Wild World Of Politics: March 2011

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Presidential Proclamation--National Child Abuse Prevention Month

Release Time:

For Immediate Release

A Proclamation

     Our Nation's children are our hope for the future, and caring for them is one of our greatest responsibilities. During National Child Abuse Prevention Month, we renew our commitment to preventing child abuse and neglect by promoting healthy families, protecting children, and supporting communities throughout our Nation.

     Although a strong family unit is the best deterrent to child abuse, effectively intervening in the lives of children threatened by abuse is a shared responsibility. Strengthening the bonds within families requires community members and leaders to partner with parents. From schools to local social service agencies, we can work together to protect the well?being of our children by recognizing the signs of violence and creating safe, stable, and nurturing environments that safeguard the promise of their futures.

     My Administration will continue to reinforce initiatives that enhance the efforts of child protective service agencies to prevent and treat child abuse. Last December, I was pleased to sign into law the CAPTA (Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment) Reauthorization Act of 2010, giving States and local authorities new tools to identify and address abuse and neglect. This Act will also bolster prevention efforts by addressing risk factors for mistreatment like substance abuse, mental illness, and domestic violence. We are also supporting programs that expand coordination of early childhood services in order to improve outcomes for young children.

     As a Nation, we must continue our work to ensure all children have the ability to live free from abuse and neglect by advocating for the safety of all young people. For more information about what families and communities can do to overcome this devastating problem, concerned Americans can visit: www.ChildWelfare.gov/Preventing.

     NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim April 2011 as National Child Abuse Prevention Month. I call upon all Americans to observe this month with programs and activities that help prevent child abuse and provide for children's physical, emotional, and developmental needs.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirty-first day of March, in the year of our Lord two thousand eleven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fifth.

BARACK OBAMA

George Bush global warming Joe Biden Bush tax cuts Rubio

Fern Siegel: Stage Door: The Book of Mormon

ethics charges washington bureaucrats John Kerry George Will George Bush

Presidential Proclamation--Cesar Chavez Day

Release Time:

For Immediate Release

A PROCLAMATION

     Our Nation's story of progress is rich with profound struggle and great sacrifice, marked by the selfless acts and fearless leadership of remarkable Americans. A true champion for justice, Cesar Chavez advocated for and won many of the rights and benefits we now enjoy, and his spirit lives on in the hands and hearts of working women and men today. As we celebrate the anniversary of his birth, we honor Cesar Chavez's lasting victories for American workers and his noble methods in achieving them.

     Raised in the fields of Arizona and California, Cesar Chavez faced hardship and injustice from a young age. At the time, farm workers toiled in the shadows of society, vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. Families like Chavez's were impoverished; exposed to hazardous working conditions and dangerous pesticides; and often denied clean drinking water, toilets, and other basic necessities.

     Cesar Chavez saw the need for change and made a courageous choice to work to improve the lives of his fellow farm workers. Through boycotts and fasts, he led others on a path of nonviolence conceived in careful study of the teachings of St. Francis of Assisi and Mahatma Gandhi, and in the powerful example of Martin Luther King, Jr. He became a community organizer and began his lifelong advocacy to protect and empower people. With quiet leadership and a powerful voice, Cesar founded the United Farm Workers (UFW) with Dolores Huerta, launching one of our Nation's most inspiring social movements.

     Cesar Chavez's legacy provides lessons from which all Americans can learn. One person can change the course of a nation and improve the lives of countless individuals. Cesar once said, "Non-violence is not inaction. . . . Non-violence is hard work. It is the willingness to sacrifice. It is the patience to win." From his inspiring accomplishments, we have learned that social justice takes action, selflessness, and commitment. As we face the challenges of our day, let us do so with the hope and determination of Cesar Chavez, echoing the words that were his rallying cry and that continue to inspire so many today, "Sí, se puede" – "Yes, we can."

     NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 31 of each year as Cesar Chavez Day.

I call upon all Americans to observe this day with appropriate service, community, and educational programs to honor Cesar Chavez's enduring legacy.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirtieth day of March, in the year of our Lord two thousand eleven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fifth.

BARACK OBAMA

Glenn Beck Rush Limbaugh Hillary Clinton Tea Party Black Panthers

Redondo Beach Dead Fish: 175 Tons Of Dead Sardines Removed From Marina

democrates republicans radical left wing right wing

Statement by the President on the Passing of Geraldine Ferraro

Release Time:

For Immediate Release

Michelle and I were saddened to learn about the passing of Geraldine Ferraro. Geraldine will forever be remembered as a trailblazer who broke down barriers for women, and Americans of all backgrounds and walks of life. Whether it was as a public school teacher, assistant district attorney, Member of Congress, or candidate for Vice President, Geraldine fought to uphold America's founding ideals of equality, justice, and opportunity for all. And as our Ambassador to the UN Human Rights Commission, she stood up for those ideals around the world. Sasha and Malia will grow up in a more equal America because of the life Geraldine Ferraro chose to live. Our thoughts and prayers go out to her husband, John Zaccaro, her children and grandchildren, and their entire family.

putin Blagojevich financial regulations Tony Hayward bill clinton

President Obama Signs Oregon Disaster Declaration

Release Time:

For Immediate Release

The President today declared a major disaster exists in the State of Oregon and ordered Federal aid to supplement State and local recovery efforts in the area struck by a tsunami wave surge on March 11, 2011.
Federal funding is available to State and eligible local governments and certain private nonprofit organizations on a cost-sharing basis for emergency work and the repair or replacement of facilities damaged by the tsunami wave surge in Curry County.
Federal funding is also available on a cost-sharing basis for hazard mitigation measures statewide.
W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Department of Homeland Security, named Dolph A. Diemont as the Federal Coordinating Officer for Federal recovery operations in the affected area.
FEMA said additional designations may be made at a later date if requested by the State and warranted by the results of further damage assessments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FEMA (202) 646-3272.

George Will George Bush global warming Joe Biden Bush tax cuts

Jim DeMint's Support of Tea Party Candidates Could Boost His Senate Profile

When Marco Rubio embarked on his campaign for the Republican nomination in the U.S. Senate race in Florida, he had very little public support among Republican power brokers, who overwhelmingly backed Charlie Crist, Florida governor and odds-on favorite at the time.
Enter Jim DeMint.
The junior Republican senator from South Carolina, who has developed a reputation for bucking authority in the Capitol, met with Rubio, the former speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, in Washington on May 12, 2009. DeMint liked what he heard enough to endorse Rubio a month later. Rubio now has a commanding lead in the polls over Democrat Kendrick Meek and independent Crist, who bolted the GOP when it became clear he would lose to Rubio in the primary.
Rubio is among candidates DeMint has backed in the midterm elections as part of a multimillion-dollar effort to push the Senate's Republican caucus to the right. Those candidates -- mostly associated with the Tea Party movement -- also could help DeMint consolidate a leadership role in the Senate, assuming some or all of them win.
DeMint's early support of the then-relatively unknown Rubio did not go unnoticed. Across the country, other outsider, conservative hopefuls approached DeMint, looking for help in their battles against the establishment.
"There was a line of candidates down the street who wanted to talk to him," said Matt Hoskins, a spokesman for DeMint's political action committee, the Senate Conservatives Fund.
In an effort to bring more like-minded conservatives to the Senate, DeMint endorsed and funded alternative candidates in Republican primaries throughout the country. His Senate Conservatives Fund is still supporting 10 of these candidates in their general election bids, and all but one, Delaware's Christine O'Donnell, are either leading in the polls or in very competitive races.
When the victors arrive in Washington in January -- and political analysts project four to nine of the DeMint picks will win -- they will bring with them a heightened level of influence and power for their benefactor within the Republican Party.
DeMint's goal throughout the election season has been to steer the Senate to the right. With his own re-election assured well before the Nov. 2 vote, DeMint focused his efforts on raising money for the types of conservatives he'd like to serve with in the Senate, especially those with an appetite for reigning in the federal budget. DeMint regularly found himself the only national Republican supporting certain candidates.
"He was the first one," said Owen Loftus, spokesman for Ken Buck, the Republican nominee for Senate in Colorado. "It wasn't until after the primary that others followed."
And DeMint has given more than his name to these candidates. Hoskins estimated that the Senate Conservatives Fund has spent more than $4 million so far on the 10 Senate candidates DeMint is backing.
In the process of nudging the Senate to the right, DeMint almost inevitably will provide a boost to his own influence within the chamber.
"DeMint is a faction leader now," said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics. "He'll have some votes. When you have votes that you can potentially deliver, you have power."
Sabato and other Beltway experts foresee the formation of a small but outspoken Tea Party caucus within the Senate Republicans. The belief is that these new senators will regularly side with DeMint because of a shared view of the role of government and, perhaps, a sense of debt.
"They will come in with sort of a natural affinity in terms of their ideas," said Robert Oldendick, a professor of political science at the University of South Carolina. "Plus, given the role that DeMint is playing in each of their campaigns, there is some kind of, 'OK, I owe some chips to this guy.' So he has become the de facto leader of this."
Hoskins insisted that DeMint's support of these candidates comes with no strings attached. But he expressed optimism that an influx of DeMint-backed candidates could change the direction of the Republican caucus in the Senate.
"I think you're going to see maybe a little more fight from the Republican Party in terms of its principles," Hoskins said. "A lot of people just focus on the numbers but in the Senate sometimes you don't need to have 50 votes. You need three people willing to stand up and speak out on something. If you've got that you can begin to rally the American people and before long you have 50 votes."
Some observers question DeMint's motives in getting so involved in the midterm elections. They claim DeMint is angling to become the Republican leader in the Senate or even to run for president. But Hoskins said DeMint's sole goal is to pack with the Senate with fellow hard-right conservatives.
"He wants to support these candidates to strengthen the Senate," Hoskins said.

gulf oil muslims czar putin Blagojevich

Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney and Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough

Release Time:

For Immediate Release

Location:

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

11:36 A.M. EDT

MR. CARNEY: Good morning, everyone. Thanks for coming to this morning’s gaggle. I just want to clarify that this is pen and pad only. It is not for broadcast of any kind. And with that, as you know, I have with me today Denis McDonough, the President’s deputy national security advisor.

