Release Time:
For Immediate Release
Today, President Obama will announce his intent to nominate John Bryson as the Secretary of U.S. Department of Commerce. Mr. Bryson will play a key role as a member of the President’s economic team, bringing decades of knowledge and experience in the public and private sectors, and will provide valuable ideas and initiatives to strengthen America’s competiveness around the world.
“I am pleased to nominate John Bryson to be our nation’s Secretary of Commerce, as he understands what it takes for America to succeed in a 21st century global economy,” said President Obama. “John will be an important part of my economic team, working with the business community, fostering growth, and helping open up new markets abroad to promote jobs and opportunities here at home.”
The President is confident in Mr. Bryson’s ability to lead the Department and promote job creation, economic growth, sustainable development and improved standards of living for all Americans by working in partnership with businesses, universities, communities and our nation’s workers.
Mr. Bryson will continue the Department’s mission to drive U.S. competitiveness in the global marketplace, strengthen the international economic position of the United States and facilitate global trade by opening up new markets for U.S. goods and services. Mr. Bryson will continue the ongoing effort to meet the President’s goal of doubling America’s exports to support millions of American jobs.
Previously, John Bryson was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Edison International, the parent company of Southern California Edison and Edison Mission Group, from 1990 to 2008.
He is a director of The Boeing Company, The Walt Disney Company and Coda Automotive, Inc., and is a senior advisor to KKR. He is chairman of the board of BrightSource Energy, the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), and the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California (USC) Board of Overseers. He also serves as co-chairman of the Pacific Council on International Policy (PCIP).
Mr. Bryson is a trustee of the California Institute of Technology and a director of The California Endowment and the W. M. Keck Foundation. He serves on the Advisory Board of Deutsche Bank Americas. He also previously served on a number of educational and environmental boards, including as chairman of the California Business Roundtable, co-chairman of the Electric Drive Transportation Association (EDTA), trustee of Stanford University, and as a member of the U.N. Secretary-General’s Advisory Group on Energy and Climate Change (AGECC).
Bryson also served as president of the California Public Utilities Commission, chairman of the California State Water Resources Control Board, and on the board of the Council on Foreign Relations. At the start of his career, he was a co-founder and attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), a national and international environmental group. He is a graduate of Stanford University and Yale Law School.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Carl Paladino Plays Up Redneck Politics
Andrew Cuomo Has Double-Digit Lead Over Carl Paladino in N.Y. Governor Race11 days ago
illegal immigrant Pakistani The View gubernatorial candidate Howard Dean
The G-8/Africa Joint Declaration
Release Time:
For Immediate Release
Attached is the G-8/Africa Joint Declaration.
For Immediate Release
Attached is the G-8/Africa Joint Declaration.
Rubio Charlie Crist Scott Brown Congressional Budget Office Michael Steele
Fox News Runs The Republican Party - MSNBC Report
MSNBC host Cenk Uygur speaks with syndicated columnist David Sirota, Jane Hamsher of firedoglake.com and Adam Green of the PCCC on a report that Fox News president Ailes is unhappy with the Republican presidential candidates. They also discuss Trump 2012, Biden 2016 and voters opposing Social Security and Medicare cuts.
�
Declaration of the G-8 on the Arab Spring
Release Time:
For Immediate Release
Attached is the Declaration of the G-8 on the Arab Spring.
For Immediate Release
Attached is the Declaration of the G-8 on the Arab Spring.
immigration Afghan Tropical Storm Gulf of Mexico jeremiah wright
Readout of President Obama's G-8 Meetings in Deauville, France to the Travel Pool by a Senior Administration Official
Release Time:
For Immediate Release
Location:
Centre Internationale de Deauville, Deauville, France
11:50 A.M. CEST
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: All right, so this has actually been quite a good G8 and in many respects it has underscored what is best about the G8, which is -- as you all know, we are strong proponents of the G20 as the premier forum for international economic coordination -- you got to have the major emerging economies around the table when you talk about the issues affecting -- the major issues affecting the global economy.
But there is something about the G8 and a small group of leaders who deal with each other across a wide range of issues -- economic, security, political, development, et cetera -- and deal with each other on a very regular basis. I can’t remember, somebody -- these people talk to each other, you know, like every few weeks in some ways about some issue or another. That builds a strong relationship with them and it really came out here over the last day and a half as they had very frank, very open discussions. This has not been a meeting where people read prepared interventions nearly as much as it’s been give and take, questioning each other, working through problems together, and trying to come out with common solutions.
So I’ve actually been quite impressed with how it’s come out and the way that President Sarkozy has managed it. He’s really -- he’s actively managed the discussion in terms of pulling things out of people, pointing out differences where they exist, and managing the discussion. And I’ll give you some examples of that.
That’s the first point I’d make. The second point I’d made is -- and I’ll try and give you some examples of this as well -- the role that President Obama has played and the things that he has done that has set the groundwork for this meeting was really quite substantial. The speech that he gave on the Middle East and North Africa, on the Arab Spring, last week, which laid out our approach to democratic and economic reform in the region, as you probably have seen, has been largely echoed in what the G8 is coming out with or will be coming out with in terms of the economic strategy towards the region. The peace plan -- the issues that he talked about regarding the Middle East peace process were warmly welcomed in this group, often cited by other leaders, and helped give context to the discussion here around those issues.
There were discussions yesterday on trade and on climate change, and I think he helped provide a framework for the G8 as a whole to think through these issues in a very constructive way -- about Doha, about Durban, about a whole variety of issues. And again and again throughout the discussions here, the role of U.S. leadership -- and I have to say, it was leadership as the United States and leadership as President Obama -- sort of came out really on every issue and really helped shape both the discussions in the room and the outcomes that the leaders agreed on.
On climate change, again, a very good discussion about how to ensure that the process moves forward, building on Copenhagen, building on Cancun, putting in place the building blocks of a climate change regime that covers financing and technology and mitigation and verification and all the rest, with an emphasis on what can get done in Durban in a pragmatic, realistic way. And again, the President played a critical role I think in helping set expectations with the other leaders and reach a consensus with them as to what collectively they want to try and achieve at Durban.
There was a thorough discussion last night of the Middle East and North Africa, both the political and economic reform efforts, about the Middle East peace process, about Libya. And again, in all three instances, really the starting point of the discussion was the President’s speech last week and the leadership of the U.S. in those efforts.
This morning we just came out of a session with the Egyptian and Tunisian Prime Ministers, along with Ban Ki-moon, Bob Zoellick, and John Lipsky from the IMF. And again, quite an extraordinary session with those Prime Ministers coming and laying out their vision for their countries, their reform agenda, their commitment to democracy and economic modernization; and the G8, in response, or as partners, laying out what it was willing to do through the multilateral institutions, the international financial institutions, as well as bilaterally to support that.
And there will be a statement that’s issued, if it hasn’t already been issued, on the Arab Spring and it will talk about what’s being done by the G8 in the Middle East and North Africa and set up a process going forward, an open process, with G8 countries, other countries from the region, other countries from outside the region that may have things to bring to the table, by foreign ministers and finance ministries, to work through these issues and help drive this.
And a lot of discussion about how does this compare to the fall of the Berlin Wall, what the G7 at that time did to help drive institutional reform at the international level, as well as democratic and economic reform in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and the willingness of the G8 to step up and try and do the same thing with the Middle East and North Africa.
Both the -- I think the Prime Minister -- it’s in my notes -- one of the Prime Ministers, as well as the Amr Moussa, who’s the head of the Arab League, who was also there representing the Arab League, referred back to -- when said, can we succeed in this, they referred back to, yes, we can. And they said, just as President Obama has said, yes, we can. So this is -- it’s something that -- you’ve seen I think in some of the protests the “yes, we can” sort of moniker showing up in Tahrir Square, in Tunisia and other places.
So I think -- one observation I would just make is just how important all the various things that the U.S. has been doing and the President in particular has been doing to lay the groundwork on these issues is to international coordination on these efforts. And again, great credit goes to President Sarkozy for pulling this together, for managing this. And they have a very good relationship in terms of working through these issues in what will be called the Deauville partnership that will come out of this on the Middle East and North Africa.
Q At your remarks at the very beginning about the G8, there was some talk that the G8 should be absorbed into the G20. It sounds like what you’re saying is you like the separate nature of it.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, look, our view has always been that the G20 should be the premier forum for international economic cooperation, that there are issues that can’t be dealt with without having the major emerging economies of the world at the table, and that’s the right forum for doing that.
Having said that, there is a role for the G8 -- not to duplicate what the G20 does -- and while there was a discussion yesterday about economic issues and the Eurozone crisis and things of that sort, it was not the same sort of discussion you have in the G20 with an action plan on, you know, financial regulation or setting up the mutual assessment process in the IMF for the framework or anything of that sort.
So we see the two as playing -- each one playing important but a distinct role. And again, what the G8 provides that the G20 has not yet developed into is a forum for political and security discussions across like-minded countries.
Q There’s a lot of stories out right now about the part in the declaration about the $20 billion from the development banks.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: From the MDBs.
Q What’s the best way for us to describe what that actually means? I mean, is this -- it seems like it’s one of the options that’s been presented that could go to help Tunisia and Egypt, but it’s not actually a plan that’s in motion right now.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think what the MDBs have done -- the World Bank and the other MDBs, including the European investment bank as part of that, -- has said what they believe they could provide in the context of suitable reform programs to those countries.
And there are a number of important elements to that sentence. One is in response to suitable reform programs. There’s conditionality for it. It’s not a blank check. It’s in the context of overall reform programs. But it gives a dimension of what they think they could provide for the programs that they support, whether it’s infrastructure or education or micro-finance or other things.
So it’s sort of a -- it’s an envelope that could be achieved in the context of good reform.
Q So we should be using this $20 billion figure, bottom line, or no?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, it’s a data point out there. It’s what the MDBs have said they could make available. It’s not the bilateral assistance. We each have made our own announcements. President Obama’s was in his speech. The EU made an announcement the day before yesterday I think. France I think was making an announcement.
So each country or the EU is making their own announcement of what they’re doing, and those are hard numbers to compare because it’s a bit of apples and oranges; some is new money, some is old money, some are two-year money, some is three-year money. The MDB figure is what they think they can do over the next -- I think it’s three years, isn’t it?
Q The three years, yes.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Over the next three years in the context of suitable reform.
Q Did you guys get a number -- I know the number for Egypt on what they say they need is $12 billion. Did you get a number from Tunisia?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Tunisia has said it needs $5 billion a year -- $5 billion a year -- and I think it said it has sort of a five-year plan in mind.
I think Egypt used the figure $9 to 12 [billion].
Q $9 to 12 [billion], okay.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: That’s for financing needs, given their --
Q Over a period or per year?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think that’s a one-year number.
Q Europeans say the U.S. offered political support to sort out the debt crisis. Is that true? And if so, what kind of support is the U.S. offering to Europe? And then also, is -- what’s the U.S. position on more IMF aid for Greece?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Let me answer the first one and maybe have you -- let you talk to Treasury about the second one.
On the first one, the President made clear that we have a strong interest in the Eurozone successfully managing their way through the situation; that we have been supportive of them doing so; that it’s their issue to figure out how to resolve; it’s not our place to tell them how to resolve it. But through the IMF and otherwise, we are supportive of what they’re doing and we have confidence that they’ll be able to work through it. So in that form we are providing political support.
Q Okay, so that’s what political support means. And then also, Lech Walesa announced that he’s not going -- on Poland, just moving ahead a little bit -- announced that he is not going to be at the meeting with the President.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I don’t have anything on the Poland trip so that’s --
Q Okay.
Q Can I ask you about something that will resonate, because the President ends this day in the -- at the capital of what was the Warsaw Pact, the opposite of NATO, and you mentioned there -- you raised in this the comparison to what it meant to Europe to have the Berlin Wall fall. Is that really an apt description for what they -- how is that an apt description for what they’re --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: There are vast differences between Central and Eastern Europe and Middle East and North Africa. So it’s not an analogy that one should overstress. But in terms of moments in time when important democratic and economic transitions begin, this is a comparable moment. It doesn’t mean that each -- that the situation is identical. Obviously the histories of the two regions are quite different and the situation in each country is different, but it is a moment when the international community is coming together and focused on doing everything that it can to support those who are trying to achieve democratic and economic reform.
