offices.  I wonder if you could react to that.  But also, has the President instructed any U.S. personnel to do anything with U.S. embassies around the world in other hot spots?  Is there any concern about U.S. embassies around the world?

MR. CARNEY:  I don’t have any announcement to make with regard to the second part of your question.  You might want to check with the State Department.  But I’m not aware of anything related to the events in Tehran. 

I put out a statement earlier today, as you know, saying that the United States condemns in the strongest terms the storming of the British embassy in Tehran.  

Iran, as every other country does, has a responsibility to protect the diplomatic missions present in its country, and the personnel stationed in them.  I would also note that Iran has a responsibility to protect diplomatic personnel — not just to protect them, but not to try to assassinate them, which was another issue that we dealt with not too long ago.

So Iran’s behavior outside of international norms is well established, and this is another item in the catalogue of particulars — particular transgressions that the Iranian regime has perpetrated over the months and years.  And we strongly condemn it.

Q    Very quick follow-up.  You note the storming of the diplomatic offices, the embassy, but also the attempted assassination of the Saudi ambassador.  Does that not suggest that sanctions, while they’ve hurt the Iranian economy, they have done nothing to stop Iran from operating outside international norms?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, what we know, Ed, is that we have built an unprecedented international coalition behind the effort to isolate and pressure Iran; to get it to change its behavior; to prevent it from pursuing nuclear weapons.  We have made, through that effort, the choice ever more starkly clear to the Iranian regime that faces them, which is further isolation, further pressure, further scorn in the eyes of the international community, or a decision to get right with the world, to live up to its international obligations and fulfill its responsibilities.

We have recently, as you know, put forward even tighter sanctions on the Iranians — so have other of our partners internationally — and we will continue in that effort in a variety of means, not just through sanctions, to isolate and pressure Iran.

Q    Jay, the President is now in a TV ad, speaking to camera, saying the 2012 campaign has begun.  And I know yesterday you guys were pushing back very hard on this concept of it just being a coincidence how many swing states the President has been.  But tomorrow you’re going to Scranton, Pennsylvania, a swing state.  How is this not just a straight-up political trip?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, you are an expert, there is no question, Chuck, on how this works.  But we did win Pennsylvania by double digits.  I suppose that it might be a swing state next year.  You know more about this than I do.

The point I made yesterday, which I think bears repeating, is that Virginia is 10 minutes away from the Oval Office.  Every President, including this one, makes a lot of visits to Virginia to get out of Washington.  This President has.  Because he also happened to have won Virginia in 2008, it is now viewed as a battleground state.

Every President ought to be able to travel everywhere in the country.  It’s part of his responsibility, serving the American people, to get out and be among them and to speak with them about his agenda or her agenda.  This President will continue to do that.

It is also true that we are moving forward in what will be a Presidential election year.  And this President is running for reelection and fully intends to carry out his role as a candidate and to win reelection.  And so that process is also underway.  But it is a separate process.  And at this point, because the President faces no primary challenger, and the President has enormous responsibilities as President to fulfill — principally to do everything he can, both legislatively and using his executive authority to grow the economy and create jobs — he is overwhelmingly focused on that task and not on campaigning.

Q    How much time is he focused on the campaign on a given day?

MR. CARNEY:  On a given day?  I can’t do it on a given day.  I would say on a given week about 5 percent of his time.

Q    Question about Pakistan?

MR. CARNEY:  Let me get to Stephen, who’s patiently –

Q    What does the administration think about Russia’s statement that it’s time for an end to ultimatums to Syria?  And it certainly seems like Russia is acting directly against the U.S. and Arab League bid to further isolate Damascus.

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I would say a couple of things.  One, as I noted yesterday, the chronology here, with regards to Syria, I think tells a very significant story about growing international consensus that the Assad regime has behaved reprehensively — reprehensibly, rather.  It has perpetrated gross violations of human rights against its own citizens.  It has used excessive violence and force against its own citizens.

There is broad international consensus around that idea, and that is why you see so much pressure being brought to bear, not just by the United States, not just by Western nations, but also by nations in the region.  So I think that’s an important point.

We have an important relationship with Russia that encompasses a lot of issues.  We don’t agree with Russia on every issue, but we certainly have agreed on many and have made significant progress as a result of the agreement that we do have.

Q    Is there any concern that in recent weeks Russia has become — perhaps since the transfer of power was kind of muted, seems to have become a little bit more hawkish on the international stage?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I would simply stand back and take note of the fact, with regard to Iran — subject we were just discussing — that in the bilateral meetings the President had with President Medvedev, there was no debate about Iran’s behavior.  There was no disagreement, rather, about Iran’s behavior.  And you noticed that in the wake of that, when there was a vote at the IAEA Board of Governors, that there was a great sweeping consensus in support of that vote.