Neither Denis nor I is here to preview the President’s speech. We are here to -- Denis can talk to you about the questions you have about -- substantive questions about Libya, what’s happening there or other issues, but we’re not going to get ahead of the President in terms of the -- what he will actually say in the speech.

So with that, why don't we get started?

Q Are you going to start?

MR. CARNEY: Ben.

Q Okay, well. (Laughter.)

MR. CARNEY: We can end it now if you like, or move on to other issues. (Laughter.)

Q We have a Denis McDonough sighting. It’s good to see you. I will make a run at something here. Can we -- even in a broad sense, can we expect the President to talk about the Libya conflict in the context of the broader Middle East and other aspects of what’s happening in this volatile region, or is this a Libya speech?

MR. McDONOUGH: Well, Ben, it’s nice to see you, and thanks for the opportunity to speak with all of you this morning.

I’m going to follow the guidance of my colleague Jay and not get into the contents of the speech today. Obviously, that will -- the President will lay that down tonight. And you’ve heard him talk about it generally. You heard Secretary Gates and Secretary Clinton talk about our case yesterday, and they surely put it in the context of the region and what’s happening in the region.

Q So going forward, once the U.S. has fully pulled back to this support role and the civilian protection and no-fly, how many ships, planes and service members will we have -- approximately will we have committed to this effort?

MR. McDONOUGH: I didn't understand the full -- I think like the fourth or fifth word you said when we pull back to this what?

Q Support.

MR. McDONOUGH: Oh, okay.

Q That's the word you guys have been using, right?

MR. McDONOUGH: I just didn't understand --

Q So when you guys pull back to the support effort, how many ships, planes and servicemembers will you have committed to this?

MR. McDONOUGH: I don't have a specific number for you, Jake, but --

Q Do you have a rough number, an idea?

MR. McDONOUGH: I’m sure the Joint Staff does, but I don't have that for you right now.

Q Tomorrow they’ll be convening a high-level conference in London to talk about the Libya situation going forward. And Secretary Clinton already mentioned that there will be -- as a post-Qaddafi era. Do you see this conference providing any kind of a way out for Qaddafi, a way, a sort of final “this is your last chance to leave quietly or else” kind of situation? Or is it not going to get quite that specific?

MR. McDONOUGH: Well, we’re obviously very gratified that the U.K. is going to be leading the conference. And Secretary Clinton will obviously be participating as our representative. We do think it’s very important to spell out an end-state, a vision of where this goes. And it’s also very important that we have the opportunity to work that jointly with our allies and with all the countries -- all of our partner countries. So you’ll see a big Arab League presence, as we understand it. And obviously, as the Secretary indicated over the weekend, that you’ll see a presence of Libyan opposition, as well.

So we -- I’m not going to get ahead of the conference because it is a U.K.-led effort. But we do expect that there will be some amplification of the political end-state. And what the Libyan people can expect, which, as the President has made clear throughout this effort, that the bottom line here is that they need to have a greater say in their own future -- something that they have not had for 41 years.

Q And on Syria, the situation continues to deteriorate there. The Syrian forces have been firing on protestors again today. Can you give us a sense of -- is there any sense within this administration that -- of taking acting against Syria, similar to what’s being taken by a coalition against Qaddafi of Libya? And where do you see the whole situation heading?

MR. MCDONOUGH: Well, I’m not sure what you mean by “similar” -- the similar sets of actions, Matt, but --

Q Military action.

MR. MCDONOUGH: There has not been any discussion of that. What we have made clear through various channels is that we expect the Syrian government to respect the rights of Syrians to peacefully protest; that they -- as we’ve made clear across the region, that Syrians have every right to expect that their certain universal aspirations and values be respected, and we’ll continue to communicate that to the Syrian government and to others.

Q I noticed the French President and the British Prime Minister put out a joint statement on Libya, and why wasn’t President Obama part of that?

MR. CARNEY: I’d have to see the joint statement. I don’t know, Dan.

Helene.

Q Hi, Denis. Can you -- now that you’ve set the precedent in Libya, are you guys worried at all that now since we went into Libya that other countries and people -- other countries in the Arab region, including Syria or Bahrain or other places that blew up, are going to expect American intervention? I mean, are you worried at all about the Libya precedent?

MR. MCDONOUGH: Hi, Helene, it’s nice to see you, too.

Q What about the rest of us? What about us?

MR. MCDONOUGH: Well, you didn’t start your question by saying, “Hi, Denis.” (Laughter.) Just trying to keep it real here. (Laughter.)

Q Hi, Denis.

MR. MCDONOUGH: Hi, Dan. (Laughter.) You know, we don’t -- I think it’s very important that we see each of these instances, as the President has said since the beginning in the region, as unique; that obviously there are certain aspirations that are being voiced by each of these movements. But there’s no question that each of them is unique nationally, that each of them, frankly, is nationally motivated; it’s not an international thing by any means.

So we don’t get very hung up on this question of precedent. What we do -- because we don’t make decisions about questions like intervention based on consistency or precedent. We make them based on how we can best advance our interests in the region. And I think you heard Secretary Clinton and Secretary Gates spell that out yesterday.

So do we worry about what’s happening in the region? We worry about it an awful lot. Do we worry about setting some false set of precedent? We don’t, because we’ve been very clearly communicating why we’re doing certain things in certain instances and not in others, and we’ll continue to do that.

Mostly, however, we’ll continue to respect the fact that each of these movements is a national and unique reaction to certain developments in their countries, and we’ll try to do our best to make sure that we recognize that, as we have kind of since the beginning of this effort.

Q But you’ve sort of -- with the Libya case, you’ve sort of made the argument that civilians were in danger and there was a responsibility to protect. I mean, if that becomes the case in Syria, is that --

MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I think we’ve made the case -- we’ve made the argument that each is very unique. And I think you’ve heard Ben and Tom and Secretary Gates and Secretary Clinton and others spell out exactly why we believe Libya was unique. And insofar as we believe it’s unique, we believe it doesn’t set a precedent that should create any expectations in that regard.

Mara.

Q Very nice to see you, Denis.

MR. McDONOUGH: Nice to see you, Mara. (Laughter.)

Q Two questions. One, you said it’s important to spell out the end-state. Could you describe the end-state that you want to see?

MR. McDONOUGH: I think you’ll hear more and more about that from Secretary Clinton in the course of the next couple days, so I’m not going to beat to that.

Q You don't -- do you know what the end-state is that you want to see?

MR. McDONOUGH: We do, yes. We’ve been working on --

Q You just don't want to talk about it?

MR. McDONOUGH: No, I want to make sure that my bosses have the opportunity to talk about it.

Q Okay. The second question about precedent, just to follow on Helene. In the Saturday radio address, the President said that if we didn't do this, other dictators would be emboldened to use force against their own people. Isn’t that by definition the idea of a precedent; that you’re doing this to prevent other dictators from doing the same thing? Doesn’t that suggest that if they do it, they’re going to get the same response?

MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I think that, again, to take it back to where -- what I was saying to Helene -- the fact is that each of these instances is unique, and I could spell out each of the Libya examples which makes it unique: the fact that we had very unsettling and insightful language -- inciting language from the government, to include that he would use no mercy, or that he would go door to door and find people in their closets; his history -- threatening the King of Saudi Arabia; being behind an attack on American citizens, as has been very well spelled out in Pan Am 103; the fact that we had indications of the planning around the use of such violence against individuals.

All of those speak to the unique developments in Libya, and the reason why the President thought it was so important to send a very clear signal that in the event that -- as we did, for example, in the run-up to the elections in Sudan, making clear that the Sudanese leadership understands, as it relates to Darfur and otherwise, that we continue to watch developments, that we continue to be on top of them, and that the international community will hold leaders to account if they don't live up to their expectations.

Does that mean that every time we have to lead an international coalition to intervene militarily? Absolutely not. But --

Q But he seemed to describe this as a kind of deterrent or even a precedent --

MR. McDONOUGH: There’s a lot of ways to --

Q -- where he says that if we didn't do this --

MR. McDONOUGH: I think there’s a lot -- I think what the President is referring to, Mara, is that there is a lot of ways to deter the kind of hateful actions that we’ve seen too often over the course of time.

That could mean, obviously, increasing the amount of time and attention we focus on these issues, making sure that people are understanding that we’re accumulating reporting as it relates to the mistreatment of individuals. And we’ve done that in Sudan. We did that in Libya. We continue to make that case as it relates, for example, in the Libya case, by having the ICC referral in the first resolution out of the Security Council.

So, again, the idea that since we intervened -- since we had led an international coalition to shape the environment for an intervention in Libya means that we have to intervene everywhere else just belies the fact that we don't intervene based on precedent or based on a certain set of consistency guidelines but rather so that we can advance our interests. And each of those interests is going to be unique in each instance.

Q Denis, you said you won’t address the substance of tonight’s speech. How about the procedure? Why is this not in the Oval Office? Why is it at NDU?

MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I think it’s very important to go down to NDU, which is a place where we have mid-career officers from each of the services who are currently serving or who have -- many of them just come back from tours overseas. But if you just line it up, Chip, about what our military is doing right now -- undertaking an enormous effort in Japan to support our Japanese allies in this moment of great trial; continuing the effort in Afghanistan to ensure that Afghanistan does not again become a safe haven for al Qaeda; winding down our effort in Iraq so as to ensure the hand-over at the end of this -- at the end of next year, so that we are in a position to shape the environment using our unique assets and capabilities in Libya so that we can hand off to our allies.