Q Could you describe a little bit more what it was like with those two Prime Ministers because they’re kind of emerging powers; they don’t represent kind of a settled government in either case. What was it like as they -- did they sit and kind of explain to everybody, were they questioned, how did it work?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: They each presented first -- first, Egypt, and then Tunisia. They each had really very strong, coherent presentations about what their challenges were, how they were going to go after them, what they themselves needed to do, and where the international community could help. The Tunisian Prime Minister is I think 84 or 85 years old, was incredibly energetic and dynamic. And President Sarkozy noted that it was good to have such a young, vibrant leader in the room. (Laughter.) I mean, he really -- he was fantastic -- as was the Egyptian one -- but the Tunisian one was notable by his age.
They were followed by Amr Moussa from the Arab League, and then by Ban Ki-moon of the U.N., who also spoke. And then it opened up for -- then President Obama spoke and, building on his speech from last week, laid out our view of what was necessary in the region and how we saw ourselves supporting it. And then others spoke -- John Lipsky from the IMF, Bob Zoellick from the World Bank, other leaders -- and then we broke.
Q Sarkozy said I think last night that the IMF leadership issue has actually come up fairly often in the talks with these leaders. Can you give us any kind of insight into how it came up?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: It’s not come up in the collective --
Q I think he said -- yes, I think he said not in the like formal G8 meetings, but on like the margins of it it’s been discussed a lot.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I imagine that President Sarkozy has discussed it on the margins of the G8. (Laughter.)
Q Was it discussed in the meeting?
Q Has he discussed it with Obama?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Look, I think -- it did come up in the meeting and I think we know what France’s position is on it.
Q But we don’t know the U.S. position on it.
Q What’s the U.S. position?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think Tim Geithner laid out -- Secretary Geithner laid out our position quite clearly, that we support the IMF process that they announced last weekend, which has a deadline of I think June 30th or so, and are confident that it will produce a good candidate.
Q What do we think about Christine Lagarde?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think I’ll let Treasury answer about specific candidates.
Q How did the President -- I mean, Sarkozy has said he was going to press him on that or ask him for support. How did the President respond?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think the President, similar to what I said, restated our position that the IMF has announced a process and it’s important to go through that process.
Q Did Sarkozy formally say, I’d like your support, or will you --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I won’t characterize what he said. But it did come up in the conversation.
Q The Syria language was a little tougher than some people expected, or stronger. I mean, what -- can you walk us through that --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Actually, you know, I can’t because I was out of the room when they did the political declaration last night. Bill Burns, if you see him, is the one who negotiated that.
Q You talked about insufficient progress in the Doha Round and possible alternatives. Is that -- are you saying you might scrap the Doha Round and try some other forum or what --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I don’t have the -- do you have the declaration? -- it’s quite clear. It sort of says explore all negotiating options for the conclusion of the -- to bring the Doha Round to a conclusion. So we’re not -- I think nobody is saying we should scrap the Doha Round but nor are the leaders saying that -- nor are they just repeating what they have often said before, that we’re going to achieve a balanced, ambitious, comprehensive, successful round by a date certain. They’re saying it’s important now to explore all the negotiating options.
Q Can you give us any more of a readout on the Sarkozy meeting, what things came up with Libya and other sorts of --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I mean, they did do a stand-up. You guys were there, right? So you -- I think those words sort of speak for themselves. I’m happy to do G8 stuff, but probably shouldn’t do the bilat.
Q Is there anything else, just quickly from the Arab Spring declaration, that you would just kind of note for us? I mean, the $20 billion seems to be the big takeaway a lot of people are writing about.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I wouldn’t -- more important than any numerical figure is I think the vision that it lays out, which is consistent with the vision that was laid out in the President’s speech, that there is a financial stabilization component; there is a component focused on reforming and modernizing these economies, including developing private sector entrepreneurship and job creation -- very important where they have large unemployed young populations; and it’s important to integrate these economies with each other, in the region, and with the global economy. This region trades less than virtually any other region. I mean, I think there was a figure in the President’s speech about 300 million people trading less than Switzerland’s 8 million people.
And this is going to be largely a case of trade, not aid, and investment, not assistance, over time. It’s really about establishing the conditions under which the private sectors in these economies can flourish, attract capital both domestically and from abroad, create jobs, particularly for the young people, and grow -- and grow in a way in the benefits are broadly shared.
Q Is there anything you could say about the parallels with Central Europe, about specific institutions like Enterprise Funds and things like that, that can be implemented that are similar?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Sure. Well, first and foremost, I’d start with the EBRD, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, where the G8 has agreed to reorient it so that it can expand its geographic mandate. It’s an institution that’s got great expertise, staff, facilities, and resources focused on transition. And while the transition in each country is different, it is well placed to bring that expertise from its Central and Eastern Europe experience to this region. So that’s I think a very important institutional outcome of this. Again, the President called for it in his speech, and the G8 embraced it today.
The President also had announced that we are seeking support for an Enterprise Fund in Congress. And those were very successful in Central and Eastern Europe in terms of bringing private investment into the region and helping to develop the private sector in those countries, and we’ll try and do the same thing in Egypt and Tunisia as well.
Q Is there any disappointment that there haven’t been concrete pledges; that the G8 really isn’t a pledging forum anymore?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I think -- I mean, I don’t think we had any expectations this was going to be a pledging session. Again, I think it’s actually more important -- you know, the Central and Eastern experience is a two decade-long experience. These are long, hard transitions to work through. As actually the President said in the session this morning, there will be forward movement and backward movement -- this is not a linear process; there will be ups and downs -- and we need to be engaged for the long run.
So I actually think the -- much more important and enduring than a particular pledge for a couple years is this agreement on the economic vision for the region, the various stages and what’s necessary, the kind of institutions and processes that need to be set up to fulfill that.
Q You were going to give us some examples of -- you said Sarkozy was good at managing discussions and pointing out when people had disagreements and --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I thought he was terrific -- I’ll use the example of the climate change discussion yesterday. -- I thought he was terrific in teasing out from the countries what their respective positions, concerns, objectives were; pointing out where they didn’t line up; and trying to find ways to put -- bring people onto the same page. So I thought he did a terrific job.
That’s probably the clearest one. I mean, he just -- there were -- climate change is an area where there are very different positions in the G8. The U.S. is in one position, not being a member of Kyoto; you have other parties who are members of Kyoto and want to remain members of Kyoto; and other parties who might not want to remain members of Kyoto. And trying to figure out what they’re going to do with Kyoto is going to be a bit part of what happens in Durban.
Q Is this different than you’d seen him in this type of role or forum before?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, personally, I had not seen him sort of chair a leaders meeting like this. He is always a very articulate, energetic participant in these -- in the G20s, in the G8s. He has very interesting observations to make. But I had not seen him in the role of managing the meeting. I thought he did a terrific job.
Q Thanks for doing this.
END 12:20 P.M. CEST
For Immediate Release
Location:
Centre Internationale de Deauville, Deauville, France
11:50 A.M. CEST
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: All right, so this has actually been quite a good G8 and in many respects it has underscored what is best about the G8, which is -- as you all know, we are strong proponents of the G20 as the premier forum for international economic coordination -- you got to have the major emerging economies around the table when you talk about the issues affecting -- the major issues affecting the global economy.
But there is something about the G8 and a small group of leaders who deal with each other across a wide range of issues -- economic, security, political, development, et cetera -- and deal with each other on a very regular basis. I can’t remember, somebody -- these people talk to each other, you know, like every few weeks in some ways about some issue or another. That builds a strong relationship with them and it really came out here over the last day and a half as they had very frank, very open discussions. This has not been a meeting where people read prepared interventions nearly as much as it’s been give and take, questioning each other, working through problems together, and trying to come out with common solutions.
So I’ve actually been quite impressed with how it’s come out and the way that President Sarkozy has managed it. He’s really -- he’s actively managed the discussion in terms of pulling things out of people, pointing out differences where they exist, and managing the discussion. And I’ll give you some examples of that.
That’s the first point I’d make. The second point I’d made is -- and I’ll try and give you some examples of this as well -- the role that President Obama has played and the things that he has done that has set the groundwork for this meeting was really quite substantial. The speech that he gave on the Middle East and North Africa, on the Arab Spring, last week, which laid out our approach to democratic and economic reform in the region, as you probably have seen, has been largely echoed in what the G8 is coming out with or will be coming out with in terms of the economic strategy towards the region. The peace plan -- the issues that he talked about regarding the Middle East peace process were warmly welcomed in this group, often cited by other leaders, and helped give context to the discussion here around those issues.
There were discussions yesterday on trade and on climate change, and I think he helped provide a framework for the G8 as a whole to think through these issues in a very constructive way -- about Doha, about Durban, about a whole variety of issues. And again and again throughout the discussions here, the role of U.S. leadership -- and I have to say, it was leadership as the United States and leadership as President Obama -- sort of came out really on every issue and really helped shape both the discussions in the room and the outcomes that the leaders agreed on.
On climate change, again, a very good discussion about how to ensure that the process moves forward, building on Copenhagen, building on Cancun, putting in place the building blocks of a climate change regime that covers financing and technology and mitigation and verification and all the rest, with an emphasis on what can get done in Durban in a pragmatic, realistic way. And again, the President played a critical role I think in helping set expectations with the other leaders and reach a consensus with them as to what collectively they want to try and achieve at Durban.
There was a thorough discussion last night of the Middle East and North Africa, both the political and economic reform efforts, about the Middle East peace process, about Libya. And again, in all three instances, really the starting point of the discussion was the President’s speech last week and the leadership of the U.S. in those efforts.
This morning we just came out of a session with the Egyptian and Tunisian Prime Ministers, along with Ban Ki-moon, Bob Zoellick, and John Lipsky from the IMF. And again, quite an extraordinary session with those Prime Ministers coming and laying out their vision for their countries, their reform agenda, their commitment to democracy and economic modernization; and the G8, in response, or as partners, laying out what it was willing to do through the multilateral institutions, the international financial institutions, as well as bilaterally to support that.
And there will be a statement that’s issued, if it hasn’t already been issued, on the Arab Spring and it will talk about what’s being done by the G8 in the Middle East and North Africa and set up a process going forward, an open process, with G8 countries, other countries from the region, other countries from outside the region that may have things to bring to the table, by foreign ministers and finance ministries, to work through these issues and help drive this.
And a lot of discussion about how does this compare to the fall of the Berlin Wall, what the G7 at that time did to help drive institutional reform at the international level, as well as democratic and economic reform in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and the willingness of the G8 to step up and try and do the same thing with the Middle East and North Africa.
Both the -- I think the Prime Minister -- it’s in my notes -- one of the Prime Ministers, as well as the Amr Moussa, who’s the head of the Arab League, who was also there representing the Arab League, referred back to -- when said, can we succeed in this, they referred back to, yes, we can. And they said, just as President Obama has said, yes, we can. So this is -- it’s something that -- you’ve seen I think in some of the protests the “yes, we can” sort of moniker showing up in Tahrir Square, in Tunisia and other places.
So I think -- one observation I would just make is just how important all the various things that the U.S. has been doing and the President in particular has been doing to lay the groundwork on these issues is to international coordination on these efforts. And again, great credit goes to President Sarkozy for pulling this together, for managing this. And they have a very good relationship in terms of working through these issues in what will be called the Deauville partnership that will come out of this on the Middle East and North Africa.
Q At your remarks at the very beginning about the G8, there was some talk that the G8 should be absorbed into the G20. It sounds like what you’re saying is you like the separate nature of it.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, look, our view has always been that the G20 should be the premier forum for international economic cooperation, that there are issues that can’t be dealt with without having the major emerging economies of the world at the table, and that’s the right forum for doing that.