I think that, again, we have an important relationship with Russia.  We have a number of issues that we agree on, and obviously we don’t agree on everything.

Jon-Christopher.  The last one. 

Q    Does the decision from Pakistan to skip the Afghan conference in Bonn, Germany, on December 5th trigger any concerns from this White House that Pakistan is withdrawing from all international efforts to stabilize the region in Afghanistan before and after the troop withdrawal on 2014?

MR. CARNEY:  Well, I appreciate the question.  We certainly urge Pakistan to participate in this conference.  It’s very important for the future of Afghanistan.  Pakistan, obviously, will play an important role in the future of Afghanistan, and we urge them to participate in the conference.

Thank you.

END
3:01 P.M. EST

President Barack Obama holds a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the Netherlands, in the Oval Office, Nov. 29, 2011. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

President Obama continues to meet with European leaders in an effort to help find a solution to the Eurozone crisis.

Today, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte was at the White House to discuss his government's commitment to keeping the euro intact — as well as a range of additional issues.

The President told reporters that the United States has "no stronger ally" than the Netherlands — and discussed why the nation is such an important economic partner:

[Despite] the fact that the Netherlands doesn't have a huge population, they are one of our most important trading partners. The economic relationship between our two countries is deep; it is broad. We are one of the largest investors in the Netherlands. The Netherlands, in turn, is one of the largest investors in the United States. And so, given both of our interests in promoting commerce, growth and jobs, it is very important that we coordinate with the Netherlands.

Read the full remarks from the President and Prime Minister here.

The United States condemns in the strongest terms the storming of the British Embassy in Tehran.  Iran has a responsibility to protect the diplomatic missions present in its country and the personnel stationed at them.  We urge Iran to fully respect its international obligations, to condemn the incident, to prosecute the offenders, and to ensure that no further such incidents take place either at the British Embassy or any other mission in Iran. Our State Department is in close contact with the British government and we stand ready to support our allies at this difficult time.

3:03 P.M. EST

        MS. BARKOFF:  Thank you, and thanks for joining the call today.  Our hope is to provide you all with a more detailed sense of the Vice President’s schedule and his goals on his trip to Greece and Turkey.  With us today we have National Security Advisor to the Vice President Tony Blinken.  We have United States Special Envoy to the Organization for Islamic Cooperation Rashad Hussain and Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economic Affairs Michael Froman.

        This is a reminder — this call will be on the record.  And our speakers are happy to take questions after Tony gives his initial, brief opening statement.  We’d like to keep this call focused on the Vice President’s trip as much as possible.  So with that, I'd like to turn this over to Tony.

        MR. BLINKEN:  Kendra, thanks very much, and thanks, everyone, for being on the call.  Good afternoon.

        Let me walk you through, briefly, the highlights of the Vice President’s trip, in terms of the schedule, and then talk about some of the issues we expect to come up.  And then we’ll open it up to your questions.  And in terms of answering questions, as Kendra indicated, Mike Frohman is here and he can focus on some of the economic questions you may have.  And Rashad Hussain is here to talk about the Entrepreneur Summit.

        So the Vice President will travel to Turkey and Greece later this week.  He’s going to stop first in Ankara, on December 2nd.  We’ll have meetings with Turkish leaders in Ankara, and then it’s on the Istanbul to address the global Entrepreneurship Summit on Saturday, December 3rd, which is to be hosted by Prime Minister Erdogan.  

        After Turkey, he goes to Athens for meetings with Greek officials and party leaders.  That’s on Monday, December 5th, and then he comes back home to the United States from Greece.  

        A little bit more detail, in terms of Ankara:  Right now, the schedule has him meeting with Prime Minister Erdogan and President Gul.  He’ll also lay a wreath at the Ataturk Mausoleum and then get into these meetings with the Prime Minister and the President.  And we expect the discussions in Ankara to cover the broad agenda of partnership and cooperation between the United States and Turkey.  There are few international issues on which we do not consult closely with Turkey.  It’s hard to think of any.

        What we expect to be discussed includes, first, our assistance in the fight against PKK terrorism, particularly in light of the recent attacks against Turkish forces.  The PKK is a common enemy of Turkey, the United States and Iraq, and we expect to focus on that.

        We’ll look at expanding trade and investment ties between our two countries.  There has already been significant progress in that arena since President Obama came to office, and we’re going to look at what we can do to further expand those ties.

        I expect we’ll talk about the support for political and economic reform in the countries of the Arab Spring, including the situation in Syria where, as you know, Prime Minister Erdogan has called on President Asad to step down and where of course Turkey has significantly said it would implement the sanctions agreed to by the Arab League just yesterday.  