Q So he’ll be addressing all --

MR. McDONOUGH: So he wants to send a very clear signal to the folks there to that regard. But as it relates to whether it should be in the Oval or somewhere else, I think that that's probably better addressed to somebody else.

Q Will he be addressing all those issues tonight that you just went through?

MR. McDONOUGH: I’ll let the speech speak for itself later on.

Q Well, what about the argument that has been widely reported, or at least commentated that he’s doing it to downplay the importance of the Libya operation -- that's why he’s not in the Oval Office.

MR. McDONOUGH: Well, you know, we’ve had meetings every day with the President, and the President is meeting every day either telephonically, in person -- including over the weekend -- with the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Vice President, General Ham, Secretary of State and his National Security Advisor because of the importance he attaches to it. The fact is that he attaches great importance to it. And as I think each of you has heard him say, no issue weighs more heavily on him and he attaches no greater importance to any issue than the decision to send our men and women in uniform into conflict.

Wendell.

Q Denis, is our part of the heavy lifting basically done now in Libya?

MR. McDONOUGH: I think that we feel great -- I think the President feels great pride in the good work of our Marines, soldiers, airmen, sailors because of the remarkable and successful work that they’ve done in turning back, as he said in the speech -- or in the address on Saturday, in turning back the potential onslaught in Benghazi, Ajdabiya, and other places. So I think he feels very proud of their work.

I don't know if you want to characterize it as heavy lifting or whether the important support missions that the President referred to going forward, I think those are -- ultimately come at a big sacrifice with our troops deployed overseas and doing things away from their families. So I think that's all -- I always consider each of those deployments for our guys to be a heavy lift because they are taking time away from their family and doing things that are -- that the President is calling on them to do.

So I don't want to get into the business of characterizing which is heavy and which is light, but I do know that he’s very proud of the work that they’ve done.

Q Can this be called a “Mission Accomplished” moment?

MR. McDONOUGH: I think we’ll -- the President in his address on Saturday laid out what he thinks about what’s happened so far, and I think he’ll discuss that more tonight.

Chuck.

Q Denis, two things. One, I want to follow up on Helene’s question. The President on -- I believe it was on Tuesday in El Salvador said one of the justifications for doing this in Libya had to do with the fragile status of Tunisia and Egypt. So this is a case -- I mean you’ve been making this argument, each -- everything is unique, and yet this was a case where he felt one of the justifications has to do with what’s going on in the region. So can you square that with a Syria, with a Bahrain, with a Yemen?

MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I’d have to go back and look at the specific comment in El Salvador, Chuck. But I think the reference there is to the fact that both Tunisia and Egypt, which I’ve -- Tunisia being the first, Egypt being kind of the center of gravity for the region and historically a real bellwether and leader for the region -- are going through important transitions. And I think that insofar as you saw a humanitarian crisis engulf Libya and lead to a mass exodus of people, either to Tunisia or to Egypt, I think that what he is referring to there is the fact that that would not be in our interests, particularly at this time of delicate transition.

Q But looking to Syria, Syria is -- while Egypt culturally the center of the Arab world, Syria has been at the center of pretty much every Middle East conflict this country has ever dealt with.

MR. McDONOUGH: Well, again, Syria is an important country, and I think I’ve said -- I think I’ve made our case on that one, Chuck. I mean, we’re going to continue to make clear to the government that they ought to respect and -- respect the Syrian people’s ability to peacefully protest, peacefully speak their minds. And insofar as you want me to try to approach this as if what we’re going to do in one country works exactly the same way in another country, I’m just not going to go there because that's not how we operate.

Q And then do you have an estimate on cost? Do you feel as if you’re going to need --

MR. McDONOUGH: I don't have an estimate on that, but I think that's being worked.

Q And comfort level with the Libyan opposition -- has it grown over the last -- because you were very careful early on not to -- almost as if to say, it’s not necessarily that America is taking sides, but it’s trying to clear -- trying to create a fair fight, I guess.

MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I think what we’re trying to do, as I indicated earlier, that we’re -- rather than get into a characterization of the Libyan opposition, because I think that's quite a broad movement of people. You had the people -- shopkeepers and others -- and even in Tripoli, those first several days who were protesting and saying that the mistreatment that they’d been under for so long was -- needed to end. I think they’re part of the opposition. I think those people in Misurata right now who are pinned down by government forces are part of the opposition.

So I think it’s not just the forces that are carrying out this effort as they head back west from Benghazi. It’s not just those individuals, but I think it’s individuals that we saw in those first several days -- shopkeepers, students and others. And there’s no question that they have every right to be heard on this.

Q Denis, can I take another shot since you didn’t answer my --

MR. McDONOUGH: I don’t know what the rules are, Jake, in terms of --

MR. CARNEY: Let me get a few more because we’re going to -- I don’t want Denis to have to stay here too long. So why don’t we -- Laura.

Q Thanks.

MR. McDONOUGH: Hi, Laura.

Q Hi. What is your assessment of the situation on the ground in Libya right now? And could you speak -- including the weekend events. And could you speak to the timing of the speech today, why this is the right moment for the President to be addressing the nation on this?

MR. McDONOUGH: I think the -- I’ve been very impressed by the reporting from many of your colleagues, which I think has been intrepid and I think it’s -- they’ve given us as good an understanding of what’s going on the ground any given day. And I think if you look kind of across the region and the great risk that many of your colleagues are taking to report for the American people, I think it’s very admirable -- not only admirable, but I think very accurate. And so much of the reporting we see reflects a lot of what we’re seeing in other sources.

So I think my assessment is not going to be much different than yours, Laura, which is that the opposition is -- has regained some momentum; that that momentum is feeding some sense of opposition -- or some sense of momentum throughout the country, not just in the east.

And that as it relates to timing, I think that the President has been -- has talked to many of you about it, and each of you has talked with others about in the administration -- has been talking to the American people about this since that Friday afternoon, and talking to Congress about it, really, since a couple of weeks before that when we had a kind of regular series of interactions and briefings and hearings and otherwise on this important issue. But I think he just thinks that given that we are approaching the moment that he indicated would be days not weeks whereby we would begin to transition to our allied lead, he thinks that would make sense to do that now.

Q But why does it make it sense to address the people at the moment when we’re transitioning as opposed to at the moment when we’re getting into it? I mean, why is this the -- is it sort of a --

MR. MCDONOUGH: Well, I disagree a little bit with the premise of the question because he did address the issue when we were getting into it.

Q Well, not in the same length, certainly.

MR. MCDONOUGH: Well, I mean, he gave a very good -- very complete set of remarks on that Friday, which obviously was preceded by a very good meeting with the bipartisan, bicameral leadership down in the Sit Room, another one of those which he did last Friday. Intermittent -- or in between there, we obviously had a series of interactions on the staff and member level on that. So we’ve been engaged with the American people on this throughout and we think this is another good opportunity to do that.

MR. CARNEY: Why don’t we just do two more. Peter and then April.

Q Denis, the Egyptian news agency is quoting the Arab League, as you may know, as saying that it would like to see a stop to the military operations to clear the way for some sort of a political solution. Do you have -- what would your reaction be to that? And is this any indication of sort of a split from the portrayal that the President has been offering that the Arab Leagues is on board, too?

MR. McDONOUGH: Well, I think the Arab League will be present, members and other -- members and Arab League functionaries will be present tomorrow in London, so they’ll have an opportunity to discuss it there.

Q If I could just jump in real quick on terms of a transition to -- Denis, if -- Denis McDonough -- if I could just make this transition. When you talk about the transition, going forward do you see the U.S. playing anything -- once the transition is complete, anything other than a supporting role? Or is it once we’ve crossed over into supporting role, are we in a supporting role for -- and just in Libya, keeping it Libya specific?

MR. MCDONOUGH: I mean, I think the -- I think as Secretary Clinton and Secretary Gates talked about yesterday that we -- we’ve been working very closely with our allies and with our partners; been intense -- intense planning being done over at the North Atlantic Council to ensure that our -- the alliance can take over each of these functions. And so obviously we’ll continue to support that, but we don’t see anything beyond that.

MR. CARNEY: And April, you’re last for Denis. And I’ll stay and take questions on other issues or similar issues, but I want to let Denis get back to work.

April.

Q Good morning.

MR. MCDONOUGH: Hello, April.

Q How are you? All right, with this military action in Libya, how is the administration looking at reshaping or continuing, even, its message to the Muslim world? You had Iraq, you have Afghanistan, and now Libya. And then also, prior to the military action and Libya, how often did President Obama talk with his commander at AFRICOM, then Commander Kip Ward? Because we know he talks to Petraeus and other commanders, but how often did he keep in touch with AFRICOM, especially knowing the buildup -- potential buildup into Libya?

MR. MCDONOUGH: I’m forgetting first question, April.

Q The first question is the Muslim message.

MR. MCDONOUGH: Oh, right. Well, the message continues to be the same, which is that I think if -- as you look at this, the -- obviously the Arab League and the Gulf countries strongly endorse the idea of a no-fly zone expressly because I think they were worried about the potential threat to Muslims in Libya as a result of the actions of the government.

We, obviously, continue to express the same kind of messaging that we have kind of throughout this, basically since the Cairo speech, but also throughout this effort and this series of reform and changes in the region, which is that there are certain aspirations which are universal. And people, regardless of their religion or ethnicity, ought to have the opportunity to express them. And we’ll continue to underscore that as we have here and abroad going forward.