Having said that, there is a role for the G8 -- not to duplicate what the G20 does -- and while there was a discussion yesterday about economic issues and the Eurozone crisis and things of that sort, it was not the same sort of discussion you have in the G20 with an action plan on, you know, financial regulation or setting up the mutual assessment process in the IMF for the framework or anything of that sort.
So we see the two as playing -- each one playing important but a distinct role. And again, what the G8 provides that the G20 has not yet developed into is a forum for political and security discussions across like-minded countries.
Q There’s a lot of stories out right now about the part in the declaration about the $20 billion from the development banks.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: From the MDBs.
Q What’s the best way for us to describe what that actually means? I mean, is this -- it seems like it’s one of the options that’s been presented that could go to help Tunisia and Egypt, but it’s not actually a plan that’s in motion right now.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think what the MDBs have done -- the World Bank and the other MDBs, including the European investment bank as part of that, -- has said what they believe they could provide in the context of suitable reform programs to those countries.
And there are a number of important elements to that sentence. One is in response to suitable reform programs. There’s conditionality for it. It’s not a blank check. It’s in the context of overall reform programs. But it gives a dimension of what they think they could provide for the programs that they support, whether it’s infrastructure or education or micro-finance or other things.
So it’s sort of a -- it’s an envelope that could be achieved in the context of good reform.
Q So we should be using this $20 billion figure, bottom line, or no?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, it’s a data point out there. It’s what the MDBs have said they could make available. It’s not the bilateral assistance. We each have made our own announcements. President Obama’s was in his speech. The EU made an announcement the day before yesterday I think. France I think was making an announcement.
So each country or the EU is making their own announcement of what they’re doing, and those are hard numbers to compare because it’s a bit of apples and oranges; some is new money, some is old money, some are two-year money, some is three-year money. The MDB figure is what they think they can do over the next -- I think it’s three years, isn’t it?
Q The three years, yes.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Over the next three years in the context of suitable reform.
Q Did you guys get a number -- I know the number for Egypt on what they say they need is $12 billion. Did you get a number from Tunisia?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Tunisia has said it needs $5 billion a year -- $5 billion a year -- and I think it said it has sort of a five-year plan in mind.
I think Egypt used the figure $9 to 12 [billion].
Q $9 to 12 [billion], okay.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: That’s for financing needs, given their --
Q Over a period or per year?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think that’s a one-year number.
Q Europeans say the U.S. offered political support to sort out the debt crisis. Is that true? And if so, what kind of support is the U.S. offering to Europe? And then also, is -- what’s the U.S. position on more IMF aid for Greece?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Let me answer the first one and maybe have you -- let you talk to Treasury about the second one.
On the first one, the President made clear that we have a strong interest in the Eurozone successfully managing their way through the situation; that we have been supportive of them doing so; that it’s their issue to figure out how to resolve; it’s not our place to tell them how to resolve it. But through the IMF and otherwise, we are supportive of what they’re doing and we have confidence that they’ll be able to work through it. So in that form we are providing political support.
Q Okay, so that’s what political support means. And then also, Lech Walesa announced that he’s not going -- on Poland, just moving ahead a little bit -- announced that he is not going to be at the meeting with the President.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I don’t have anything on the Poland trip so that’s --
Q Okay.
Q Can I ask you about something that will resonate, because the President ends this day in the -- at the capital of what was the Warsaw Pact, the opposite of NATO, and you mentioned there -- you raised in this the comparison to what it meant to Europe to have the Berlin Wall fall. Is that really an apt description for what they -- how is that an apt description for what they’re --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: There are vast differences between Central and Eastern Europe and Middle East and North Africa. So it’s not an analogy that one should overstress. But in terms of moments in time when important democratic and economic transitions begin, this is a comparable moment. It doesn’t mean that each -- that the situation is identical. Obviously the histories of the two regions are quite different and the situation in each country is different, but it is a moment when the international community is coming together and focused on doing everything that it can to support those who are trying to achieve democratic and economic reform.
Q Could you describe a little bit more what it was like with those two Prime Ministers because they’re kind of emerging powers; they don’t represent kind of a settled government in either case. What was it like as they -- did they sit and kind of explain to everybody, were they questioned, how did it work?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: They each presented first -- first, Egypt, and then Tunisia. They each had really very strong, coherent presentations about what their challenges were, how they were going to go after them, what they themselves needed to do, and where the international community could help. The Tunisian Prime Minister is I think 84 or 85 years old, was incredibly energetic and dynamic. And President Sarkozy noted that it was good to have such a young, vibrant leader in the room. (Laughter.) I mean, he really -- he was fantastic -- as was the Egyptian one -- but the Tunisian one was notable by his age.
They were followed by Amr Moussa from the Arab League, and then by Ban Ki-moon of the U.N., who also spoke. And then it opened up for -- then President Obama spoke and, building on his speech from last week, laid out our view of what was necessary in the region and how we saw ourselves supporting it. And then others spoke -- John Lipsky from the IMF, Bob Zoellick from the World Bank, other leaders -- and then we broke.
Q Sarkozy said I think last night that the IMF leadership issue has actually come up fairly often in the talks with these leaders. Can you give us any kind of insight into how it came up?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: It’s not come up in the collective --
Q I think he said -- yes, I think he said not in the like formal G8 meetings, but on like the margins of it it’s been discussed a lot.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I imagine that President Sarkozy has discussed it on the margins of the G8. (Laughter.)
Q Was it discussed in the meeting?
Q Has he discussed it with Obama?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Look, I think -- it did come up in the meeting and I think we know what France’s position is on it.
Q But we don’t know the U.S. position on it.
Q What’s the U.S. position?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think Tim Geithner laid out -- Secretary Geithner laid out our position quite clearly, that we support the IMF process that they announced last weekend, which has a deadline of I think June 30th or so, and are confident that it will produce a good candidate.
Q What do we think about Christine Lagarde?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think I’ll let Treasury answer about specific candidates.
Q How did the President -- I mean, Sarkozy has said he was going to press him on that or ask him for support. How did the President respond?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think the President, similar to what I said, restated our position that the IMF has announced a process and it’s important to go through that process.
Q Did Sarkozy formally say, I’d like your support, or will you --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I won’t characterize what he said. But it did come up in the conversation.
Q The Syria language was a little tougher than some people expected, or stronger. I mean, what -- can you walk us through that --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Actually, you know, I can’t because I was out of the room when they did the political declaration last night. Bill Burns, if you see him, is the one who negotiated that.
Q You talked about insufficient progress in the Doha Round and possible alternatives. Is that -- are you saying you might scrap the Doha Round and try some other forum or what --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I don’t have the -- do you have the declaration? -- it’s quite clear. It sort of says explore all negotiating options for the conclusion of the -- to bring the Doha Round to a conclusion. So we’re not -- I think nobody is saying we should scrap the Doha Round but nor are the leaders saying that -- nor are they just repeating what they have often said before, that we’re going to achieve a balanced, ambitious, comprehensive, successful round by a date certain. They’re saying it’s important now to explore all the negotiating options.
Q Can you give us any more of a readout on the Sarkozy meeting, what things came up with Libya and other sorts of --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I mean, they did do a stand-up. You guys were there, right? So you -- I think those words sort of speak for themselves. I’m happy to do G8 stuff, but probably shouldn’t do the bilat.
Q Is there anything else, just quickly from the Arab Spring declaration, that you would just kind of note for us? I mean, the $20 billion seems to be the big takeaway a lot of people are writing about.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I wouldn’t -- more important than any numerical figure is I think the vision that it lays out, which is consistent with the vision that was laid out in the President’s speech, that there is a financial stabilization component; there is a component focused on reforming and modernizing these economies, including developing private sector entrepreneurship and job creation -- very important where they have large unemployed young populations; and it’s important to integrate these economies with each other, in the region, and with the global economy. This region trades less than virtually any other region. I mean, I think there was a figure in the President’s speech about 300 million people trading less than Switzerland’s 8 million people.
And this is going to be largely a case of trade, not aid, and investment, not assistance, over time. It’s really about establishing the conditions under which the private sectors in these economies can flourish, attract capital both domestically and from abroad, create jobs, particularly for the young people, and grow -- and grow in a way in the benefits are broadly shared.
Q Is there anything you could say about the parallels with Central Europe, about specific institutions like Enterprise Funds and things like that, that can be implemented that are similar?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Sure. Well, first and foremost, I’d start with the EBRD, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, where the G8 has agreed to reorient it so that it can expand its geographic mandate. It’s an institution that’s got great expertise, staff, facilities, and resources focused on transition. And while the transition in each country is different, it is well placed to bring that expertise from its Central and Eastern Europe experience to this region. So that’s I think a very important institutional outcome of this. Again, the President called for it in his speech, and the G8 embraced it today.
The President also had announced that we are seeking support for an Enterprise Fund in Congress. And those were very successful in Central and Eastern Europe in terms of bringing private investment into the region and helping to develop the private sector in those countries, and we’ll try and do the same thing in Egypt and Tunisia as well.
Q Is there any disappointment that there haven’t been concrete pledges; that the G8 really isn’t a pledging forum anymore?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I think -- I mean, I don’t think we had any expectations this was going to be a pledging session. Again, I think it’s actually more important -- you know, the Central and Eastern experience is a two decade-long experience. These are long, hard transitions to work through. As actually the President said in the session this morning, there will be forward movement and backward movement -- this is not a linear process; there will be ups and downs -- and we need to be engaged for the long run.
So I actually think the -- much more important and enduring than a particular pledge for a couple years is this agreement on the economic vision for the region, the various stages and what’s necessary, the kind of institutions and processes that need to be set up to fulfill that.
Q You were going to give us some examples of -- you said Sarkozy was good at managing discussions and pointing out when people had disagreements and --
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I thought he was terrific -- I’ll use the example of the climate change discussion yesterday. -- I thought he was terrific in teasing out from the countries what their respective positions, concerns, objectives were; pointing out where they didn’t line up; and trying to find ways to put -- bring people onto the same page. So I thought he did a terrific job.
That’s probably the clearest one. I mean, he just -- there were -- climate change is an area where there are very different positions in the G8. The U.S. is in one position, not being a member of Kyoto; you have other parties who are members of Kyoto and want to remain members of Kyoto; and other parties who might not want to remain members of Kyoto. And trying to figure out what they’re going to do with Kyoto is going to be a bit part of what happens in Durban.
Q Is this different than you’d seen him in this type of role or forum before?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, personally, I had not seen him sort of chair a leaders meeting like this. He is always a very articulate, energetic participant in these -- in the G20s, in the G8s. He has very interesting observations to make. But I had not seen him in the role of managing the meeting. I thought he did a terrific job.
Q Thanks for doing this.
END 12:20 P.M. CEST
Murkowski Lauds Democrats
Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who is running as a write-in candidate for re-election after losing in the Republican primary, lists two Democrat senators among those she admires the most. Murkowski was asked the question by the Anchorage Daily News, The Hill reports.
"The [senators] that immediately come to mind are those that are on the other side of the aisle and I have a good working relationship with," she says. Murkowski then listed Sen. Tom Carper, D-Delaware, and Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., who like Murkowski sits on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
Murkowski has lost her leadership position in the Senate Republican Conference for running against Joe Miller, who beat her in the primary. She says he is too extreme.
Murkowski has said she would remain a Republican if she is re-elected, but she repeatedly makes overtures to Democrats, obviously hoping for more votes.
� Newsmax. All rights reserved.
immigration Afghan Tropical Storm Gulf of Mexico jeremiah wright
Fox News Runs The Republican Party - MSNBC Report
MSNBC host Cenk Uygur speaks with syndicated columnist David Sirota, Jane Hamsher of firedoglake.com and Adam Green of the PCCC on a report that Fox News president Ailes is unhappy with the Republican presidential candidates. They also discuss Trump 2012, Biden 2016 and voters opposing Social Security and Medicare cuts.