        I expect we’ll talk about the progress we’ve seen and hope to see in Cyprus negotiations before the Secretary General of the U.N., Ban, brings the two leaders of Cyprus back together in January, and our hopes for a settlement as soon as possible; internal reforms in Turkey, including our hope for the reopening of the Halki seminary in Istanbul.  Afghanistan will almost certainly be on the agenda, and the prospects for progress in normalizing relations between Turkey and Armenia.

        Then it’s on to Istanbul for the Global Entrepreneurship Summit that continues the work of the Presidential Summit on Entrepreneurship that was hosted by President Obama here in Washington back in April 2010 to promote entrepreneurship, facilitate innovation and private enterprise, and provide greater economic opportunity.  

        And this summit really comes at a critical moment in the Middle East and North Africa.  We’ve seen that millions of people have been calling out for not only political freedom but also economic opportunity and progress.  Entrepreneurs are a driving force in the United States for job creation.  They can do the same thing in the Middle East and North Africa, and so this could not be more timely.  And this will bring together entrepreneurs, corporate leaders, social entrepreneurship leaders and government officials.

        There will also be, on the sidelines, an innovation fair for young entrepreneurs, in an event that is sponsored by the Department of State, and the Vice President will go over there as well I believe with Prime Minister Erdogan.

        That brings us to Athens, after Istanbul, and there the Vice President will continue our very close dialogue and strong cooperation with the government of Greece.  As the President said, when he called Prime Minister Papademos on November 21 to congratulate him on his appointment, The United States supports Greece’s efforts to implement its commitments under its EU IMF program.  President Obama reiterated that the United States will stand strongly with Greece, a friend and ally, through these difficult times.  The Vice President is going to show that support and to encourage further implementation of the necessary steps.

        While he’s in Athens, the Vice President is going to hold the administration’s first meeting with Prime Minister Papademos, and he’ll also meet with President Papoulias.  

        And that really covers the highlights of the trip, some of the issues we expect to be discussed.  Let me end with that, and turn it over to your questions for me, for Mike, or for Rashad.  Thanks very much.

        Q    Thank you.  Thank you, presenters, for information detailed account of the trip.  My question, first question, is to National Security Advisor Mr. Tony Blinken.  You, sir, I believe, mentioned that one of the items on the agenda is assistance against PKK, which you described as a common enemy.  Turkey has been seeking to get recourse from you and as we understand there are some problems with the U.S. Congress.  My question is, do you have any news that you will — to Turkish counterparts on this?  

        And the second question, on the Entrepreneurship Summit in Istanbul.  Again, you had mentioned that one of the forefront issues is going to be regarding the Arab Spring, and I believe there will be attendance from these countries.  What specifically — I mean, how you are thinking to drive, in this summit — channel this new countries on the path to democracy?  Is there any specific mechanism?  Are you planning to put — to help more in these countries?

        And my final question is on Iran.  There was a threat by the air commander — Air Force commander of the Irani Air Forces over the weekend, saying that in case of an attack by U.S. or Israel on Iran the first target will be the newly installed NATO radar system in Turkey.  What is your response to that kind of threat?  Thank you.

        MR. BLINKEN:  Thanks very much.  Let me take the first and third questions and have Rashad speak to the summit.

        First, on the PKK question.  As I indicated, we stand, in the United States, strongly with our NATO ally, Turkey, in its fight against the PKK.  That’s why we sent the U.S. government team to Turkey last October, just after that terrible PKK attack on Turkish soldiers, to discuss additional assistance to the Turkish government in its fight against terrorism.  

        And there are a number of things that we’re doing that are assisting Turkey in this fight.  And first I should say we’re going to continue to provide a full range of meaningful and effective support for our ally, Turkey, against PKK terrorism, from national defense to diplomacy, law enforcement, intelligence cooperation.  This is something that has to be multifaceted to deal with the problem.

        We’ll be providing three SuperCobra attack helicopters to Turkey.  We transferred four Predator UAVs from Iraq to Incirlik at the air base in Turkey.  We — obviously all U.S. operations in Incirlik occur under agreements with the government of Turkey.  We’re also supporting continued cooperation between Iraq and Turkey in combating the PKK, which is a common enemy of Turkey, Iraq and the United States.  

        We established as you may know with us, Turkey and Iraq a three-way security dialogue to address cross-border terror threats, and we’re working to strengthen that.

        And one of the other things we’re doing is we’re working with Europe to clamp down on illegal PKK fundraising and money laundering.  So in all of these areas, we are working very closely with Turkey.  And this is something as I indicated that the Vice President will talk about when he is in Turkey.

        In terms of the question on Iran, and then I’ll turn it to Rashad on the summit.  A few things I think are worth saying.  I think making threatening statements doesn't serve anyone’s purpose, least of all the Iranians.  The fact of the matter is that the world is deeply concerned with Iran’s activities in a number of areas starting with their nuclear program.  We’ve seen that most recently in the very strong resolutions that were adopted by a wide margin at the IAEA following its report on Iran’s nuclear program, and also at the U.N. General Assembly on the Iranian assassination plot against the Saudi ambassador in Washington.  