As it relates to AFRICOM, the President -- I guess I could probably try to find a calendar, April, of expressly when he met with him. But, for example, before we had these series of daily briefings that the President has been having with his team, he had had dinner earlier in the week with his combatant commanders, and General Ward and General Ham were both there, the outgoing and incoming from AFRICOM. And then of course around Sudan, the planning for the referendum contingency planning there for, the President was in touch with AFRICOM and its leadership.

Q When was this dinner?

MR. McDONOUGH: He has an annual dinner here at the White House with the combatant commanders.

Q Can I follow up on April just real quick --

Q Let me finish --

MR. McDONOUGH: So oftentimes -- so the President has regular interactions with his team, but then many of the interactions are then incident-specific or issue-specific. So, for example, he does have the monthly SVTCs with General Petraeus, General Mattis, and others, as it relates to Afghanistan.

Q On Libya -- just real quick on the message to the Muslim world and the universal aspirations, because the message has been very similar to Syria and Jordan and Bahrain and Yemen, and yet your Nowruz message to Iran was really quite different. It was very specific. You mentioned names. You were very condemnatory. And then when you went on to speak to the youth, you came sort of this close to saying that if they rose up, you would support them. That's quite different from what you’re saying to the rest of the world.

MR. McDONOUGH: I’m going to let the President’s Nowruz message speak for itself. It’s become an annual effort here where the President communicates with the Iranians and others who are celebrating Nowruz, and so I think I'll let the message speak for itself.

Thanks, Jay.

MR. CARNEY: Thanks, Denis. So I’m here for more questions. We don't want this to go on for too long. But, Jake, yes.

Q There was a report out of West Point in 2007 about the people going through Syria to get into Iraq to fight U.S. troops, and that report had about a fifth of those going in to fight U.S. troops from Libya. There was also a Libyan opposition group that was affiliated with al Qaeda. And my question is, how concerned is the administration about the possible presence within this broad group of Libyan opposition figures that there are those who fought jihad against the United States in Iraq, or are affiliated with al Qaeda or affiliated groups?

MR. CARNEY: Well, Jake, what I'll say is that we have obviously spent a lot of time looking at the opposition in Libya and speaking with opposition leaders. Denis spoke a little bit about that just moments ago. I don't have anything for you on a specific concern. But what we have seen in Libya is something that's national and organic, where, as we’ve seen in other countries, the people of Libya have expressed their desire for greater participation, greater voice in their government, more representation.

But beyond that, I don't have anything specific on elements of the opposition that would be of concern.

Q How confident is the President that whatever comes next after regime change happens, assuming it does, which is the stated policy of this White House, that it will be better for the United States and in our interests -- that government?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I'll share Denis’ opinion that I don't want to get ahead of the Secretary of State, who, as I think you noted, will be addressing this issue to some degree in London tomorrow.

But I will say that in general, this is obviously a situation in the region where there is a lot of unpredictability. But the President believes strongly that it is -- serves the U.S. national interest and national security interests to be on the right side of history and to, as he did with regard to Egypt and as he has with regard to situations across the region, to support the democratic aspirations of the people, to support political dialogue between governments and their people, and that an outcome that results in greater pluralistic, democratic representative governments in the region will increase prosperity, stability and therefore -- and also be good for the United States of America.

Ben.

Q Jay, it sounds like the speech is an attempt to -- the President to explain and recap for the American people why the U.S. got involved, what its goals are, and what's happened, and where we go from here, as opposed to a new policy speech; a chance for people who haven’t been paying attention to every news conference and radio address to kind of hear it all in one place. Is that the right way to think about this speech?

MR. CARNEY: Ben, I’m not going to deviate off of our promise not to characterize or describe or use language from the speech. Obviously, he’s going to speak about Libya, but I don't want to -- while others -- (laughter) --

Q Can we get that -- that has to be off camera? (Laughter.)

MR. CARNEY: Can you -- you all can tweet that, all right? But Chip was asking about whether we’re going to talk about some other countries. But I don't want to -- I’m not going to steer you away from what you just said, but I don't think that I want to go into any detail about his speech because I think it’s important that it comes from him.

Q Well, what does the President want to accomplish?

MR. CARNEY: He will be speaking to the American people tonight to communicate about this very important issue, as he has on a number of occasions leading up to and through the decision to use military force in a coalition with our international partners in Libya. He thinks it’s an essential part of his job as Commander-in-Chief and as President to communicate with the people, just as with the people of this country about an issue this important, and just as he does -- just as he thinks it’s an essential part of his job to communicate with members of Congress, which I think we discussed a lot in earlier briefings.

Q Jay, just to follow up on that, a number of times you and Denis have said you’re going to hear more about -- we’ll hear more about this from Secretary Clinton tomorrow. Will the President leave things unexplained that Hillary Clinton will explain, or tonight will he answer the basic questions --

MR. CARNEY: Laura --

Q I’m not saying what he’s going to say, I’m just asking --

MR. CARNEY: -- just say what he’s not going to say.

Q Well, I’m trying another way. Will the questions that members of Congress have been asking be answered tonight, in terms of what he sees as the end-game -- you don't have to tell me what he’s going to say -- just, do you think that he’ll satisfy those questions, which have been coming from both sides of the aisle, or will he also leave that for the Secretary of State?

MR. CARNEY: No. Look, I was echoing what Denis said, specifically on the issue of what an end-state looks like in Libya and the fact that the Secretary of State will be discussing that question in London. But beyond that -- and the President will obviously use this opportunity to answer the questions that the American people have, as well as members of Congress have, about his decisions with regard to Libya. But I’m not going to -- you can keep trying, but I’m not going to characterize it more than that.

Q The problem that we have is that once the speech is delivered, it’s not like we can come back and then have this moment to say what his goals were.

MR. CARNEY: We’ll talk tomorrow.

Q But we’re going to all have to write about it tonight, so if you could just give us a sense of what the --

MR. CARNEY: But, Laura, he will speak at some length tonight about it, and he’ll do it well, and I think that you ought to --

Q I’m not suggesting he won’t.

MR. CARNEY: He’ll do it, I’m sure, better than I could from here. So I’d just point you to the speech.

Margaret.

Q Thanks. Without talking about the speech, will we -- will Americans have a better sense about what to expect in the rest of the region? In other words, I know each country is case by case and we’re trying to balance what are the U.S. interests against everybody’s desire for more freedoms and democratization and stuff, but is the new formula that if there’s a multilateral willingness to act and a multilateral agreement that a group-Western action would behoove everybody’s interests? Is that kind of the new parameter? There are all these other countries where all this other stuff is happening, and I think there’s two questions on Americans’ minds, right? One is what’s going to happen in Libya; and one is, when Libya is over, what’s going to happen everywhere else. Is the President going to talk about that? And what guidelines can you set forth for how that works?

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, without getting into the contents of the speech, I will say that every country is different. And -- as Denis said -- and we don't -- but there are overarching principles, which I’ve discussed and others; the President himself has discussed, which we -- he looks at this -- which he carries with him as he looks at the situation in the region and the specific countries where unrest is occurring and that is: nonviolent response; political dialogue; the universal rights of citizens. And that guides him.

These are the principles that he enunciated in Cairo in 2009, and those principles guide the way he views what’s happening in the region now. But again, our response -- our policy response to each country will be different because the countries are so different -- not both in their -- what their governments are like; what the cultural makeup is like; the size; the response that the government is using when there have been protests; the international community’s response.

Again, on Libya, do not forget that we had a United States -- I mean United Nations Security Council resolution -- two of them, and in terms of the use of the kinetic force, we had 1973. And beyond the UNSC, we also had support from the Arab League. We had support in a request from the Libyan opposition for precisely what the Security Council resolution allowed for, which was -- to go back to some questions we’ve had before -- that the Libyan opposition did not ask for the use of international force to create regime change, it asked for the help that we have given them in terms of a no-fly zone and the other assistance that's been provided. So these are unique set of circumstances.

Ann.

Q Why is the President not delivering this from the Oval Office? Why in an auditorium? Is it not -- and not primetime but at 7:30 p.m.? Is he trying to not make this speech comparable to other Presidents who have announced war efforts?

MR. CARNEY: I think giving an address that's going to be covered by the -- we hope by all the major networks and cable channels is -- signifies how important we think this is. As Denis mentioned, the National Defense University is a very appropriate place to give a speech like this, given the tremendous engagement and sacrifice that our armed forces have been making around -- Libya being the case specific right now, but around the world in different areas; and one area that Denis mentioned that people tend to forget because it’s not a traditional military operation, and that's the assistance provided to our allies in Japan.

And I think there are different venues to do this. It’s still -- it is the President speaking to the American people and -- at a time when we expect a lot of Americans will be home and able to watch.

Q Will he speak at all directly to any of the opposition voices in Libya, Yemen --

MR. CARNEY: Again, I don't want to preview the contents of the speech.

Laura.

Q Thanks. In the joint declaration made by Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron on Libya, which was just released, they are saying that they are insisting on a new beginning for Libya, and they're saying at the end, we must unite to help them make again a new beginning. Can we expect the President tonight to have something different than that?

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I’m not going to get into the contents of the President’s speech, Laura, but I will say that, broadly speaking, the President has made it clear that he thinks Libya deserves a new beginning and that Colonel Qaddafi is no longer a legitimate leader of Libya, both in the eyes of his people or in the eyes of the world.

Stephen.

Q The advances of the rebels over the weekend appear to be possible because the coalition airplanes got there first and bombed the Libyan positions. Is that the policy now, moving from the defensive mission, which it was in Benghazi, to prepare the ground for the rebels’ advance? And is the coalition prepared to do that all the way to Tripoli?

MR. CARNEY: In terms of tactical military operations, I think the Defense Department is better suited to answer that question.