�
Bush tax cuts Rubio Charlie Crist Scott Brown Congressional Budget Office
Monday, May 30, 2011
DCCC Throws in Towel on 4 Races It Thought It Could Win
Democrats are starting to pull their money from congressional races they once saw as winnable. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has canceled TV ads in four hotly contested races, Politico reports.� This is yet another indication that Republicans are headed for a landslide victory.
The ads are being pulled for two freshmen, Florida Rep. Suzanne Kosmas and Ohio Rep. Steve Driehaus and for two Democrat-held open seats in conservative districts: Indiana?s 8th and Tennessee?s 8th, a Democratic insider tells Politico.
The DCCC also cut its ad spending for Arizona Rep. Harry Mitchell and Wisconsin Rep. Steve Kagen, who look like they?re going down, too.
� Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Wall Street Tax To Pay For Public Colleges?
Ana Kasparian and Cenk Uygur talk about a proposal to charge Wall Street a financial transaction tax to pay for public college, the tax would allow students to attend public universities tuition free.
�
Chelsa Clinton Michelle Obama Sean Hannity Glenn Beck Rush Limbaugh
Statement by the Press Secretary on S. 990
Release Time:
For Immediate Release
On Thursday, May 26, 2011, the President signed into law:
S. 990, the “PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act of 2011,” which extends certain surveillance authorities included in the USA PATRIOT Act and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.
For Immediate Release
On Thursday, May 26, 2011, the President signed into law:
S. 990, the “PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act of 2011,” which extends certain surveillance authorities included in the USA PATRIOT Act and the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.
President Obama Signs Oklahoma Disaster Declaration
Release Time:
For Immediate Release
The President today declared a major disaster exists in the State of Oklahoma and ordered Federal aid to supplement State and local recovery efforts in the area struck by severe storms and flooding during the period of April 21-28, 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 severe storms and flooding in the counties of Adair, Cherokee, Delaware, Haskell, Le Flore, McIntosh, Muskogee, Okmulgee, Pittsburg, and Sequoyah.
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 William J. Doran III 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.
For Immediate Release
The President today declared a major disaster exists in the State of Oklahoma and ordered Federal aid to supplement State and local recovery efforts in the area struck by severe storms and flooding during the period of April 21-28, 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 severe storms and flooding in the counties of Adair, Cherokee, Delaware, Haskell, Le Flore, McIntosh, Muskogee, Okmulgee, Pittsburg, and Sequoyah.
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 William J. Doran III 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.
Press Gaggle by Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes and NSC Senior Director for European Affairs Liz Sherwood-Randall, 5/27/2011
Release Time:
For Immediate Release
Location:
Aboard Air Force One, En Route Warsaw, Poland
4:45 P.M. CEST
MR. CARNEY: Hello, everyone. As we make our way to Warsaw, I wanted to gaggle and bring with me Ben Rhodes, the President’s Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications. We also have with us Liz Sherwood-Randall, who is Senior Director at the NSC for European Affairs, who can talk to you about our visit to Poland.
I don’t have any other announcements to make, so I’m going to ask Ben to give a little bit of an overview, and then Liz can talk to you about specifics about the dinner tonight and what’s on the agenda for tomorrow.
MR. RHODES: Just a quick thing on today. I know you got a readout already, but in addition, the President was able to met separately on the margins for a brief period of time today with both Prime Minister Essebsi of Tunisia and Prime Minister Sharaf of Egypt. They were able to have discussions between meetings.
And the President just told us that he found both of the leaders committed to moving forward with the political reforms in their country. They discussed the importance of moving forward with democratic reforms, including respect for the rights of minorities. The President reaffirmed America’s commitment to democracy in both Egypt and Tunisia, as well as the programs of economic modernization that were the topics of discussion today. And the President discussed again our long-term commitment to supporting stability and democracy and economic prosperity in these countries, and was impressed with both leaders.
I’ll just kind of go through some of the -- you already have most of this, but the top lines for the Poland trip, and Liz can speak to the dinner tonight and the bilateral agenda for tomorrow.
So tonight, after we get to Poland, the President will lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Warsaw. He will proceed immediately to the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and lay a wreath honoring, of course, the great sacrifices made by the Poles throughout many, many centuries and many years of their history.
Then he will go to the Warsaw Ghetto Memorial, where he will also pay tribute there to, of course, the tragic history as well as the heroic resistance that took place at the Warsaw Ghetto Memorial. He will lay a wreath there as well.
Then he will proceed to the presidential palace, and he and President Komorowski will host a dinner with Central and Eastern European heads of state. Liz can give you the list and the agenda for that dinner in a moment. But, again, this is an important opportunity from Warsaw to underscore America’s deep commitment to security and democracy in the region, to consult with the leaders of these countries, as well as, of course, having the bilateral meeting with Poland.
Then tomorrow the President will begin with a bilateral meeting with President Komorowski. Then the two leaders will participate in a discussion -- after that bilateral meeting, a separate discussion about democracy, some of the lessons learned from the experience of Eastern Europe in Poland and their democratic transitions. There is a group of people who’ve traveled -- Poles -- who work these issues who’ve recently traveled to Tunisia and other places, and also are playing a key role in Belarus, which Liz can talk to, which is of course the last remaining -- or the most troublesome remaining country in Europe in terms of backsliding on democracy.
Following that, he will have a working lunch and bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Tusk. They will hold a joint press conference. And then he will visit the church that is the memorial to the tragic plane crash of last year.
With that, Liz can give you the dinner and the bilateral agenda, and then we’ll take some questions.
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: Hi, all. Happy to do this. So for those of you who remember, last year in Prague the President had dinner with a number of his Central and Eastern European counterparts. It was leaders only. And the President found it very meaningful to hear directly from them about their concerns in their region, their perspective on the work that we’re doing together. And so when we learned that the Poles were hosting a summit today of Central and Eastern European leaders -- which has been a formula in Central and Eastern Europe since 1993, with variable participants, it’s not a set group -- we asked if we could jointly host with the Polish President an informal dinner with the Presidents from the region who are going to be in Warsaw today.
So the President will have dinner with President Komorowski and 17 other leaders from the region tonight. Would you like me to actually tell you what countries?
Q Yes.
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: Okay. Albania, Austria, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Italy, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine, and then obviously Poland and the United States.
The agenda for the dinner is twofold. The first element is a discussion about finishing the unfinished business of Europe in the post-Cold War era. So it’s really to talk with these countries about their consolidation of democracy, their security interests, and then, as Ben alluded to, the challenges we continue to face in the countries on the eastern periphery of Europe, in particular Belarus, which is really the last holdout in Europe.
And we’ll be discussing the ways in which we can cooperate together to build on the successful models of the countries that are around this table tonight and encourage those who are at this table who are still working their way along the democratic path to continue along that path.
So the first discussion, as I said, is about European security and prosperity. The second half of the dinner will be a discussion about Europe in the world -- because one of the themes of our administration has been that these countries, which moved along toward democracy at the end of the Cold War, have great experience to share with countries that have not yet made that transition. And given the dramatic events of the last few months, Poland has taken the lead, as Ben mentioned, to assist countries like Tunisia with their efforts to build new democratic institutions and processes.
And so what we want to talk about with these countries is the role that they can play not only within Europe, as we’ll talk about at the first session of the dinner, but in the second element of the dinner, how they can play a role beyond Europe. And we’ll be discussing in particular Tunisia and Egypt and the participation that they can have alongside us in the work we’re doing there, building on what happened today at the G8.
Q Liz, can you expand on that a little bit, on how these countries could play a role in Tunisia and Egypt?
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: Well, already it’s happening, so the democracy event tomorrow where the President will be briefed by Poles who have been out in Tunisia and in Libya -- because the foreign minister has been in Libya recently -- what we’re talking with them about is, what lessons from your experience of transition can be applied to those who are now trying to figure out, in the wake of the revolutions that essentially have taken place in their countries, how to build new democratic institutions that work. And while our experience is rather old in this regard, with these countries the experience is very fresh; it’s 20 years ago.
And so our thinking is -- and we know this from some of our partners in the Middle East and North Africa -- they’re very interested in the example of Poland, in particular, but also some of the other countries that will be around the table tonight.
MR. RHODES: I’ll just add one thing to that, too. There are the direct contacts that we want to encourage between the countries around the table -- Poland in particular has taken the lead -- and these countries. There have been very impressive civil society contacts. I think you’ve seen, for instance, some of the group of people who were involved in the Serbian protests have been in contact with the Egyptian and Tunisian counterparts. So they’re government-to-government; they’re civil society-to-civil society contacts.
But also some of the discussion today, of course, was about the economic component of this. Some of the very same institutions and infrastructure that was set up to support democratic transitions in Europe, in Eastern Europe in particular, are now being reoriented towards the south. So you have the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, who built up expertise and how countries that are transitioning in democracy need to consolidate growth.
So the EBRD is going to be reorienting a lot of its focus to MENA. That’s an outcome of the G8 meeting today. And that’s the type of expertise that exists within Eastern Europe that can be now refocused on the Middle East and North Africa.
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: And actually I’d add two points here -- one, to build on what Ben has said. So a concrete example of this is in our own country that our democratic institutes are partnering with the Poles. We can provide some support for them. They have the human capital, and some of our democratic institutes want to help them get out in the region.
MR. RHODES: Yes. Like NDI and NRI --
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: So NED, NRI -- yes, exactly -- and NDI.
So, second thing I want to say, going back to the first session, given what happened yesterday with the apprehension of Mladic after so many years, it’s a perfect way of thinking about the continuing work we’re doing toward reconciliation in Europe and toward integration in Europe. And so one of the themes of this first session, when we’re talking about Europe itself, is how can we consolidate that integration.
There are countries in the Balkans that have not moved fully along the path to membership in the EU. The development in Serbia yesterday means that Serbia can take further steps forward toward its EU membership -- because one of the issues that had blocked its progress was the fact that Mladic was still on the loose.
And so this is a good example of the kind of work we want to do to help Europe heal from the past and integrate so that it is that Europe that is truly whole, free, and at peace. And there is unfinished business still to be done.
Q Are you surprised that Walesa isn’t going to be at the event tonight, given his interest, his visit to Tunisia recently? Why did he cancel? And what is your reaction to that?
MR. RHODES: Yes, I got your question, Kate. First of all, events tomorrow, the democracy events tomorrow. He was invited by President Komorowski. We certainly -- President Obama would welcome the opportunity to meet with him.
My understanding, from his statements and his communications with us, is he has an engagement in Italy -- speaking engagement. But we’re working -- we, of course, would welcome his participation in the democracy event. He was invited by the Polish President, and President Obama, of course, would welcome that opportunity. But I think it’s a scheduling matter that they’re looking at. I think he spoke to it today, actually. And we’ll let you know if there are any updates.
The group of people that he was a part of, again, were part of this Polish delegation that’s traveled in the region and that will be providing the readout of the meeting. But, of course, he is a symbol among -- a leading symbol among many of the transition by the Polish people. So we’re certainly going to benefit from the experience of those Poles who travel in the region and the experience of Poles involved in the transition to democracy. And I think right now what we’re working through is just whether there’s a scheduling conflict.
Q Did the two -- did Walesa and Obama speak today, did you say? When you said the two spoke today, who --
MR. RHODES: No, no, no, I said I think Lech Walesa spoke publicly about how he’s trying to -- about his scheduling commitment. And so I think -- I was referring to the fact that he spoke. And we’re proceeding with the democracy event, seeing if there’s any way to make it possible for him to be there, but if he can’t be there because he has a previous commitment, that’s certainly understandable.
Q Given that you’re talking a lot about how good your relationship with Russia is, is there any feeling that it’s good for the President to go to Poland to sort of stress that just because you have a good friendship with Russia doesn’t mean you can’t be an effective sort of partner with Poland?
MR. RHODES: We’ve had a view from the very beginning of the administration that the reset of our relationship with Russia would be good for Eastern Europe and the security of Europe generally, because, frankly, when you have Russia communicating well with the United States, communicating well with NATO, you have a better context for European security generally.