        Turkey shares our goal of preventing a nuclear-armed Iran.  And of course, Turkey has a long history of — ties to Iran as well as a long common border.  But Turkish leaders told us repeatedly that they strongly support international efforts to encourage Iran to engage with the P5-plus-1 toward a diplomatic resolution of the concerns about Iran’s nuclear program.

        And of course, we think it’s very important that Turkey, a NATO ally, agreed to host the radar which is a NATO program — very important to the defense of all NATO countries against the growing missile threat that is emerging in the world, and we’re very pleased that Turkey is standing up as a NATO ally to do that.

        Rashad, did you want to say something about the summit?

        MR. HUSSAIN:  Sure.  We are expecting participants from a number of countries in the Middle East and North Africa including Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia and Yemen and others.  And we continue to believe that economic and social entrepreneurship are powerful forces for creating opportunity and sparking innovation, also for lifting people out of poverty and helping transform societies.

        We’ve seen certainly throughout the Arab Spring that entrepreneurs have been at the forefront of pushing the envelope when it comes to change within societies, and the summit will allow entrepreneurs from all over the world to come together and share their experiences and discuss what they’ve been doing, some of the ways that they’ve been able to overcome obstacles that they face to expand their networks.

        We also will continue to promote in this summit and beyond trade, investment, regional integration as we support political and economic reforms in the Middle East and North Africa, and we’ll also be continuing to assist in combating corruption and aiding those efforts.

        The Vice President will speak a little bit more about this and get into a little bit more detail in some of the specific initiatives that we’ll be implementing with Turkey and with other countries in the region.

        Q    Thank you very much for taking my question.  I have actually two questions:  Will you expect Excellency the Vice President bring any specific proposal for financial help from the U.S. to Greece, number one?  Number two, will you verify that His Excellency will visit the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Constantinople and specifically His Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew — of Constantinople on this coming Saturday, please?

        MR. BLINKEN:  Let me just quickly take the last question, then turn it over to Mike for the first question.  Yes, I can confirm that he will see the Ecumenical Patriarch when we’re in Turkey, and he very much looks forward to doing that.

        Mike?

        MR. FROMAN:  Well, thank you.  I think the U.S. very much recognizes the sacrifices being made by the Greek people as they pursue this reform process and view the fiscal and structural reforms that have been agreed on with the European partners and with the IMF as critical.  We stand by Greece.  We’re a strong friend and ally of Greece, and we’ll continue to support Greece through this very challenging period, including through the IMF where we’re the largest shareholder.

        Q    Hi.  Thanks very much for doing this.  Just to preview — the administration is clearly supporting Erdogan, even with military assets such as the Predator, although he’s an Islamist.  He doesn't — he said he’s conditionally supportive of democracy.  He cracks down on political journalists.  He supports the bigots in Hamas.  So what are you asking in return for giving our support to this local leader?  What do we get in return for all this?

        MR. BLINKEN:  As you know, Turkey has been a longstanding ally to the United States through NATO.  We have worked together closely throughout the decade in any theaters of conflict.  We have Turkish soldiers in Afghanistan standing side-by-side with our troops.  We have Turkish cooperation in Iraq.  Turkey has taken a strong stand against the Asad government in Syria, and the Prime Minister has called on Asad to step down.  Turkey is implementing Arab League sanctions.  It played a very significant role in Libya in terms of supporting forces for progress there.  And we’re seeing similar things in Egypt.  So in many, many areas, as well by the way, as trade and economic ties, which have I think have increased twofold since President Obama has been in office.  So in many, many areas we’re working very, very closely with Turkey.

        And Turkey has a very important story to tell as a country that can send — set an example for other countries that are making transitions in the Arab world, in the Islamic world, in North Africa.

        Obviously, there are areas where we clearly have disagreements with our ally and partner, and we have the kind of mature relationship which we can make those disagreements known.  

        You’ve mentioned some areas where we’ve had disagreements, and when it comes to making our concerns known that's certainly something we’ve done and continue to do.  Right now for example Turkey is looking at revising its constitution, and we’ve been urging the Turks in this constitutional reform process to have an inclusive process that strengthens freedoms of expression, religion and other fundamental rights, including the human rights of minorities.

        We’ve expressed concerns about journalists who’ve been detained and others.  We have pushed very hard and continue to push for the reopening of the Halki seminary, and that's something that will come up certainly on the Vice President’s trip.  So we have the kind of relationship with Turkey where we work very closely together on so many different issues across the globe, but where when we have disagreements we make them known in a spirit of respect.