Q But that's a strategic question --

Q But that’s not -- yes, that’s not tactical.

Q But are you confident that what was taking place was compatible with the resolution protecting civilians? Is that -- is attacking military positions, the Libyan --

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I think that the Defense Department is better suited to answer some of these questions. But I think that the civilian protection aspect of the revolution -- not a revolution -- of the resolution allows for taking action in order -- if the military forces were in question here, Qaddafi’s forces are -- are and have been attacking Libyan civilians, that goes right at the heart of the resolution and the mission it authorizes.

David Corn.

Q Thank you. What is the President going to say tonight? (Laughter.) Critics on the left or right and voices in the media have talked about there being some confusion in the public over the President’s aims and the goals and intentions of this mission. Do you believe that from the very start the White House has communicated effectively with the public about what the President is thinking regards to the Libyan action?

MR. CARNEY: Absolutely, yes. No, David, seriously, I think -- I want to get at this question, because somebody over the weekend on one of these shows suggested that -- or claimed outright that the White House had suggested that some of the questions raised by members of Congress were illegitimate. No one in the White House ever said that. I certainly never said that from this podium.

Questions are legitimate. They deserve to be answered. We have endeavored to answer them from the President, to the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, National Security Advisor, Deputy National Security Advisor, and the Press Secretary and others.

So they’re all -- they are legitimate questions. And it is understandable that there is complexity here that needs to be explained and we have tried to explain, which is that there is the military mission, the goals of which are quite clearly laid out in the resolution authorizing the use of force in all necessary measures.

And then there are the over -- and there are the other baskets, the other tools. I think Secretary Gates said it well that we have more than just hammers in our toolbox here, and the things that we are doing unilaterally as the United States, but also in concert with our international allies, to put pressure on Qaddafi and isolate Qaddafi, that is also very much an important aspect of our policy.

And I think that where you see the question of confusion come up is this idea that because we have stated, the President has stated, that we do not believe Qaddafi is a legitimate leader and that he should leave power, and yet we are not authorizing our military -- or the U.N. Security Council resolution is not authorized to take out or remove or effect regime change in Libya, that there is somehow confusion in that.

There is a military mission designed to protect civilians, to enforce a no-fly zone. And there is a policy of this administration that we are pursuing through other measures that seeks to isolate and pressure Qaddafi to the point where he leaves power.

Q To follow up on that, Mitt Romney has attacked the President for being nuanced and timid on other things. Do you think that having a policy that has these different levels is just hard to explain in a hyper-media --

MR. CARNEY: I would just say, David, we’ve tried to explain it and I think -- when it’s explained well and clearly, that it is understandable. And the President has done that on a number of occasions, and again the American people will hear him speak to it tonight.

Yes.

Q NRC Chairman Jaczko is in Japan right now. Do you have any information? Was he instructed by the White House to go there in any capacity?

MR. CARNEY: I know that he is in Japan, but I don't have his -- I mean, it’s an independent agency, so I don't believe he was instructed by the White House. But obviously I think the fact that he’s there reflects the intense engagement between the NRC and its Japanese counterparts, the number of experts the NRC has had in Japan, trying to assist our allies there. And the fact that the chairman is there, I think, reflects that commitment.

Q May I follow up on that?

MR. CARNEY: Yes.

Q Thank you, Jay. So on the situation in Japan, what's the latest assessment by the administration on the situation on the ground? About a week ago the situation seemed to be -- stopped getting worse, but now Japanese officials are now saying that there may be a leaking from a core of a reactor. Is the situation deteriorating again, or what's your sense of that?

And secondly, on the ripple effect of the Japan earthquake on the U.S. economy or the world economy, a week ago General Motors announced that they laid off 59 people because of the disruption of the parts from Japan. What's your sense of the impact of the earthquake on the U.S. economy and the world economy?

MR. CARNEY: Let me take the economic question first. We continue to believe that while this is a very serious situation and has immediate impacts economically, that the -- we have great confidence in the resiliency of the Japanese people and the strength of its economy and believe that Japan will recover, and that is good for -- obviously for Japan but also for all of its trading partners and for the United States.

On the issue specifically with the reactors, I think the NRC is better suited -- or the Department of Energy -- to get into the specifics. What I can tell you is we obviously monitor it a lot very closely from here. The President gets constant updates. Our national security team is focused on this, continues to be focused on it. And we are aware of the fact that while the world’s attention has shifted to other areas, that the situation in Japan remains serious. And that's why we have committed so many resources to helping the Japanese in any way that we can with that problem.

Yes.

MR. EARNEST: Jay, we should just do last one --

MR. CARNEY: This is the last one, yes.

Q Thank you, Jay. And following up on the diplomatic talks to achieve U.S. stated goal of getting Qaddafi to leave, can you elaborate a little bit on -- beyond financial sanctions? What are they?

MR. CARNEY: Well, there were a lot of things that were laid out in the initial United Nations Security Council resolution, but they are -- the financial sanctions are important; the travel restrictions are important; the referral to the International Criminal Court is very important.

I mean, part of this is aimed directly at Colonel Qaddafi, but obviously a lot of it is aimed at those around him who have to make a judgment about what their lives will look like if they continue to stand by Colonel Qaddafi and -- with the full understanding that they will be held accountable by the international community. And we obviously encourage the people around Colonel Qaddafi and the Libyan regime to consider that very carefully, consider the future of their country, the future of their people and their own personal futures in making decisions in these next days and weeks.

Thanks, guys.

END
12:23 P.M. EDT

barney franks obamacare socialized medicine socialism stem cell

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Jim DeMint's Support of Tea Party Candidates Could Boost His Senate Profile

socialism stem cell gulf oil muslims czar

Remarks by the President at Univision Town Hall

Release Time:

For Immediate Release

Bell Multicultural High School
Washington, D.C.

10:37 A.M. EDT

MR. RAMOS: Mr. President, I have the first question. As a newscaster and as an anchor, I have to ask first. And I would like to ask something that everybody wants to know. I don't know if you can give us something about the speech you're going to give later on for us to listen to here at Univision. And we are going through a very difficult time. We're going through three different wars at the same time. I was looking at the education budget in the country and it amazes me that every dollar that is being spent on education we spend $10 for war and the Department of Defense. Do we need to change that? What would you do?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, I just want to say, Jorge, it’s wonderful to be with Univision. It’s wonderful to be here at Bell Multicultural. (Applause.) You guys are doing outstanding work.

I also want to make a confession, and that is that although I took Spanish in high school, I'm receiving translation through this earpiece. (Laughter.) But for all the young people here, I want you guys to be studying hard because it is critical for all American students to have language skills. And I want everybody here to be working hard to make sure that you don't just speak one language, you speak a bunch of languages. That's a priority. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: Let’s talk about Libya.

THE PRESIDENT: Jorge, with respect to Libya, I am going to be addressing this issue tonight, and I’ve already discussed it on several occasions, including on your program.

Our involvement there is going to be limited both in time and in scope. But you’re absolutely right that we have a very large defense budget. Some of that is necessitated by the size of our country and the particular special role that we play around the globe. But what is true is that over the last 10 years, the defense budget was going up much more quickly than our education budget.

And we are only going to be as strong as we are here at home. If we are not strong here at home, if our economy is not growing, if our people are not getting jobs, if they are not succeeding, then we won’t be able to project military strength or any other kind of strength.

And that's why in my 2012 budget, even though we have all these obligations -- we’re still in Afghanistan; I have ended the war in Iraq, and we’ve pulled 100,000 troops out -- (applause) -- but we still have some commitments there -- despite all that, my proposed budget still increases education spending by 10 percent, including 4 percent for non-college-related expenses. But we also increased the Pell Grant program drastically so all these outstanding young people are going to have a better chance to go to college. (Applause.)

So the larger point you’re making I think is right that we have to constantly balance our security needs with understanding that if we’re not having a strong economy, a strong workforce and a well-educated workforce, then we’re not going to be successful over the long term.

MR. RAMOS: Okay. Mr. President, one of the main problems here in the United States is that -- with Hispanics especially -- is that only one out of three of Hispanic students actually graduates from high school. They drop out. And Iris Mendosa, a student from this school has the first question. Iris?

Q Hello, Mr. President. My name is Iris Mendosa, and I attend Washington, D.C. Bell Multicultural High School. And my question is: What can we do to reduce the amount of students that drop out of school before graduating?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I appreciate the question. And I want to reiterate something that Mr. Conde said at the outset. This is an issue that’s not just important for the Latino community here in the United States; this is an issue that is critical for the success of America generally, because we already have a situation where one out of five students are Latino in our schools, and when you look at those who are 10 years old or younger, it’s actually one in four. So what this means is, is that our workforce is going to be more diverse; it is going to be, to a large percentage, Latino. And if our young people are not getting the kind of education they need, we won’t succeed as a nation.

Now, here’s what’s also important -- that eight out of 10 future jobs are going to require more than a high school education. They’re going to require some sort of higher education, whether it’s a community college, a four-year college, at the very least some job training and technical training -- all of which means nobody -- nobody -- can drop out. We can’t afford to have anybody here at Bell drop out. We can’t have anybody drop out anywhere in the country.

Now, there are some things that we know work. To the extent that young people are getting a good start in school and are falling behind, they’re less likely to drop out. So that’s why it’s important for us to invest in early childhood education. And my budget makes sure that we put more money into that. In K through 12, we’ve got to make sure that we’ve got the highest-quality teachers. We have to make sure that we have parental involvement so that we are building a culture in our community. Everybody -- businesses, philanthropies, churches, whoever these young people are interacting with, they’ve got to hear a message that they don’t have any choice, they’ve got to graduate, and everybody is going to be behind them.