I think, understandably, at the very beginning of the administration, there was some concern that if there was a reset with Russia, would it come at the expense of Europe, or would it be in service of European interests? And I think what we found increasingly is that these countries very much came to support the reset. You saw that in Prague last year when they actually -- after signing the START Treaty, President Obama had the dinner with these leaders, and many of them remarked on the fact that they had come to believe that the thawing of relations between the United States and Russia was a broader thawing, in some respects, between the United States and the West that could be beneficial for European security.
Similarly, many of these leaders, as you know, those of you who were with us in Lisbon, became very supportive of the START Treaty and made statements in support of the START Treaty that were very important statements at a time of discussion and debate in the United States. And what they said at the time was it is better, again, to have this type of cooperation with Russia, this type of transparency, so we understand what’s happening at the time within Russia as it relates to its -- their nuclear facilities.
So, again, you saw them reaffirm their support for the cornerstone of the reset with the START debate.
So I think what we’ve come to see -- and then, last, I should have said the NATO-Russia Council that took place in Lisbon also I think spoke to the fact that this wasn’t just the United States and Russia that had to reset, but rather it was NATO and Russia, to include, of course, the Eastern European countries.
At the same time, I think it’s important for the President to send a signal about all of our -- the importance of all of our alliances and partnerships. And what you’ve seen on this trip is the close ties that we have with the Irish people underscored by the President. You saw a reaffirmation of one of our most important relationships in the world, of course, with the United Kingdom. Then you saw the consultations at the G8, meeting with President Medvedev as a part of that, and now a chance to underscore the importance of Eastern Europe as well.
So I do think it’s important to send a signal in that context, that Eastern Europe is very important to the United States, and European security is very important to the United States, and that we’re going to remain deeply committed to the democratic consolidation in Eastern Europe while also working with them to make them more active global partners as well.
Q Does the U.S. have anything to announce on any of their sort of bilateral issues like their kind of request for help with their F-16s, squadrons, or even the visa waiver issue?
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: So we have a number of deliverables that will be put out tomorrow. I think I can say confidently that we are going to announce tomorrow the conclusion of the agreement to establish an aviation detachment in Poland that will allow for our two air forces to cooperate in training the Poles to utilize the American aircraft that they purchased -- F-16s and C-130s.
So what we will be doing is rotating quarterly trainers and aircraft to Poland so that they can become more interoperable with NATO, utilizing the equipment that they own. This will be a small, permanent presence on the ground, and then a rotational presence that will be more substantial.
Q How many aircraft are you talking about, Liz?
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: I believe they have 48 F-16s, but how many we will rotate will depend on how we decide to do the training.
MR. RHODES: The agenda tomorrow -- that's a very -- obviously, an issue of great interest to the Poles and to the United States, given their interest in -- and our common interest in their close defense cooperation. And I’m sure they’ll be discussing a range of issues to include the democracy aspects that we discussed, to include economic cooperation, particularly on energy. I think the Poles are interested.
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: And we have a fact sheet we’re going to put out tomorrow on the cooperation that we’re undertaking with the Poles on energy, particularly clean energy and shale, which is something we’re working on very closely with them.
As Ben said, we’re going to have some things to announce on democracy promotion because of the leadership role that Poland has played in the region and our concerns about Belarus.
And then do you want to say word on visa waiver?
MR. RHODES: Yes. Then I think -- of course, visa waiver is an important issue to the Poles, so I think tomorrow the President will be able to update both Prime Minister Tusk and President Komorowski on the progress that we’re making in pursuit of fulfilling the President’s commitment to address Poland’s visa concerns. So that will be -- he’ll be providing that update tomorrow.
I should have pointed at the beginning, we put out a statement on Belarus today condemning the political arrests that have been made there and signaling an intent was to pursue targeted sanctions against those members of the Belarusian government who are responsible.
MR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: And provide additional support to Belarusian opposition and civil society.
Q It doesn’t sound like you have a final visa agreement.
MR. RHODES: I think that we’re working towards fulfilling the commitment that the President made. There are many components of that, to include both components within the administration, but also legislatively, as well. So those are being worked through. And I think the President will be able to provide the update as to how many of -- how far down the road we’ve moved and what the remaining issues are.
But, again, it will be -- we feel like we’ve made progress from the time that he made -- he had his last meeting with the Poles, and he’ll be able to speak to that progress tomorrow.
Q Ben, can you talk a little bit about the comments out of Russia today where they were saying that they would be willing to mediate in Qaddafi’s exit? And can you talk a little bit about what Obama and Medvedev spoke about this yesterday?
MR. RHODES: Yes. Well, as we said yesterday, Libya was a topic of conversation in the bilateral meeting yesterday. The President reiterated the fact that Russia’s role in abstaining was essential to the resolution passing, the operation going forward.
They then discussed what role Russia might play in the current context. And the Russians, of course, have longstanding relationships in Libya that, frankly, we don't have, and so we agreed that it would be important for us to remain in close contact with the Russians.
For them, they provided us with an update on some of their discussions they’ve had with I think both the opposition as well as regime officials -- because I think recently you saw, for instance, travel to Moscow by some opposition leaders. So they’ve been in touch with members across the Libyan spectrum. And we agreed to stay in contact with them around those discussions.
We noted Russia’s public statements following the meeting that they are committed to seeing Qaddafi go. And that's very consistent with the discussion that the two Presidents have.
Q Did Medvedev say that Russia was willing to play a role in Qaddafi’s exit?
MR. RHODES: They didn't -- the way I would characterize it is there was agreement about what needs to happen in Libya, and that we believe that Russia has a role to play going forward as a close partner of ours who also has discussions with the Libyan people.
So I wouldn’t want to suggest that they discussed a great detailed plan of action, but it was rather, we agree that the Libyan people -- we are in agreement that there needs to be forward movement in Libya on the political side. There’s an agreement that the Libyan people deserve a better and different future, and that we are going to be in close touch with the Russians as they pursue their conversations with the Libyans. And we’re going to continue to share information about this.
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: I had a Russia point, just going back to the question about the reset. It’s notable that Poland has pursued its own reset with Russia, that in the context of the work that we’ve done to reduce the tensions in the relationship between the United States and Poland, Poland felt the confidence also to pursue the development of a more constructive relationship. And they feel that their security environment has been improved as a consequence of the overall change in climate since we began this work together.
So I think that's one of the things that we see when we talk about Poland’s role in the region. Poland is really playing a leadership role now in stabilizing its region, in encouraging reconciliation and progress toward EU integration, and in trying to induce countries that are still not far enough along the path of democracy -- in particular Belarus, but we also see backsliding in Ukraine -- to work in that direction. They’ve committed time and energy and resources to it, and we’re going to be increasingly partnering with them as they assume that leadership role.
Q Thank you, guys.
END 5:09 P.M. CEST
For Immediate Release
Location:
Aboard Air Force One, En Route Warsaw, Poland
4:45 P.M. CEST
MR. CARNEY: Hello, everyone. As we make our way to Warsaw, I wanted to gaggle and bring with me Ben Rhodes, the President’s Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications. We also have with us Liz Sherwood-Randall, who is Senior Director at the NSC for European Affairs, who can talk to you about our visit to Poland.
I don’t have any other announcements to make, so I’m going to ask Ben to give a little bit of an overview, and then Liz can talk to you about specifics about the dinner tonight and what’s on the agenda for tomorrow.
MR. RHODES: Just a quick thing on today. I know you got a readout already, but in addition, the President was able to met separately on the margins for a brief period of time today with both Prime Minister Essebsi of Tunisia and Prime Minister Sharaf of Egypt. They were able to have discussions between meetings.
And the President just told us that he found both of the leaders committed to moving forward with the political reforms in their country. They discussed the importance of moving forward with democratic reforms, including respect for the rights of minorities. The President reaffirmed America’s commitment to democracy in both Egypt and Tunisia, as well as the programs of economic modernization that were the topics of discussion today. And the President discussed again our long-term commitment to supporting stability and democracy and economic prosperity in these countries, and was impressed with both leaders.
I’ll just kind of go through some of the -- you already have most of this, but the top lines for the Poland trip, and Liz can speak to the dinner tonight and the bilateral agenda for tomorrow.
So tonight, after we get to Poland, the President will lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Warsaw. He will proceed immediately to the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier and lay a wreath honoring, of course, the great sacrifices made by the Poles throughout many, many centuries and many years of their history.
Then he will go to the Warsaw Ghetto Memorial, where he will also pay tribute there to, of course, the tragic history as well as the heroic resistance that took place at the Warsaw Ghetto Memorial. He will lay a wreath there as well.
Then he will proceed to the presidential palace, and he and President Komorowski will host a dinner with Central and Eastern European heads of state. Liz can give you the list and the agenda for that dinner in a moment. But, again, this is an important opportunity from Warsaw to underscore America’s deep commitment to security and democracy in the region, to consult with the leaders of these countries, as well as, of course, having the bilateral meeting with Poland.
Then tomorrow the President will begin with a bilateral meeting with President Komorowski. Then the two leaders will participate in a discussion -- after that bilateral meeting, a separate discussion about democracy, some of the lessons learned from the experience of Eastern Europe in Poland and their democratic transitions. There is a group of people who’ve traveled -- Poles -- who work these issues who’ve recently traveled to Tunisia and other places, and also are playing a key role in Belarus, which Liz can talk to, which is of course the last remaining -- or the most troublesome remaining country in Europe in terms of backsliding on democracy.
Following that, he will have a working lunch and bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Tusk. They will hold a joint press conference. And then he will visit the church that is the memorial to the tragic plane crash of last year.
With that, Liz can give you the dinner and the bilateral agenda, and then we’ll take some questions.
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: Hi, all. Happy to do this. So for those of you who remember, last year in Prague the President had dinner with a number of his Central and Eastern European counterparts. It was leaders only. And the President found it very meaningful to hear directly from them about their concerns in their region, their perspective on the work that we’re doing together. And so when we learned that the Poles were hosting a summit today of Central and Eastern European leaders -- which has been a formula in Central and Eastern Europe since 1993, with variable participants, it’s not a set group -- we asked if we could jointly host with the Polish President an informal dinner with the Presidents from the region who are going to be in Warsaw today.
So the President will have dinner with President Komorowski and 17 other leaders from the region tonight. Would you like me to actually tell you what countries?
Q Yes.
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: Okay. Albania, Austria, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Italy, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine, and then obviously Poland and the United States.
The agenda for the dinner is twofold. The first element is a discussion about finishing the unfinished business of Europe in the post-Cold War era. So it’s really to talk with these countries about their consolidation of democracy, their security interests, and then, as Ben alluded to, the challenges we continue to face in the countries on the eastern periphery of Europe, in particular Belarus, which is really the last holdout in Europe.
And we’ll be discussing the ways in which we can cooperate together to build on the successful models of the countries that are around this table tonight and encourage those who are at this table who are still working their way along the democratic path to continue along that path.
So the first discussion, as I said, is about European security and prosperity. The second half of the dinner will be a discussion about Europe in the world -- because one of the themes of our administration has been that these countries, which moved along toward democracy at the end of the Cold War, have great experience to share with countries that have not yet made that transition. And given the dramatic events of the last few months, Poland has taken the lead, as Ben mentioned, to assist countries like Tunisia with their efforts to build new democratic institutions and processes.
And so what we want to talk about with these countries is the role that they can play not only within Europe, as we’ll talk about at the first session of the dinner, but in the second element of the dinner, how they can play a role beyond Europe. And we’ll be discussing in particular Tunisia and Egypt and the participation that they can have alongside us in the work we’re doing there, building on what happened today at the G8.
Q Liz, can you expand on that a little bit, on how these countries could play a role in Tunisia and Egypt?