        Q    Thank you.  Hi, Tony.  First of all, for you, you said the Vice President will meet with the President and the Prime Minister of Greece.  But you know we have a coalition government, which is being supported by three parties — with George Papandreou, Mr. Samaras and the leader of the far right, Mr. Karatzaferis.  And then, Mr. Froman, you mentioned the support that the U.S. gives in the IMF and generally.  But will there be something more from the Vice President since that's the first visit by such a high U.S. official in Greece after the crisis?  Will there be something on investment, something maybe in the role of the U.S. banks in dealing with lowering the Greek debt?  I mean something more specific in terms of — support?  Thank you.

        MR. BLINKEN:  Thanks very much.  On the first question, yes, the Vice President will meet with the heads of the two principal parties supporting the transition government, former Prime Minister Papandreou, who heads the largest party in parliament, as you know, and Antonio Samaras, who heads the second largest party.  So he will meet with both of them.

        Mike?

        MR. FROMAN:  On the economic situation, the Vice President will be supportive of the overall reform effort and the package of measures that have been put in place by the European partners and by the IMF.  That includes substantial funding, as well as other mechanisms to help support Greece during the transition period.  So his support will be for the existing package of reform measures and of financial support that's been provided to Greece.

        Q    Thanks for taking the call.  Can you hear me?

        MR. BLINKEN:  Yes.  Go ahead, please.

        Q    Okay.  Do you expect the issue of relations between Turkey and Israel to come up?  On trade with Turkey, could you talk a little bit more specifically about what you expect to do in that space?  And overall, how would you characterize the Vice President’s mission here?  Is it part of the continuation of an ongoing dialogue?  Or do you see concrete deliverables from his visit?

        MR. BLINKEN:  Thanks very much.  It really is part of a continuum.  We’ve had deep engagement with Turkey and with Greece by the President and by the Vice President since the start of this administration and indeed by both of them before they came to the White House and so this is very much part of a continuum in that relationship.

        As I said at the outset, it’s hard to think of an international issue where we don't have close cooperation or collaboration or consultation at the very least with Turkey, and there’s a lot on the agenda right now.

        But I should add that really the focal point of this trip is the Entrepreneurship Summit, and that's the primary reason that the Vice President is making this trip.  It’s something that's very important to President Obama who initiated the summit here in Washington.  We see this, as Rashad said, as a very important vehicle for supporting entrepreneurship around the world, but also particularly in the Middle East and North Africa, and at a very critical time.

        And of course, in Greece we think it’s very important to show our ongoing support for Greece, for a close friend and partner as it goes through a difficult time.  

        On Turkey and Israel, yes, I suspect that that will come up.  We have in the United States longstanding strategic ties with both Israel and with Turkey.  We have been and we continue to encourage both countries to seek opportunities to move beyond the recent strains in their relationship, and we believe that opportunities are there for the two countries to fully repair relations and move forward.  

        It pains us to see the two of them at odds because they're both such close partners of the United States.  And the bottom line is that improved relations between Turkey and Israel would be good for Turkey, good for Israel and good for the United States and indeed good for the region and the world so that's something we will continue to encourage.

        Mike, did you have anything to add?

        MR. FROMAN:  No, I’d only add that Turkey is one of the better performing, faster growing economies of the world at the moment.  We are close partners in the G20, and they play a critical role in the G20.  And through that and other mechanisms, we engage in a whole range of economic, trade and investment issues.  And as Tony said, this is part of our ongoing dialogue with them.

        Q    Yes, thank you for doing this.  I wonder if you would just address this narrative that you see so much in the press that Erdogan’s government is Islamist and looking east rather than to its old friends and NATO to the west and sort of spinning out of our sphere of influence and towards Iran and some of the other regimes in the neighborhood.  You know that this sort of narrative is out there.  I wonder — I gather from your comments you think there’s a more nuanced story to tell.  Could you address that narrative in particular?

        MR. BLINKEN:  Sure.  I think it’s fair to say that Turkey has always looked to the east and the west, given its position in the world both geographically and geopolitically just as I might add the United States looks both to the Pacific and to the Atlantic.  In that sense, it’s quite similar.

        Turkey has been, remains and will be an important member of the transatlantic alliance of NATO.  That hasn’t changed.  It’s very much anchored in NATO.  

        Turkey has expanded its involvement in the Middle East through increased political engagement, trade, social and cultural relations.  But at the same time, it remains deeply engaged with the United States and our European allies.  And of course, it continues to seek accession to the European Union.  So I don't think these things are in conflict at all or in contradiction.  To the contrary, I think they complement each other.  

        Turkey has in many ways a unique role to play as a bridge between these different worlds, an ability to talk to different countries in ways that are extremely helpful.  And as I suggested earlier, its own example can be very powerful to countries now going through transition.  So it’s very encouraging to see Turkey play a strong leadership role.  We’ve seen that in Syria.  We’ve seen that Libya.  We’ve seen that in Egypt, in Afghanistan, in NATO.  And that's something that is in the interest of the United States.