We know that there’s some programs that will help young people catch up if they’ve already fallen behind. And one of the things that we’ve emphasized is something called Race to the Top, which is a program that says to states and school districts all across the country, if you design programs that are especially designed to get at those schools that are creating a lot of dropouts, that are not performing up to par, we’ll give you extra money if you are serious about reform.

So we’re going to have to take a comprehensive approach to make sure that we reduce dropout rates. And the last point I’ll make on this -- there are about 2,000 schools in the country where the majority of dropouts take place. I mean, we can name them. We know what these schools are. And for us to put some extra help, some intensive help, into those schools to help turn them around is something that we've really got to focus on.

Mr. Conde and I were both at a school down in Miami that used to have a 60 percent dropout rate and now they’ve been able to reduce that drastically because they completely turned the school around -- got a new principal, got -- about a third of the teachers were new, had a whole new approach, had the whole community surround them.

We can do that with each of those 2,000 schools around the country, we can make a big difference. Great question. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: As you know, the success in the students depends not only on good teachers and good administrators; it also depends on their parents.

Q I’m from Chile. And my daughter attends CHEC. I do know that the success of our children’s education also hinges on their parents. So my question is, how can we help to fight illiteracy and lack of language knowledge, English knowledge?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, the fact that you’re here shows that you’re a very involved parent and that’s where this has to start. No matter who you are, no matter where you come from, if you’re a parent, you are the single most important factor in whether your child is going to succeed. And so starting out very young, reading to your children -- even if you yourself are not an English-language speaker, reading them in Spanish gets them used to the idea of reading and builds their vocabulary and will be building a foundation for learning.

Making sure that as your children get older, that you’re turning off the television set and making sure that they’re doing their homework -- even if you as a Spanish-speaking person may not be able to help them with all their homework, you can make sure that they’re actually doing it. Parents making sure that they’re involved in their schools and going and meeting teachers. And I know that there are some schools where parents experience not a good interaction with the schools. The schools seem to push them away, particularly if English is not their native language. But you have rights as parents to make sure that your children are getting what they need. And the more you’re interacting with the teachers and the principals and the administrators, the more support you can provide to your child.

So those are all areas where parents can make a big difference. What we’re trying to do as the government is to make sure that we’re providing more incentives for schools to improve their parental involvement programs. We’re trying to make sure that schools are open and understand that it is up to them to provide a welcoming environment to parents so that they can be involved in their child’s education.

And specifically with respect to young people who are coming to school and English may not be their native language, we’ve got to make sure that we continue to fund strong programs, both bilingual education programs but also immersion programs that ensure that young people are learning English but they’re not falling behind in their subjects even as they are learning English.

And there’s a way to do that that is effective. We have schools that do it very well; there are some schools that don’t do it as well. We want to lift up those models that do it well. And parents should be demanding and insisting that even if your child is not a native English speaker, there is no reason why they can’t succeed in school, and schools have an obligation to make sure that those children are provided for. They have rights just like everybody else. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: Thank you very much. Mr. President, in San Salvador, we had the opportunity to have a conversation regarding deportation, and I was telling you that your government has deported more immigrants than any other President before. And you also told me that many students in the United States, even though they are undocumented, are not deported. But Karen Montinado (ph) sent us this video, and I wanted for you to watch it together with me, and I want for you to give me your opinion regarding her experience:

Q My question for the President is why saying that deportations have stopped or the detention of many students like me? Why is it that we are still receiving deportation letters like this one?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, Jorge, I said before we have re-designed our enforcement practices under the law to make sure that we’re focusing primarily on criminals. And so our deportation of criminals are up about 70 percent. Our deportation of non-criminals are down. And that's because we want to focus our resources on those folks who are destructive to the community. And for a young person like that young woman that we just spoke to, who’s going to school, doing all the right things, we want them to succeed -- which is why I have been such a strong proponent of the DREAM Act; why I reiterated during my -- (applause) -- why I reiterated during my State of the Union speech that we need to pass the DREAM Act. We came close in December. It almost happened.

And for those students here who aren’t familiar with what the DREAM Act says, basically what it says is if you’re a young person who came to this country with your parents, even if you were undocumented when you came here but you were a child -- you didn't make the decision -- you’ve grown up as an American child, and we want your talents here in the United States. And if you have done right in your community, if you’ve been studying hard, if you’ve been working in school, you should be able to go ahead and get a process towards legalization and a process whereby you can be a full-fledged citizen in this country.

We almost were able to get it passed. We fell a few votes short. I believe that we can still get it done. But it’s going to be very important for all the viewers of Univision, all the students who are interested in this issue, we’ve got to keep the pressure up on Congress. And I have to say without being partisan that the majority of my party, the Democrats, I got their votes to get this passed, but we need a little bit of help from the other side. And so all of you need to contact your members of Congress, contact your members of the Senate, and let them know that this is something that is the right thing to do.

America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the President, am obligated to enforce the law. I don't have a choice about that. That's part of my job. But I can advocate for changes in the law so that we have a country that is both respectful of the law but also continues to be a great nation of immigrants. And the DREAM Act is a perfect example of a law that can help fix this.

Of course, I believe that we also have to have an even more comprehensive reform of our immigration system. It’s broken right now. We have to have secure borders. We have to make sure that businesses are not exploiting undocumented workers, but we have to have a pathway to citizenship for those who are just looking for a better life and contributing to our country. And I’ll continue to fight for that. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: Mr. President, my question will be as follows: With an executive order, could you be able to stop deportations of the students? And if that’s so, that links to another of the questions that we have received through univision.com. We have received hundreds, thousand, all related to immigration and the students. Kay Tomar (ph) through univision.com told us -- I’m reading -- “What if at least you grant temporary protective status, TPS, to undocumented students? If the answer is yes, when? And if no, why not?”

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, temporary protective status historically has been used for special circumstances where you have immigrants to this country who are fleeing persecution in their countries, or there is some emergency situation in their native land that required them to come to the United States. So it would not be appropriate to use that just for a particular group that came here primarily, for example, because they were looking for economic opportunity.

With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed -- and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know that we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws.

There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.

That does not mean, though, that we can't make decisions, for example, to emphasize enforcement on those who’ve engaged in criminal activity. It also doesn’t mean that we can't strongly advocate and propose legislation that would change the law in order to make it more fair, more just, and ultimately would help young people who are here trying to do the right thing and whose talents we want to embrace in order to succeed as a country. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: You mentioned minutes ago -- you talked about the DREAM Act. And you talk to parents and teachers and one of the things of the educational system in the United States is it allows them to go to elementary school and secondary studies, high school, but it doesn’t allow them to go to college. And Sonia Marlene (ph) has a question regarding the DREAM Act. And students have been frightened and they are saying publicly that they are undocumented and they are being at risk of deportation.

Q Thank you for being here in this forum. My name is Sonia Marlene(ph). And I'm a mother, a parent, an activist, and pro-undocumented young people. After the non-passing of the DREAM Act in Congress, many students asked me, why should I keep struggling to continue with my studies when I don't have a future in this country? What should I answer to them, Mr. President?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that change in this country sometimes happens in fits and starts. It doesn’t happen overnight. If you think of the history of the civil rights struggle, though even after Brown v. Board of Education, there were still struggles to ensure that ultimately everybody was treated with dignity and respect.

I think with respect to the DREAM Act, as I said, it was very close to passage. We didn’t get it passed this time, but I don't want young people to be giving up because if people in the past had given up, we probably wouldn’t have women’s rights, we wouldn’t have civil rights. So many changes that we’ve made had to do with young people being willing to struggle and fight to make sure that their voices are heard.

And one of the things just to reemphasize is if we’ve got talented young people here in the United States who are working hard, who aspire to college, in some cases want to serve in the military, want to serve our country, it makes no sense for us to send them away.

One of the strengths of America, compared to other countries, is that we’re always attracting new talent to our shores -- people who reinvigorate the American Dream. And that has to continue in this generation. And so they should know, these young people should know that they have a President who believes in them and will continue to fight for them and try to make sure that they have full opportunities in this country. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: Thank you. At the beginning of this show, Mr. President, we were saying why are 10 dollars spent in wars and a dollar on schools. Somebody else asked why do we help people who have more money instead of doing that to people who have less money.

The next question comes the Jimenes family, and so this is what they want to ask you: “Hello, Mr. President. California is one of the last on the list regarding spending in schools. However, it seems that there’s a lot of money for arms and for corporate bailouts but not for school budgets. How is it our children can stay strong in our country, can survive, if we don’t want to spend in their education today, a quality education?”

THE PRESIDENT: Well, the irony is, is that California used to be famous for having the best school system in the country. And that wasn’t that long ago. I mean, when I was a young person -- I know I seem very old to all of you -- (laughter) -- but when I was a young person back in the ‘70s, ‘80s, everybody would say what a great public school system California had and what a great university system California had. But, unfortunately, most education funding is done at the state level. And in many states, what’s happened is that there have been various laws put in place that limit the ability to raise money for schools, partly by capping property taxes.

And, look, I’m somebody who believes that money is not everything when it comes to schools. You’ve got some great schools in low-income neighborhoods that don’t have a high tax base but you’ve got a dynamic principal, you’ve got great teachers, you’ve got parents who are rallying around the school. You can do well even if you don’t have a lot of money.

But money does make a difference in terms of being able to provide the resources, the supplemental help, the equipment, the technology, the science labs, all those things. And the fact of the matter of is, is that in most states what we need is for people to reprioritize.

Part of what happened in California was there were huge amounts of money spent on prisons and that drained away money from the school system. And if it turns out that it costs $16,000 or $17,000 or $20,000 for one inmate, and you could spend an extra $3,000 or $4,000 or $5,000 in a school to keep that -- young people from going into prison in the first place, it’s a smart investment for us to invest in the schools first.