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: Well, already it’s happening, so the democracy event tomorrow where the President will be briefed by Poles who have been out in Tunisia and in Libya -- because the foreign minister has been in Libya recently -- what we’re talking with them about is, what lessons from your experience of transition can be applied to those who are now trying to figure out, in the wake of the revolutions that essentially have taken place in their countries, how to build new democratic institutions that work. And while our experience is rather old in this regard, with these countries the experience is very fresh; it’s 20 years ago.
And so our thinking is -- and we know this from some of our partners in the Middle East and North Africa -- they’re very interested in the example of Poland, in particular, but also some of the other countries that will be around the table tonight.
MR. RHODES: I’ll just add one thing to that, too. There are the direct contacts that we want to encourage between the countries around the table -- Poland in particular has taken the lead -- and these countries. There have been very impressive civil society contacts. I think you’ve seen, for instance, some of the group of people who were involved in the Serbian protests have been in contact with the Egyptian and Tunisian counterparts. So they’re government-to-government; they’re civil society-to-civil society contacts.
But also some of the discussion today, of course, was about the economic component of this. Some of the very same institutions and infrastructure that was set up to support democratic transitions in Europe, in Eastern Europe in particular, are now being reoriented towards the south. So you have the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, who built up expertise and how countries that are transitioning in democracy need to consolidate growth.
So the EBRD is going to be reorienting a lot of its focus to MENA. That’s an outcome of the G8 meeting today. And that’s the type of expertise that exists within Eastern Europe that can be now refocused on the Middle East and North Africa.
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: And actually I’d add two points here -- one, to build on what Ben has said. So a concrete example of this is in our own country that our democratic institutes are partnering with the Poles. We can provide some support for them. They have the human capital, and some of our democratic institutes want to help them get out in the region.
MR. RHODES: Yes. Like NDI and NRI --
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: So NED, NRI -- yes, exactly -- and NDI.
So, second thing I want to say, going back to the first session, given what happened yesterday with the apprehension of Mladic after so many years, it’s a perfect way of thinking about the continuing work we’re doing toward reconciliation in Europe and toward integration in Europe. And so one of the themes of this first session, when we’re talking about Europe itself, is how can we consolidate that integration.
There are countries in the Balkans that have not moved fully along the path to membership in the EU. The development in Serbia yesterday means that Serbia can take further steps forward toward its EU membership -- because one of the issues that had blocked its progress was the fact that Mladic was still on the loose.
And so this is a good example of the kind of work we want to do to help Europe heal from the past and integrate so that it is that Europe that is truly whole, free, and at peace. And there is unfinished business still to be done.
Q Are you surprised that Walesa isn’t going to be at the event tonight, given his interest, his visit to Tunisia recently? Why did he cancel? And what is your reaction to that?
MR. RHODES: Yes, I got your question, Kate. First of all, events tomorrow, the democracy events tomorrow. He was invited by President Komorowski. We certainly -- President Obama would welcome the opportunity to meet with him.
My understanding, from his statements and his communications with us, is he has an engagement in Italy -- speaking engagement. But we’re working -- we, of course, would welcome his participation in the democracy event. He was invited by the Polish President, and President Obama, of course, would welcome that opportunity. But I think it’s a scheduling matter that they’re looking at. I think he spoke to it today, actually. And we’ll let you know if there are any updates.
The group of people that he was a part of, again, were part of this Polish delegation that’s traveled in the region and that will be providing the readout of the meeting. But, of course, he is a symbol among -- a leading symbol among many of the transition by the Polish people. So we’re certainly going to benefit from the experience of those Poles who travel in the region and the experience of Poles involved in the transition to democracy. And I think right now what we’re working through is just whether there’s a scheduling conflict.
Q Did the two -- did Walesa and Obama speak today, did you say? When you said the two spoke today, who --
MR. RHODES: No, no, no, I said I think Lech Walesa spoke publicly about how he’s trying to -- about his scheduling commitment. And so I think -- I was referring to the fact that he spoke. And we’re proceeding with the democracy event, seeing if there’s any way to make it possible for him to be there, but if he can’t be there because he has a previous commitment, that’s certainly understandable.
Q Given that you’re talking a lot about how good your relationship with Russia is, is there any feeling that it’s good for the President to go to Poland to sort of stress that just because you have a good friendship with Russia doesn’t mean you can’t be an effective sort of partner with Poland?
MR. RHODES: We’ve had a view from the very beginning of the administration that the reset of our relationship with Russia would be good for Eastern Europe and the security of Europe generally, because, frankly, when you have Russia communicating well with the United States, communicating well with NATO, you have a better context for European security generally.
I think, understandably, at the very beginning of the administration, there was some concern that if there was a reset with Russia, would it come at the expense of Europe, or would it be in service of European interests? And I think what we found increasingly is that these countries very much came to support the reset. You saw that in Prague last year when they actually -- after signing the START Treaty, President Obama had the dinner with these leaders, and many of them remarked on the fact that they had come to believe that the thawing of relations between the United States and Russia was a broader thawing, in some respects, between the United States and the West that could be beneficial for European security.
Similarly, many of these leaders, as you know, those of you who were with us in Lisbon, became very supportive of the START Treaty and made statements in support of the START Treaty that were very important statements at a time of discussion and debate in the United States. And what they said at the time was it is better, again, to have this type of cooperation with Russia, this type of transparency, so we understand what’s happening at the time within Russia as it relates to its -- their nuclear facilities.
So, again, you saw them reaffirm their support for the cornerstone of the reset with the START debate.
So I think what we’ve come to see -- and then, last, I should have said the NATO-Russia Council that took place in Lisbon also I think spoke to the fact that this wasn’t just the United States and Russia that had to reset, but rather it was NATO and Russia, to include, of course, the Eastern European countries.
At the same time, I think it’s important for the President to send a signal about all of our -- the importance of all of our alliances and partnerships. And what you’ve seen on this trip is the close ties that we have with the Irish people underscored by the President. You saw a reaffirmation of one of our most important relationships in the world, of course, with the United Kingdom. Then you saw the consultations at the G8, meeting with President Medvedev as a part of that, and now a chance to underscore the importance of Eastern Europe as well.
So I do think it’s important to send a signal in that context, that Eastern Europe is very important to the United States, and European security is very important to the United States, and that we’re going to remain deeply committed to the democratic consolidation in Eastern Europe while also working with them to make them more active global partners as well.
Q Does the U.S. have anything to announce on any of their sort of bilateral issues like their kind of request for help with their F-16s, squadrons, or even the visa waiver issue?
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: So we have a number of deliverables that will be put out tomorrow. I think I can say confidently that we are going to announce tomorrow the conclusion of the agreement to establish an aviation detachment in Poland that will allow for our two air forces to cooperate in training the Poles to utilize the American aircraft that they purchased -- F-16s and C-130s.
So what we will be doing is rotating quarterly trainers and aircraft to Poland so that they can become more interoperable with NATO, utilizing the equipment that they own. This will be a small, permanent presence on the ground, and then a rotational presence that will be more substantial.
Q How many aircraft are you talking about, Liz?
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: I believe they have 48 F-16s, but how many we will rotate will depend on how we decide to do the training.
MR. RHODES: The agenda tomorrow -- that's a very -- obviously, an issue of great interest to the Poles and to the United States, given their interest in -- and our common interest in their close defense cooperation. And I’m sure they’ll be discussing a range of issues to include the democracy aspects that we discussed, to include economic cooperation, particularly on energy. I think the Poles are interested.
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: And we have a fact sheet we’re going to put out tomorrow on the cooperation that we’re undertaking with the Poles on energy, particularly clean energy and shale, which is something we’re working on very closely with them.
As Ben said, we’re going to have some things to announce on democracy promotion because of the leadership role that Poland has played in the region and our concerns about Belarus.
And then do you want to say word on visa waiver?
MR. RHODES: Yes. Then I think -- of course, visa waiver is an important issue to the Poles, so I think tomorrow the President will be able to update both Prime Minister Tusk and President Komorowski on the progress that we’re making in pursuit of fulfilling the President’s commitment to address Poland’s visa concerns. So that will be -- he’ll be providing that update tomorrow.
I should have pointed at the beginning, we put out a statement on Belarus today condemning the political arrests that have been made there and signaling an intent was to pursue targeted sanctions against those members of the Belarusian government who are responsible.
MR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: And provide additional support to Belarusian opposition and civil society.
Q It doesn’t sound like you have a final visa agreement.
MR. RHODES: I think that we’re working towards fulfilling the commitment that the President made. There are many components of that, to include both components within the administration, but also legislatively, as well. So those are being worked through. And I think the President will be able to provide the update as to how many of -- how far down the road we’ve moved and what the remaining issues are.
But, again, it will be -- we feel like we’ve made progress from the time that he made -- he had his last meeting with the Poles, and he’ll be able to speak to that progress tomorrow.
Q Ben, can you talk a little bit about the comments out of Russia today where they were saying that they would be willing to mediate in Qaddafi’s exit? And can you talk a little bit about what Obama and Medvedev spoke about this yesterday?
MR. RHODES: Yes. Well, as we said yesterday, Libya was a topic of conversation in the bilateral meeting yesterday. The President reiterated the fact that Russia’s role in abstaining was essential to the resolution passing, the operation going forward.
They then discussed what role Russia might play in the current context. And the Russians, of course, have longstanding relationships in Libya that, frankly, we don't have, and so we agreed that it would be important for us to remain in close contact with the Russians.
For them, they provided us with an update on some of their discussions they’ve had with I think both the opposition as well as regime officials -- because I think recently you saw, for instance, travel to Moscow by some opposition leaders. So they’ve been in touch with members across the Libyan spectrum. And we agreed to stay in contact with them around those discussions.
We noted Russia’s public statements following the meeting that they are committed to seeing Qaddafi go. And that's very consistent with the discussion that the two Presidents have.
Q Did Medvedev say that Russia was willing to play a role in Qaddafi’s exit?
MR. RHODES: They didn't -- the way I would characterize it is there was agreement about what needs to happen in Libya, and that we believe that Russia has a role to play going forward as a close partner of ours who also has discussions with the Libyan people.
So I wouldn’t want to suggest that they discussed a great detailed plan of action, but it was rather, we agree that the Libyan people -- we are in agreement that there needs to be forward movement in Libya on the political side. There’s an agreement that the Libyan people deserve a better and different future, and that we are going to be in close touch with the Russians as they pursue their conversations with the Libyans. And we’re going to continue to share information about this.
MS. SHERWOOD-RANDALL: I had a Russia point, just going back to the question about the reset. It’s notable that Poland has pursued its own reset with Russia, that in the context of the work that we’ve done to reduce the tensions in the relationship between the United States and Poland, Poland felt the confidence also to pursue the development of a more constructive relationship. And they feel that their security environment has been improved as a consequence of the overall change in climate since we began this work together.
So I think that's one of the things that we see when we talk about Poland’s role in the region. Poland is really playing a leadership role now in stabilizing its region, in encouraging reconciliation and progress toward EU integration, and in trying to induce countries that are still not far enough along the path of democracy -- in particular Belarus, but we also see backsliding in Ukraine -- to work in that direction. They’ve committed time and energy and resources to it, and we’re going to be increasingly partnering with them as they assume that leadership role.
Q Thank you, guys.
END 5:09 P.M. CEST
As gas prices rise, public seeks alternatives to oil
(Cross-posted from Think it Through.)
Guest post by Emma White.
With gas topping $4 a gallon in many places, the prevailing wisdom in DC suggests that calling for more domestic oil drilling is a political winner for politicians, and those who oppose new drilling will pay a political price. �President Obama embraced this perspective last week, offering his own plan to expand offshore oil drilling in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Atlantic seaboard.
It is certainly true that many Americans are open to increasing offshore drilling in the U.S.� The Pew Research Center found in March, when gas prices had already risen sharply, that 57% favor allowing increased oil and gas drilling in U.S. waters.
Guest post by Emma White.
With gas topping $4 a gallon in many places, the prevailing wisdom in DC suggests that calling for more domestic oil drilling is a political winner for politicians, and those who oppose new drilling will pay a political price. �President Obama embraced this perspective last week, offering his own plan to expand offshore oil drilling in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Atlantic seaboard.