        MS. BARKOFF:  Okay, thanks, all, for joining the call.  That's all we have.

        MR. BLINKEN:  Thanks very much.

END 3:29 P.M. EST

The National Archives and Record Administration has collected, on average, 475 million pages of records a year for each of the last 10 years. Thanks to new technology, both the volume and diversity of material being archived has increased, but Federal agencies aren't keeping up with this heavier load. 

Making these records available and accessible to the public is an important step toward giving people clear and accurate information about the decisions and actions of the Federal Government. That, however, is largely dependent on taking advantage of these technology advances and making information available electronically, instead of relying on paper-based archives.

Today, President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum that will do exactly that. His memorandum instructs Federal agencies move into a digital-based record keeping system, and which will save money, promote accountability, and increase government transparency.

Roosevelt Room

2:01 P.M. EST

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Good afternoon, everybody.  I am very pleased to welcome Presidents Van Rompuy and Barroso to the White House.  We have had several occasions to meet over the last year, but this is the first formal U.S.-EU summit that we’ve had an opportunity to have since the Lisbon summit last year.

Of course, much has changed over the last year.  We’ve seen the incredible transformations that have been taking place throughout North Africa and the Middle East.  What hasn’t changed, though, is the fundamental bonds that exist between the European Union and the United States.  Our common values, our common belief in the rule of law, in democracy, in freedom, in a free market system — all those things bind us together, as do the extraordinary economic and commercial relationships that we have and the people-to-people relationships that we have. 

And so this is an extraordinarily important relationship.  These aren’t always the most dramatic meetings because we agree on so much that sometimes it’s hard to make news.  As the world’s two largest economies and as each other’s most important trading partners, we spent a lot of time focusing on how we can continue to grow our economies and create good jobs on both sides of the Atlantic.  A large part of that conversation obviously revolved around the eurozone crisis, and Presidents Van Rompuy and Barroso have been very actively engaged with the heads of government and heads of state in Europe to try to resolve this crisis.  I communicated to them that the United States stands ready to do our part to help them resolve this issue.  This is of huge importance to our own economy.  If Europe is contracting or if Europe is having difficulties, then it’s much more difficult for us to create good jobs here at home because we send so many of our products and services to Europe; it is such an important trading partner for us.

And so we’ve got a stake in their success, and we will continue to work in a constructive way to try to resolve this issue in the near future.  And I appreciate the leadership of both these gentlemen in trying to address this in a clear and forthright way.

With regard to security cooperation, we agreed to make sure that we continue to place pressure on the Iranian regime to stand down when it comes to the development of nuclear weapons, emphasizing that we continue to hope for a diplomatic resolution that allows them to use peaceful nuclear energy in a way that’s consistent with their international obligations. 

We have a shared stake in continued progress in Afghanistan, where the EU serves as a leading donor, and next week’s Bonn conference will be an opportunity to make sure our security and development agenda is sustainable.

Meanwhile, with respect to aviation security, the EU has been extraordinarily cooperative, and in particular, thanks to the leadership of President Barroso and President Van Rompuy, we’ve been able to make progress in exchanging intelligence information that can keep our passengers safe and assure that we are preventing any kind of terrorist activity from taking place.

Finally, as global partners in support of universal values, we spent a lot of time discussing how we can be supportive of the best elements of what’s taking place in North Africa and the Middle East, continuing to encourage democracy, continuing to encourage transparency, continuing to encourage economic development because we’ve both agreed that the aspirations that were expressed in Egypt and Tunisia and in Libya are not simply political issues but they’re also economic issues, and that we have to do everything we can to support increased opportunity for young people.  These are very young populations, and if they have a sense of a future for themselves where they can work hard and use their skills and talents to develop themselves and support their families, then the likelihood of a successful political transition will exist as well.

Of course, these problems don’t only exist in the Middle East and North Africa.  We discussed, for example, the situation in Belarus, where we stand shoulder to shoulder in wanting to see a return to the rule of law and the flowering of democratic practices there; in the Ukraine, where we agree that we want Ukraine to continue down a reform path, and we want to do everything we can to encourage that.

And so both on security issues, as well as on economic issues, we could not have a closer partner than the European Union.  There are many issues that don’t get a lot of attention — for example, our cooperation on clean energy and green jobs; our continued exploration of ways where we can get increased regulatory cooperation that can facilitate increased commercial ties — a whole range of work that’s done by both the European Council and the European Commission that benefits our peoples directly in a multitude of ways.

And so I’m very much appreciative of the partnership that I’ve formed with these two gentlemen.  I hope they have a good visit.  I understand they’re going to be going to Capitol Hill, and I’m sure they’ll receive a warm reception from the Senate Majority Leader.  And I hope that they have a good, albeit brief, visit. 