But what’s important, I think, for everyone to understand is this is typically a decision that’s made at the state level. And so in each of the states, wherever you’re watching -- in Arizona, in New Mexico, in California, in Maryland -- whatever state you’re in, you should be pressing your state legislatures and your governors to make sure that they are properly prioritizing education when it comes to the state budget, because just as a country is going to succeed because it’s got the best workers, the same is going to be true in states.

Companies can locate anywhere today, and they’re going to choose to locate in those places where they’ve got the most well-educated, best-trained workforce, because then that saves them money. They don’t have to re-train people. They know that whoever they hire they’re going to have good math skills and good science skills and good communication skills. So that’s a huge competitive advantage for any state in the country. And it’s important, I think, for you to make sure that all your state and local officials know this is something that you’re paying attention to.

But it’s a great question. Thank you. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: One of the things that surprised me during this investigation that we ran through is that when I get eight Hispanic students together, only one of them, one out of eight of Hispanics will go to college. That I think is just a waste of talent and energy and their life. And Kenny Alvarado (ph) has a question regarding changing that number, who knows, that eight or seven can go, that most of them can actually attend school.

Q Hello, Mr. President, my name is Kenny Alvarado. I attend Bell Multicultural and I have great aspirations to be able to attend university. Before a student was able to receive two scholarships a year to pay for college. Now that student can only have one. What is your government going to do to keep the Pell scholarship without cutting the budget for education?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, I expect you to go to college, so -- I’m confident that you’re going to succeed. (Applause.) I believe in you.

Here’s what we’ve done over the last two years. First of all, we increased the level of Pell Grants so now you can get up to $800 more in Pell Grants every year than you were able to do two years ago because of changes that we made.

We also made Pell Grants available to millions more students around the country. So we expanded eligibility so that more young people could get access to student loans and grants that would help them pay for college.

The way we did this -- the student loan program through the government had been previously funneled through banks, and the banks were taking out a profit on the student loan program, even though these were all loans that were guaranteed by the U.S. government -- so the banks weren’t taking any risks. They were basically just processing these loans, but they were taking a couple billion dollars off the top in profits. And we said, well, why do we have to go through the banks? Why don't we just give these loans directly to the students? That will save us billions of dollars. That way we can expand the program, make sure that more young people can go to college. So that's what we have already implemented.

In addition, what we’ve said is that starting in 2014 -- so right about when you guys are -- some of you are starting college, in some cases some of you will be right in the middle of college -- we’re going to institute a program whereby your loans repayments will not have to exceed more than 10 percent of your income.

Now, this is something very important for all of you, because -- (applause) -- I speak from experience. Michelle and I, we didn’t come from wealthy families. So we came from families a lot like yours, and we had to take out all these student loans to go to college and law school. By the time we were out, we had, I think between us, $120,000 worth of debt. It took us 10 years to pay it off. And we were lucky because we both got law degrees; we could make enough money to pay that debt.

But let’s say that we had wanted to teach, and we were only making -- what’s a teacher making these days? (Laughter.) Not enough, is what somebody said. (Laughter.) Or you wanted to go into public service, or work for a non-profit. You might not be able to make enough to afford servicing $120,000 worth of debt, or $60,000 worth of debt. So what we said is we’re going to cap at 10 percent. And we will give you additional help if you go into helping professions like teaching that are so important to our future.

The bottom line is this. We’ve made enormous strides over the last two years. If you are working hard, if you guys are getting good grades in school, if you are ready to be admitted to college, there's no reason why you should not be able to afford to go to college. We’re going to make sure that we’re helping to provide you the money you need. All right? (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: Well, thank you. Well, Kenny, the President of the United States wants for you to go to a university or college. We’ll talk to you in four more years, okay? (Laughter.)

Mr. President, one of the biggest tragedies is that -- you don’t have to die to go to school and many of our students are suffering bad -- bullying is what it’s called in English, they’re being abused at school. And you and your wife have been involved in a program to avoid that to happen. But the bottom line is at least one of four students go to school and instead of studying they are at risk of being wounded or even die. Jessica Bermudes (ph) sent us a video -- I don’t know how many thousands of letters you receive, but you received one from her. And this is what she wrote:

“Mr. President, I wrote you a letter after my son passed away but you never answered. It’s been two years since he committed suicide and I haven’t been able to get any legal remedy that would do justice to my son. Compensation is not enough. Would you be willing to pass a federal law that sanctions bullying like the type my son suffered?”

THE PRESIDENT: Well, obviously we’re heartbroken by a story like that and we’ve been seeing reports in the news -- and some young people here, you’ve probably seen young people who took their own lives because they had been experiencing such terrible bullying and peer pressure in the schools.

Now, look, bullying has always existed. I’ve said before when I was a kid, I was teased. I had a different name; I had an unusual background; I had big ears. (Laughter.) And so all of us have been bullied at some point -- except maybe Jorge because Jorge was very handsome and cool in school, I’m sure. (Laughter.)

MR. RAMOS: I don’t think so.

THE PRESIDENT: So all of us have experienced this to some degree or another. But it’s gotten worse partly because of new communications. Right? You guys understand this better than I do, but Facebook, Twitters -- (laughter) -- you know, all that stuff makes for added pressure not just in school but also outside of school. You can’t escape it.

And so what we did was we had a conference at the White House where we convened interested groups from across the country -- parent organizations, philanthropies, student organizations -- to find ways that -- strategies that we could put in place to reduce bullying.

Now, one of the most powerful tools, it turns out, is students themselves. And there are schools where young people have done surveys to find out how much bullying is taking place in school and how secure do you feel in the classroom. And then the students themselves started an entire campaign in the schools to say, we’re not going to tolerate bullying, and in fact, if we see somebody bullying, we’re going to call them out on it. And that peer pressure could actually end up making as much of a difference as just about anything.

But obviously we are interested in finding additional strategies for how we can reduce this epidemic of bullying that’s taking place. And the young people here, if you have suggestions in terms of how we should approach these problems, we want to listen to you. And if you go to the White House website, whitehouse.gov, that will give you a set of tools and strategies that we’re pursuing in terms of trying to make a difference on this issue. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: As you know, Mr. President, we are pressuring parents for them to help their children, and this is what they’re telling us through Univision and univision.com, is that maybe they don’t speak English or they don’t have the time because they are working hard. Maybe they need to -- they are concerned about immigration problems. But Margarita Gramajo (ph) is a parent, and she will speak for herself.

Q Good morning, Mr. President. My name is Margarita Gramajo (ph). I know many parents that don’t speak English, and they also have to work long hours to be able to feed their families. I would like to know what your government can do, how can you help these parents so they are better able to support their children’s education?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, the first thing we can do is make sure that parents have economic opportunities, that they’ve got a job that pays a decent wage. Obviously, in many immigrant communities, families and parents may be working two or three jobs because they're making such low wages. Oftentimes, they don't have benefits, so if they get sick, they don't have a place to turn and that becomes an added burden. And so, overall, one of the most important things we can do is just make life easier for those who don't make a lot of money and are sometimes working in the underground economy.

And that's why comprehensive immigration reform is important. That's why our health care reforms that will provide health insurance for a lot of families that are out there is so important, because that will relieve some of the financial pressure and burden.

But when it comes to schools, as I said before, I want schools to welcome parents. I want schools to go out there actively calling parents and finding out how can we work with you to make sure your students can achieve. How can we enlist you in the project of making sure your young people graduate from high school, go to college and move on to a career? If a school is not doing that, if it’s not actively reaching out to parents, then it’s not doing its job.

And my Secretary of Education is sitting right in front of you, Arne Duncan. And he travels all across the country, and a lot of what we do when we talk to schools is telling them how important parental involvement is, and trying to recruit parents.

Now, if they don't speak English, then it’s important for those schools to think about strategies to have translators in the schools to help them communicate with the teachers and the principals. If it turns out that the school budgets are tight and they can’t afford to hire translators, then we should enlist community members who are bilingual to come in and volunteer on parent-teacher meetings.

This is where philanthropies can make a big difference. This is where churches can make a big difference -- because there’s no reason why the community can’t also mobilize to support parents to make sure that they are able to take the time to meet with teachers and support the overall process of education.

So I can’t make a parent who’s not interested, interested. Ultimately, that has to come from the parent, him or herself. But what I can do is make sure that the school knows how important the parent is, and that’s something that we are emphasizing in every program that we do. And when we evaluate, for example, programs like Race to the Top, where we’re looking to give extra money to schools, one of the criteria we look at is, do you have a smart plan for getting parents involved -- because oftentimes that may be one of the indicators of success. All right? (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: One of the main concerns that parents have is not only that one out of four in school, but besides that, there’s a huge need for them to work and who are they going to leave their children with? Early development -- who will take care of my child when they have to go to work? Belquiz Martinez (ph) has the next question, also from a mother, from a parent.

Go ahead.

Q Well, good evening, Mr. President. My name is Belquiz Martinez (ph), and my children attend bilingual education. And this is my question. I would like to know what are you going to do -- what your presidency is going to do to keep the bilingual programs and the early Head Start?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, one of the things that we’ve already done in my first two years as part of the Recovery Act was to put several billion additional dollars into Head Start programs and early childhood education programs.

The Latino community is a young population and so there are a lot of young kids, so they need high-quality early childhood education, high-quality daycare, high-quality Head Start programs, more than just about any other community. Unfortunately, actually, they are underrepresented in these programs, and we need to do more to provide that kind of support. So in our new budget we’re also putting additional resources into early childhood education.

This is something that will pay big dividends for the entire society down the road. Because what we know is, when kids get a good start, when they come to school prepared, then they are more likely to stay on grade level and not fall behind.