It is certainly true that many Americans are open to increasing offshore drilling in the U.S.� The Pew Research Center found in March, when gas prices had already risen sharply, that 57% favor allowing increased oil and gas drilling in U.S. waters.
racial controversy U.S. banks Charlie Rangel Arizona immigration
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Where did the American united national character go?
A long time ago, in my youth in Connecticut, I remember a really different country than we have now. I didn't learn about the Federal Government through C-Span, which, of course, didn't exist back then, but through the Bristol Press and the Hartford Courant (and, occasionally, the Waterbury Republican.) These were the newspapers that came to our house, either by paper boy or by my father bringing them home at night from the Bristol Pharmacy after the 10 PM close. My parents were moderate Republicans (a concept which doesn't seem to exist any more), but some of my family were Democrats (My Uncle Pete, my Grandfather, my Aunt Helen... etc.) They all got along together. And they were part of a middle class that spent my first thirty years on this globe (I'm 65 next Tuesday) increasing their social and financial strength in a growing economy that was available to most of the population...not just the top 1%. I tripped over a quote from President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a two term Republican and hero of WWII... Republicans and Democrats respected the man... that relates to our latest political conflict. Ike said this on November 8, 1954:
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
Now it seems that those of negligible number or obvious stupidity are no longer a tiny splinter group, but a small control force with names like Koch Brothers, or Rupert Murdoch, or Grover Norquist, who are adamantly against the country solving it's economic problems by fair taxation of all economic levels. Nor do they want the remaining middle class, or the even poorer classes that much of that middle class is joining, to have access to adequate Social Security (if they have access to it at all) or Medicare or Medicaid or Food Stamps... you pick out any of the civil advancements we've made over the decades and it seems that this small control force is guiding the Republican Congress members into national devastation. Part of their secret weapon in defying Ike's prediction is in the creation of the Tea Party... getting a group of middle class or lower people to commit crippling torments on themselves... and then blaming progressives, and, indeed, our President for them. How did the rich get the not rich to carry out their self mutilation? One way was to spend lots of money on Republican politicians, on political lies during elections and on encouraging racial and social segregation feelings among folks with a history of the same and a minimum of intellectual dexterity. You can tie this to a previous administration (Read Bush II) that decimated the money kept aside for Social Security, leaving filing cabinets loaded with IOUs that were never intended to be paid while they cut the settled tax rates for the very rich... tax rates that never stopped them either being rich or getting richer ... leaving no more expected income for the needs of government. And the Tea Party folks BELIEVED all this crap. What must the laughs have been like at the Koch Brothers family cocktail gatherings? What was John Boehner's thoughts of getting progressive legislation stopped as he played at his golf outings? Those of us entering the world of Social Security/Medicare supported retirement have much different thoughts. Those who will retire ten years from now have even less positive expectations to think about. I am frustrated with much of what is happening... and aside from making statements in my blog, or on my podcast or on the Friday Morning radio show where I am a co-host... don't see what I can really do about it. I continue to vote and never miss an election, but my level of winning, the level of any progressives winning, is well below 50%... I live in the midst of conservatives and small thinkers, and of Democrats who might as well be Republicans. We have Corporations that are treated by our Supreme Court's conservative majority as individual citizens, with no control of the money spent by such private power. We have oil companies that make billions in profits, but receive billions from our government as subsidies. There is another President, even earlier than Eisenhower, who also had a vision of what could happen in our society:
"The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism ? ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. ?
? Franklin D. Roosevelt
Be afraid, my friends. Be very afraid.
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
Now it seems that those of negligible number or obvious stupidity are no longer a tiny splinter group, but a small control force with names like Koch Brothers, or Rupert Murdoch, or Grover Norquist, who are adamantly against the country solving it's economic problems by fair taxation of all economic levels. Nor do they want the remaining middle class, or the even poorer classes that much of that middle class is joining, to have access to adequate Social Security (if they have access to it at all) or Medicare or Medicaid or Food Stamps... you pick out any of the civil advancements we've made over the decades and it seems that this small control force is guiding the Republican Congress members into national devastation. Part of their secret weapon in defying Ike's prediction is in the creation of the Tea Party... getting a group of middle class or lower people to commit crippling torments on themselves... and then blaming progressives, and, indeed, our President for them. How did the rich get the not rich to carry out their self mutilation? One way was to spend lots of money on Republican politicians, on political lies during elections and on encouraging racial and social segregation feelings among folks with a history of the same and a minimum of intellectual dexterity. You can tie this to a previous administration (Read Bush II) that decimated the money kept aside for Social Security, leaving filing cabinets loaded with IOUs that were never intended to be paid while they cut the settled tax rates for the very rich... tax rates that never stopped them either being rich or getting richer ... leaving no more expected income for the needs of government. And the Tea Party folks BELIEVED all this crap. What must the laughs have been like at the Koch Brothers family cocktail gatherings? What was John Boehner's thoughts of getting progressive legislation stopped as he played at his golf outings? Those of us entering the world of Social Security/Medicare supported retirement have much different thoughts. Those who will retire ten years from now have even less positive expectations to think about. I am frustrated with much of what is happening... and aside from making statements in my blog, or on my podcast or on the Friday Morning radio show where I am a co-host... don't see what I can really do about it. I continue to vote and never miss an election, but my level of winning, the level of any progressives winning, is well below 50%... I live in the midst of conservatives and small thinkers, and of Democrats who might as well be Republicans. We have Corporations that are treated by our Supreme Court's conservative majority as individual citizens, with no control of the money spent by such private power. We have oil companies that make billions in profits, but receive billions from our government as subsidies. There is another President, even earlier than Eisenhower, who also had a vision of what could happen in our society:
"The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism ? ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. ?
? Franklin D. Roosevelt
Be afraid, my friends. Be very afraid.
barney franks obamacare socialized medicine socialism stem cell
Fact Sheet: U.S.-Poland Bilateral Defense Cooperation
Release Time:
For Immediate Release
The United States and Poland have forged an exceptional bilateral defense partnership, firmly rooted in the enduring NATO alliance. Poland and the United States work together in the Euro-Atlantic region and globally with shared values and shared democratic principles. In Afghanistan, U.S. and Polish soldiers fight bravely to advance security and stability and deny violent extremists safe haven. Committed to each other’s defense through NATO, the United States and Poland have undertaken contingency planning, joint exercises and Polish basing upgrades in support of Article 5 commitments under the North-Atlantic Treaty. Strengthening their partnership, the United States and Poland are building on the August 2008 Declaration on Strategic Cooperation through collaboration in military training and modernization, missile defense, information sharing, and defense/industrial research. Key joint actions include:
Aviation Detachment: During his visit to Warsaw, President Obama and President Komorowski welcomed the conclusion of a bilateral Memorandum of Understanding, a key step toward the establishment of a U.S. Air Force Aviation Detachment in Poland. The Aviation Detachment will strengthen joint interoperability through regular training exercise rotations in Poland, largely with U.S. F-16 or C-130 aircraft, beginning in 2013. F-16s from the California Air National Guard will also participate in the July 2011 SAFE SKIES training exercise with Polish F-16s as part of Poland’s security preparations for the EURO 2012 soccer tournament.
Missile Defense: President Obama discussed with President Komorowski and Prime Minister Tusk next steps in the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) to missile defense, including recent progress in implementing Phases I and II of the new missile defense architecture. The United States welcomes Poland’s May 2011 ratification of our Missile Defense Agreement, and the U.S. European Command and Polish military leaders will jointly inaugurate a series of consultations to take necessary actions to implement this agreement, leading to the deployment of the EPAA’s land-based interceptor site in Poland in 2018.
Preparation for Deployments to Afghanistan: The United States and Poland jointly train before each Polish ISAF deployment (which now totals 2,600), with support from the U.S. Army Europe, Special Operations Command, and the Illinois National Guard. Members of the Illinois National Guard proudly serve shoulder-to-shoulder with Polish forces in Afghanistan. The U.S. supports Polish operations with loans of armored vehicles and other combat equipment and services.
Special Operations: In the wake of the February 2009 signing of the Memorandum of Understanding establishing a strategic partnership between the U.S. and Polish Special Operations commands, the United States continues to assist Poland in becoming a fully interoperable Special Operations Forces partner nation by 2014.
Air Defense Training: In May 2010, the United States began quarterly rotations of a Patriot battery to Poland. Four rotations have already been completed and there are plans for seven more. These rotations and other military cooperation are possible because the United States and Poland negotiated a supplemental Status of Forces Agreement that entered into force in early 2010.
Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement: The United States and Poland have concluded negotiations and will soon sign a Reciprocal Defense Procurement MOU that will facilitate defense cooperation by greatly reducing barriers to trade in defense articles.
In addition to close cooperation within NATO, the United States and Poland continue regular, high-level consultations between our governments. The State Department and Ministry of Foreign Affairs hold annual Strategic Dialogue and Strategic Cooperation Consultative Group meetings. The Department of Defense leads annual High Level Defense Group meetings with the Polish Ministry of Defense. These dialogues span transatlantic, European, and NATO security issues, ranging from Afghanistan to missile defense to non-proliferation and arms control.
For Immediate Release
The United States and Poland have forged an exceptional bilateral defense partnership, firmly rooted in the enduring NATO alliance. Poland and the United States work together in the Euro-Atlantic region and globally with shared values and shared democratic principles. In Afghanistan, U.S. and Polish soldiers fight bravely to advance security and stability and deny violent extremists safe haven. Committed to each other’s defense through NATO, the United States and Poland have undertaken contingency planning, joint exercises and Polish basing upgrades in support of Article 5 commitments under the North-Atlantic Treaty. Strengthening their partnership, the United States and Poland are building on the August 2008 Declaration on Strategic Cooperation through collaboration in military training and modernization, missile defense, information sharing, and defense/industrial research. Key joint actions include:
Aviation Detachment: During his visit to Warsaw, President Obama and President Komorowski welcomed the conclusion of a bilateral Memorandum of Understanding, a key step toward the establishment of a U.S. Air Force Aviation Detachment in Poland. The Aviation Detachment will strengthen joint interoperability through regular training exercise rotations in Poland, largely with U.S. F-16 or C-130 aircraft, beginning in 2013. F-16s from the California Air National Guard will also participate in the July 2011 SAFE SKIES training exercise with Polish F-16s as part of Poland’s security preparations for the EURO 2012 soccer tournament.
Missile Defense: President Obama discussed with President Komorowski and Prime Minister Tusk next steps in the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) to missile defense, including recent progress in implementing Phases I and II of the new missile defense architecture. The United States welcomes Poland’s May 2011 ratification of our Missile Defense Agreement, and the U.S. European Command and Polish military leaders will jointly inaugurate a series of consultations to take necessary actions to implement this agreement, leading to the deployment of the EPAA’s land-based interceptor site in Poland in 2018.
Preparation for Deployments to Afghanistan: The United States and Poland jointly train before each Polish ISAF deployment (which now totals 2,600), with support from the U.S. Army Europe, Special Operations Command, and the Illinois National Guard. Members of the Illinois National Guard proudly serve shoulder-to-shoulder with Polish forces in Afghanistan. The U.S. supports Polish operations with loans of armored vehicles and other combat equipment and services.
Special Operations: In the wake of the February 2009 signing of the Memorandum of Understanding establishing a strategic partnership between the U.S. and Polish Special Operations commands, the United States continues to assist Poland in becoming a fully interoperable Special Operations Forces partner nation by 2014.
Air Defense Training: In May 2010, the United States began quarterly rotations of a Patriot battery to Poland. Four rotations have already been completed and there are plans for seven more. These rotations and other military cooperation are possible because the United States and Poland negotiated a supplemental Status of Forces Agreement that entered into force in early 2010.
Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement: The United States and Poland have concluded negotiations and will soon sign a Reciprocal Defense Procurement MOU that will facilitate defense cooperation by greatly reducing barriers to trade in defense articles.