So thank you.

PRESIDENT VAN ROMPUY:  Thank you.  Let me first thank you, Mr. President, for your hospitality you have extended to us at this time of Thanksgiving.  I very much appreciated our discussions we had here in the White House today.

Let me make two points, one on the economy and one on the international issues.  First, on the economy:  We, the European Union and the United States, have the strongest trade and economic relationship in the world.  And we therefore both need to take strong action to address the near-term growth concerns, as well as fiscal and financial vulnerabilities in order to strengthen the world economy.  It is no secret the European Union is going through a difficult period.  It is confronted with a confidence crisis, aggravated by the slowdown in global economic growth. 

The Union has done a lot over the last 18 months, and we have taken decisions that were unthinkable just a year ago in the fields of economic governance, on budgets and imbalances, financial support, and financial regulation.  All member states of the Union are all engaged in policies of fiscal consolidation and strengthening competitiveness via comprehensive reforms.  But we have to do more.

We are therefore working hard on three fronts:  dealing with the immediate crisis, the medium term, while also establishing a sound perspective for the longer term.  The 9th of December I will present to the heads of state and government a roadmap on how to strengthen the economic union of the euro area commensurate with our monetary union.  We are aiming for binding rules to ensure strong fiscal and economic discipline in all countries, to go hand in hand with fiscal and economic integration — not only discipline, but also integration in the euro area as a whole.

Improving fiscal sustainability is essential, but it’s not enough.  Promoting growth and employment is a challenge we share with the United States.  The European Union is following a two-track approach on growth:  We want to strengthen fiscal sustainability, while at the same time stimulating economic growth and employment by launching reforms, raising competitiveness, and deepening the Union’s single market, the largest in the world. 

But slower global growth is not only due to the problems in the eurozone.  Others have to do their part of the job, too — for instance, on exchange rates and on implementing the commitments made in Cannes, at the G20, earlier this month. 

My second point regards international challenges.  Not since the end of the Cold War has the world seen such a degree of transformation in global affairs.  And I’m happy to say that during the last two decades, the world is going in our direction — towards market economy and democracy.  In Europe, in Latin America, in Africa, in Asia and now in the Arab world, sudden events and slow-moving trends bring us into a new world — in the Pacific and in the Mediterranean — and we welcome the new global governments in the G20, reflecting the growing influence of emerging countries as well as their new responsibilities.

As the President said, Europe’s relationship with the United States is built on shared fundamental values.  These will continue to provide the basis for our cooperation and our alliance.  Since the end of the Cold War, there is no East anymore, but there is still a West.  The EU’s priority is its neighbors, to the south and to the east. 

On the south:  We worked together with the United States in supporting the economic and political transition process in the Arab world in the wake of the Arab Spring.  In Libya, European action was given full support by NATO and by the United States.  We both welcomed the democratic elections in Tunisia and in Morocco.  In Egypt, we call for a peaceful, democratic and successful transition to civilian rule.  The unacceptable situation in Syria has prompted the European Union to call on the international community to join its efforts in imposing additional sanctions.

And on the east side:  The EU and the U.S. worked hard to make Russia’s accession to the WTO possible.  I believe this will promote world trade and support Russia’s modernization.  And we also agree on the need to remain actively engaged with our Eastern partners in Europe, and to advance their political association and their economic integration with the European Union.  We, however, share the strong concern about the latest signs of politicized justice in Ukraine.  The democratic aspiration of Belarusian people also needs to be met.

A word on the Western Balkans:  These countries belong in the European Union.  We are making progress.  And the EU will sign the Accession Treaty with Croatia next month.

On Iran, we need to step up pressure.  The Union is preparing new restrictive measures, and in Afghanistan, we reaffirm that the Union is engaged in the long term, even after 2014. 

Mr. President, let me conclude:  Europe and the United States remain partners of first and last resort.  Our entente cordiale was a mainstay in the past, and it will remain so in the future.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Thank you.

PRESIDENT BARROSO:  Thank you very much.  First of all, I’d like to thank President Obama for a very useful, substantive and rewarding meeting.  The European Union and the U.S. are longstanding partners and staunch allies to the Atlantic relationship.  It’s indispensable to tackle the common challenges that we face.  We have just reaffirmed our determination to work closely together for the stability of the global economy and for the benefit of our people.

I want to reassure President Obama, and also I want to reassure the Americans:  Europe is going through rough times, yes, but we are determined to overcome the current difficulties.  I have full confidence in the determination of the European leaders.  We have the member states of the European institutions to tackle this crisis.  We are absolutely serious about the magnitude of the challenge, we understand the challenge, but you have to understand that sometimes some decisions take time.  But we are in that direction, and we are in fact taking strong measures for unprecedented situations. 