On the other hand, if a child comes to school and they don’t know their colors, they don’t know their letters, they’re not accustomed to being read to, then they’re starting off at a disadvantage. And kids can overcome those disadvantages -- I’m somebody who never gives up on any kid -- but, let’s face it, the longer they’re behind, the more discouraged they get. They may get turned off from school and ultimately they end up dropping out.

So we’re already putting more money into these programs. It’s not enough. Waiting lines for high-quality childcare is still too long. We've got to do more.

The other thing is, in addition to more money we have to reform many of these programs, because, frankly, sometimes a childcare program may look nice on the outside, but when you get inside it turns out that the instructors there, they’re not professionally trained, they don't know anything about early childhood development. They’re basically just babysitters -- which is fine if you're going out for an evening with your spouse, but if these folks are going to be with your child each and every day for five hours, six hours, eight hours, you want somebody who knows -- who’s been professionally trained and understands how to make sure that you're giving a good foundation of learning to children.

And so we're doing a lot of work in improving professional development and the quality of the programs, even as we increae the money to support subsidies for those programs. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: We have talked about different topics, very important, giant concepts, but the main concerns of our children are more concrete. It’s about tests. When was the last time you took a test -- do you remember that?

THE PRESIDENT: Let me tell you, I am tested every day. (Laughter.) I was tested when I appeared on Jorge’s program a couple of -- four days ago. (Laughter.) He’s a very tough instructor, a tough -- he’s a tough grader. (Laughter.)

MR. RAMOS: You passed your test. Lisa has a question regarding tests.

Q My name is Lisa and I'm going to attend my last year here at Bell Multicultural High School. Students go through a lot of tests. Could you reduce the amount of tests? For example, we found a student passes a test, he shouldn’t take the same test next year.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think probably what you're referring to are standardized tests -- because if you're just talking about your math or your science or your English test, tough luck -- (laughter) -- you’ve got to keep on taking those tests, because that's part of the way that teachers are going to know whether you're making progress and whether you understand the subject matter.

What is true, though, is, is that we have piled on a lot of standardized tests on our kids. Now, there’s nothing wrong with a standardized test being given occasionally just to give a baseline of where kids are at. Malia and Sasha, my two daughters, they just recently took a standardized test. But it wasn’t a high-stakes test. It wasn’t a test where they had to panic. I mean, they didn’t even really know that they were going to take it ahead of time. They didn’t study for it, they just went ahead and took it. And it was a tool to diagnose where they were strong, where they were weak, and what the teachers needed to emphasize.

Too often what we've been doing is using these tests to punish students or to, in some cases, punish schools. And so what we've said is let’s find a test that everybody agrees makes sense; let’s apply it in a less pressured-packed atmosphere; let’s figure out whether we have to do it every year or whether we can do it maybe every several years; and let’s make sure that that's not the only way we're judging whether a school is doing well.

Because there are other criteria: What’s the attendance rate? How are young people performing in terms of basic competency on projects? There are other ways of us measuring whether students are doing well or not.

So what I want to do is -- one thing I never want to see happen is schools that are just teaching to the test. Because then you're not learning about the world; you're not learning about different cultures, you're not learning about science, you're not learning about math. All you're learning about is how to fill out a little bubble on an exam and the little tricks that you need to do in order to take a test. And that's not going to make education interesting to you. And young people do well in stuff that they’re interested in. They’re not going to do as well if it’s boring.

So, now, I still want you to know, though, you're going to have to take some tests, man. (Laughter.) So you're not going to get completely out of that. All right? (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: My host here is Maria Tukeva, the principal of Columbia Heights educational campus, and hers has to do with teachers and to hire the teachers and get better pay for the teachers.

Q Mr. President, first of all, thank you so much again for the great honor of your presence here. I have a very important problem. You know the lack of African American teachers and Latinos, they have to have role models they can relate to. How can we create a training and recruiting program for African Americans and Latino teachers? (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: I think this is a great question. This is a great question. I’m not sure I’m going to get these statistics exactly right, but I think that if the percentage of Latino students now is 20 percent, percentage of African American students might be 12-15 percent, the number of African American and Latino teachers may only be 3 or 4 percent, maybe 5 percent. And when it comes to male teachers, it’s even lower. That's a problem.

So there are a couple things that we can do. Number one is I think it’s very important for us to say to young people who are thinking about a career, think about teaching. There’s no job that's more important and is going to give you more satisfaction and will give you more impact and influence over your community than if you go into teaching.

And so we’re trying to constantly elevate teaching as a profession. And I think we as a society have to do that, because young people, they're kind of seeing what appears to be valued. And if all they see are basketball players and rappers and -- then that's where they’ll gravitate to. And if, on the other hand, they see that teachers are being lifted up as important, then they’ll think about teaching as a career. So that's part number one.

Part number two, we’re working to figure out how to do more recruitment in historically black colleges and universities, in Hispanic-serving institutions. We need to get in there and say to young people, consider teaching as a career. And I know that that’s something that Arne Duncan has emphasized.

I’m going to be giving a commencement at Miami Dade College, which, if I’m not mistaken, is the single largest institution serving Hispanic students in the country. President Padrón is here, who also happens to chair my Council on Educational Excellence for Hispanic Students. And one of the things that I want to do when I’m there, I’ll speak to the fact that I want a bunch of those young people going into teaching.

So we’ve got to go to where the students are, get them early, get them in the pipeline, provide them the outstanding training that they need, and make sure then they’re supported as they go through. Because part of the challenge in teaching, it’s not just enough to recruit the teacher. Once the teacher is in the classroom, they’ve got to have support systems in place, professional development in place, so that they can learn their trade.

Because it’s like anything else. I mean, there’s no job where you would just start off the first day and suddenly you know exactly what you’re doing. Jorge, I’m sure, was a very young person when he became a news anchor, but I’m sure he had to get some tips and he got better and better as time went on. Certainly that’s true for me as a public servant, as an elected official. Well, teachers are the same way.

So we’ve got to have professional development programs. We’ve got to have mechanisms to make sure that people succeed over time. But I’m confident that if we give them the opportunity, there are going to be a lot of young people who want to pursue this career. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: Not long ago I was having a conversation with my son. He’s only 12 years old, and he couldn’t believe that I grew up in a world where there were no cell phones, no Internet, no computers. (Laughter.) So do you have your BlackBerry with you, or do you have an iPhone? What do you have?

THE PRESIDENT: You know, I took my BlackBerry off for this show, because I didn’t want it going off, and that would be really embarrassing. But usually I carry a BlackBerry around.

MR. RAMOS: Do you have an iPad?

THE PRESIDENT: I do have an iPad.

MR. RAMOS: Your own computer?

THE PRESIDENT: I’ve got my own computer.

MR. RAMOS: Very well. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: I mean, Jorge, I’m the President of the United States. You think I’ve got a -- (laughter and applause) -- you think I’ve got to go borrow somebody’s computer? (Laughter.) Hey, man, can I borrow your computer? (Laughter.) How about you? You’ve got one?

MR. RAMOS: Okay, Diana has a question regarding computers. So go ahead, Diana.

Q Hello, Mr. President, my name is Diana Castillo (ph), and I attend Bell. My question is, do you believe that the new technology like iPads, computers, helps students in their education? And if that is so, what can be done so we can have access to this technology?

MR. RAMOS: A minute -- I’m afraid I'll have to tell the most powerful man in the world that he only has one minute.

THE PRESIDENT: Actually, the truth is it can make a difference. If the schools know how to use the technology well, especially now with the Internet, it means that students can access information from anywhere in the world. And that's a powerful tool.

So a lot of schools that we’ve seen now have every student getting a computer. We visited a school up in -- where was that? It was in Boston, at Boston Tech? Is that what it’s called? And each student gets a computer. And they were able to do science experiments and get the information right on the screen directly as they were working in the labs.

So what we want to do is encourage schools to use technology. But technology is not a magic bullet. If you have a computer, but you don't have the content and you don't have teachers who know how to design good classes around the computer, it’s not going to make a difference. So it’s not just the technology. We also have to make sure that we have the teachers that are trained to work with students so they can use that technology to explore all these -- all the information that's available out there today. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: It’s my understanding that you also wanted to address our audience -- last words.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, I just want to thank again Univision for hosting this town hall. Part of the reason why we felt this was so important is because the Latino community in this country will be a key for our future success. And all of the young people who are sitting here are going to be a key to our success. And that means that everybody has to be involved in this project of lifting up graduation rates; lifting up performance in things like math and science; making sure that young people are getting education beyond high school so that they are prepared for the careers of the future.

And what I want to say is that the government can do its part -- we can increase funding for education; we can make college more affordable through grant programs and loan programs -- but we can’t do it alone. Ultimately, everybody has to be involved, and that includes the students here.

And I just want to say to all the young people here -- this is a competitive world now, and you can’t expect to be able to just find a job just because you’re willing to work. If you haven’t prepared through a good education, you are going to be trapped in low-end jobs. And so you’ve got to bring an attitude of hard work and pursuing excellence each and every day. That’s what you have to bring to the classroom. That’s what we need as a country. And if we do -- if we all work together, then I’m confident that not only is the Latino community going to succeed, but the American family is going to thrive and succeed in the 21st century. (Applause.)

MR. RAMOS: Mr. President, the last thing I wanted to tell you -- there are more than 50 million Hispanics and you are the first African American President. And with great education, of course, we hope that we have the first Latino president soon. Thank you for being here.

THE PRESIDENT: They may be sitting here. (Applause.) Who knows?

MR. RAMOS: Definitely. Thank you so much from Univision. Thank you so much. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much.

END
11:33 A.M. EDT

Bush tax cuts Rubio Charlie Crist Scott Brown Congressional Budget Office