Indeed, problems in Europe are, to some extent, part of a wider picture.  The world economy has not yet been able to absorb and overcome all the effects of the 2008 financial crisis.  We face the common challenge of bringing debt under control while re-launching growth and creating new jobs.  We all know this is not an easy task. 

In Europe, we have come a long way in addressing the causes and some symptoms of this crisis.  We are now strengthening economic governance of the European Union and the euro area with more robust roles — rules to ensure sound budgetary policies, and tackle imbalances.  These new rules will enter into force in just a few weeks’ time, but we want to go further.  Just last week, I have put forward new proposals to further strengthen budgetary surveillance and fiscal discipline. 

At the same time, we have an ambitious agenda for growth, both on far-reaching structural reforms.  And today, the way forward in Europe is for more interest.  This is a point I would like to underline to our American friends:  No one in Europe is speaking about coming back.  Everybody is speaking, how can we further deepen integration?  In fact, I believe that we are now living one of those moments of the acceleration of history.  We are seeing that in many parts of the world, in large measure because of the globalization. 

And Europe also is feeling this acceleration of history.  That’s why we have to anticipate some steps in our integration — integration through discipline, of course, but also integration through more convergence, responsibility and solidarity. 

And if there is a silver lining to all of this, it is perhaps that it has shown just how interdependent our economies now are.  As President Obama just said, it is a fundamental interest of all of us in the world to solve these euro area problems.  Therefore, we need to work ever more closely together.  The European Union and the U.S. have the largest bilateral economic relationship in the world.  Together, our economies account for around 50 percent of the world’s GDP, and one-third of total world trade.

European Union and U.S. trade and investment generates 15 million jobs on both sides of the Atlantic.  In addition, Europe accounts for approximately 70 percent of foreign direct investment in the U.S., and U.S. investment is three times larger in Europe than in Asia.

So to help ensure that the transatlantic economy can be an engine for the recovery of the world economy, the European Union and the U.S. have today decided to gather a high-level working group for jobs and growth.  On the European side it will be shared by commissioner for trade; on the American side, U.S. trade representative.  These groups will examine how to strengthen the European Union/U.S. trade and investment relationship, and in so doing, boost growth and job creation.

This is indeed the first priority:  growth and jobs.  We have to solve the other issues so that we can re-launch growth and jobs in Europe.  I believe this will allow us to further benefit from the untapped potential of our existing strong economic ties.  We know that today’s world is not just about economy, it is also about values and standards.  The European Union and the U.S. share a firm belief in freedom, democracy, human rights — they are the hallmarks of all societies and what binds us together.  And the sweeping transformations that are now taking place in the Middle East and North Africa confirm that the values we share are, indeed, universal.

When given a choice, people everywhere choose freedom over oppression, democracy over tyranny.  It is in the basis of these values that I believe our relationship will go forward.  And today’s meeting was a very important, substantive meeting in that direction.  I thank you very much.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Thank you very much, everybody.

END
2:18 P.M. EST

The return of Cyber Monday brings great deals for consumers, but also serves as a reminder of the need for shoppers to be vigilant and for cybersecurity legislation to protect Americans from e-predators.

In 2005, the online retail industry declared the Monday after Thanksgiving to be Cyber Monday, a day that holiday shoppers could find bargains online akin to the promotions made available by walk-up stores on Black Friday. Consumers responded enthusiastically with almost half a billion dollars in purchases that year, a figure that jumped to over one billion dollars on Cyber Monday 2010—the first time ever that online spending in a single day exceeded the billion dollar figure, according to comScore.  In an interesting twist, online retailers upped the ante this year by offering some holiday bargains on Black Friday exclusively via mobile devices, tempting shoppers with online bargains at the very moment they were navigating through the hordes of fellow shoppers last Friday.

The ever-increasing popularity of Cyber Monday mirrors the astonishing growth of online shopping year round. ComScore estimates that online retail shopping in the third quarter of 2011 amounted to over $36 billion in sales, a 13 percent increase from the previous year and the fourth consecutive quarter of double-digit growth rates. At this pace, retail e-commerce sales will exceed $160 billion for the year.  

Yet the risk of cybercrime is real, including online identity theft that affects millions of Americans each year and causes billions of dollars of harm to the U.S. economy. In May the Administration proposed a legislative package that reflects the ideas of congressional leaders and that would enhance security for online shoppers as well as bolster the integrity of government networks and other critical infrastructure.  It’s time to enact this legislative proposal and bolster cybersecurity and trust in the Internet, so that it remains an engine of innovation and economic growth.

Tom Power is Deputy Chief Technology Officer for Telecommunications

Mitt Romney has flipped and flopped on nearly every issue—except wanting to be president. Check out the DNC’s new video to see the two Mitts go head-to-head.