In addition to close cooperation within NATO, the United States and Poland continue regular, high-level consultations between our governments. The State Department and Ministry of Foreign Affairs hold annual Strategic Dialogue and Strategic Cooperation Consultative Group meetings. The Department of Defense leads annual High Level Defense Group meetings with the Polish Ministry of Defense. These dialogues span transatlantic, European, and NATO security issues, ranging from Afghanistan to missile defense to non-proliferation and arms control.
Pakistani The View gubernatorial candidate Howard Dean ethics charges
President Obama Announces More Key Administration Posts
Release Time:
For Immediate Release
WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to key Administration posts:
· Scott Charney, Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
· Dick Costolo, Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
· David G. DeWalt, Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
· Jamie Dos Santos, Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
· Lisa Hook, Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
· John D. Goldman, Member, Advisory Committee on the Arts for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts
President Obama said, “I am proud to appoint such impressive men and women to these important roles, and I am grateful they have agreed to lend their considerable talents to this Administration. I look forward to working with them in the months and years ahead.”
President Obama announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to key Administration posts:
Scott Charney, Appointee for Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
Scott Charney is the Corporate Vice President of Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing (TwC) Group. Before TwC, Mr. Charney served as Chief of the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) in the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. Mr. Charney also served as an Assistant District Attorney in Bronx County, N.Y., where he later was named Deputy Chief of the Investigations Bureau. He holds two B.A.s from the State University of New York in Binghamton and a J.D. from Syracuse University.
Dick Costolo, Appointee for Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
Dick Costolo is the current CEO and former COO of Twitter, Inc. He is also an advisor to LaunchBox Digital and a mentor at TechStars, LLC. Prior to Twitter, Mr. Costolo worked at Google from 2007 to 2009, following Google’s acquisition of FeedBurner, which he co-founded in 2004. Prior to FeedBurner, Mr. Costolo served as a Senior Vice President at 724 Solutions Inc. Mr. Costolo was also CEO, President and Co-Founder of Spyonit.com. Mr. Costolo holds a B.S. from the University of Michigan.
David G. DeWalt, Appointee for Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
David G. DeWalt is President of McAfee, which provides computer antivirus and security products and services. Prior to joining McAfee, Mr. DeWalt was President of Software, Sales and Services at EMC, a provider of storage hardware solutions. Previously, Mr. DeWalt was President and CEO of Documentum. He also held executive-level positions at Eventus Software, Quest Software, Segue and Oracle. He holds a B.S. from the University of Delaware.
Jamie Dos Santos, Appointee for Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
Jamie Dos Santos is the current President and CEO of Terremark Federal Group. She previously served as Chief Marketing Officer for Terremark Worldwide, Inc. Prior to joining Terremark, Ms. Dos Santos worked for several global companies including BellSouth, Bellcore and SAIC. Ms. Dos Santos sits on the AFCEA Intelligence Committee as well as the Information Technology Sector Coordinating Council for the U.S. Protection of Critical Information Infrastructure. Her educational background includes eight years in the Bellcore Training Center, the University of Florida and Harvard Business School for Continuing Education.
Lisa Hook, Appointee for Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
Lisa Hook is the President and CEO of Neustar, Inc. Prior to joining Neustar, Inc., Ms. Hook held leadership positions at AOL, Time Warner and Viacom. Ms. Hook also served as a senior advisor at the Federal Communications Commission. Ms. Hook currently serves on several corporate and non-profit boards, including Reed Eslevier PLC, Reed Elsevier NV, Reed Elsevier Group PLC and The Ocean Foundation. She holds a B.A. from Duke University and a J.D. from Dickenson School of Law.
John D. Goldman, Appointee for Member, Advisory Committee on the Arts for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts
John Goldman is the President of the San Francisco Symphony and has served on the Symphony’s Board of Governors since 1996. He has been active in other community and philanthropic organizations, serving as the President of the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund and as former President of the Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco, Marin, Sonoma Counties, and the Peninsula. Prior to his position with the Symphony, he was the Chairman of Willis Bay Area, Inc. and CEO of Goldman Insurance Services. He received a B.A. from Swarthmore College and an M.B.A. from the Stanford University Graduate School of Business.
For Immediate Release
WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to key Administration posts:
· Scott Charney, Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
· Dick Costolo, Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
· David G. DeWalt, Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
· Jamie Dos Santos, Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
· Lisa Hook, Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
· John D. Goldman, Member, Advisory Committee on the Arts for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts
President Obama said, “I am proud to appoint such impressive men and women to these important roles, and I am grateful they have agreed to lend their considerable talents to this Administration. I look forward to working with them in the months and years ahead.”
President Obama announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to key Administration posts:
Scott Charney, Appointee for Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
Scott Charney is the Corporate Vice President of Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing (TwC) Group. Before TwC, Mr. Charney served as Chief of the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) in the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. Mr. Charney also served as an Assistant District Attorney in Bronx County, N.Y., where he later was named Deputy Chief of the Investigations Bureau. He holds two B.A.s from the State University of New York in Binghamton and a J.D. from Syracuse University.
Dick Costolo, Appointee for Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
Dick Costolo is the current CEO and former COO of Twitter, Inc. He is also an advisor to LaunchBox Digital and a mentor at TechStars, LLC. Prior to Twitter, Mr. Costolo worked at Google from 2007 to 2009, following Google’s acquisition of FeedBurner, which he co-founded in 2004. Prior to FeedBurner, Mr. Costolo served as a Senior Vice President at 724 Solutions Inc. Mr. Costolo was also CEO, President and Co-Founder of Spyonit.com. Mr. Costolo holds a B.S. from the University of Michigan.
David G. DeWalt, Appointee for Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
David G. DeWalt is President of McAfee, which provides computer antivirus and security products and services. Prior to joining McAfee, Mr. DeWalt was President of Software, Sales and Services at EMC, a provider of storage hardware solutions. Previously, Mr. DeWalt was President and CEO of Documentum. He also held executive-level positions at Eventus Software, Quest Software, Segue and Oracle. He holds a B.S. from the University of Delaware.
Jamie Dos Santos, Appointee for Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
Jamie Dos Santos is the current President and CEO of Terremark Federal Group. She previously served as Chief Marketing Officer for Terremark Worldwide, Inc. Prior to joining Terremark, Ms. Dos Santos worked for several global companies including BellSouth, Bellcore and SAIC. Ms. Dos Santos sits on the AFCEA Intelligence Committee as well as the Information Technology Sector Coordinating Council for the U.S. Protection of Critical Information Infrastructure. Her educational background includes eight years in the Bellcore Training Center, the University of Florida and Harvard Business School for Continuing Education.
Lisa Hook, Appointee for Member, President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee
Lisa Hook is the President and CEO of Neustar, Inc. Prior to joining Neustar, Inc., Ms. Hook held leadership positions at AOL, Time Warner and Viacom. Ms. Hook also served as a senior advisor at the Federal Communications Commission. Ms. Hook currently serves on several corporate and non-profit boards, including Reed Eslevier PLC, Reed Elsevier NV, Reed Elsevier Group PLC and The Ocean Foundation. She holds a B.A. from Duke University and a J.D. from Dickenson School of Law.
John D. Goldman, Appointee for Member, Advisory Committee on the Arts for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts
John Goldman is the President of the San Francisco Symphony and has served on the Symphony’s Board of Governors since 1996. He has been active in other community and philanthropic organizations, serving as the President of the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund and as former President of the Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco, Marin, Sonoma Counties, and the Peninsula. Prior to his position with the Symphony, he was the Chairman of Willis Bay Area, Inc. and CEO of Goldman Insurance Services. He received a B.A. from Swarthmore College and an M.B.A. from the Stanford University Graduate School of Business.
Blue Dog Coalition to Face Post-Election Shake-up
The Blue Dog Coalition of fiscally conservative Democratic House members is likely to face a major upheaval after the election. That?s because the drubbing that Democrats might receive should send some Blue Dogs back home, Roll Call reports. In addition, one of the group?s main founders, Rep. John Tanner of Tennessee, is retiring.
?We don?t know what the leadership positions will be like, because we don?t know the outcome of the election,? says Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Tenn., a senior blue dog who said the group may well lose half of its 54 members in a Republican blowout.
With Tanner out, Rep. Allen Boyd of Florida may be elevated to a leadership role. The blue dogs respect him for his policy and fundraising skills. And he?s close to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who consistently has sought good relations with the group. Moderate Democrats formed the coalition after Republicans seized control of Congress in the 1994 elections.
� Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Under Fire From Democrats, Chamber of Commerce Helps Blue Dogs
Republicans and their allies in business are howling that a Democratic charge that "secret foreign money" is fueling GOP campaigns is a dog that just won't hunt. Now the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is helping conservative Blue Dog Democrats in a bid to prove it is bipartisan after all.
The powerful business lobby quietly began running ads last week in the congressional districts of 10 endangered Democrats who opposed President Obama's health-care bill or have parted ways on taxes and other fiscal issues with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.
The "voter education" ads were first spotted by political media trackers and have been all but lost in the sturm und drang over the chamber's cable-dubbed "plot to buy America."
"The chamber has a broad political program," spokesman J.P. Fielder told Politics Daily. "We're supporting pro-business candidates who have voted with the chamber," he said, noting that includes Democratic Senate hopeful Joe Manchin in West Virginia.
Among the lucky "dogs" getting help from the chamber are Reps. Glenn Nye in Virginia, Travis Childers in Mississippi and Alabama's Bobby Bright, the first Democrat to say he won't vote for Pelosi for speaker if he is re-elected.
In one "voter education ad," the narrator thanks Rep. Jim Marshall of Georgia for voting no on Obama's health-care bill. "Tell him to keep fighting for seniors and against Washington's government health care takeover," it urges.
Jessica Klonsky, a spokeswoman for Rep. Frank Kratovil, a freshman Democrat who represents Maryland's conservative Eastern Shore, would not comment on the ads running on his behalf. "We can't control what the chamber is doing," she said, "but the endorsement is just another example of (Kratovil's) independent leadership."
The officially nonpartisan lobby is spending nearly $1.9 million to help conservative House Democrats this year, according to Federal Election Commission records. That's a fraction of the nearly $22 million in outside expenditures that the Center for Responsive Politics calculates the chamber has plunked down. Most of that money has gone to Republicans.
The new ads are likely to do little to douse the firestorm over "attack ads" by outside groups. In campaign stops last week, Obama railed against the chamber for funding spots partly with dues paid by foreign corporations. The ads are "a threat to our democracy," he said. "The American people deserve to know who's trying to sway their elections."
The New York Times reported that "a closer examination shows that there is little evidence that what the chamber does in collecting overseas dues is improper or even unusual." Republicans have accused Democrats of hypocrisy since left-leaning labor unions helping Democrats also have dues-paying international affiliates.
The report didn't keep the Democratic National Committee from launching its own attack ad against the chamber. Such "shills for big business," it said, are taking "secret foreign money to influence our elections."
On Tuesday, after appearing to back down on the foreign connection, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs pushed back against critics. He said the president would continue to ask questions about GOP donors, whether they are foreign or domestic.
ThinkProgress, the liberal blog that first raised the specter of foreign influence, suggested the Democratic spots are a smokescreen. "While the chamber ads may lead many to believe that the organization is taking on a more bipartisan stance, the truth is that it has a long history of allying itself closely to Republicans," it said, noting the group's directors have given six times as much money to GOP candidates as Democrats.
"The chamber wants to give substance to its claim of being bipartisan. That matters for appearances, of course. But it also is important because the chamber does not in fact want to be wholly captured by a single party and thus lose its ability to negotiate with both parties," said Mark Rozell, a George Mason University political scientist.
"If the GOP wins the House, while some moderate-conservative Democrats also win with chamber support, that sends an even stronger message of the group's ability to hurt the president's standing," he said. "The message to Democrats over the next two years would be heard loudly: support this president, look what happens. Stick with us, then we can help you."
Rick Santorum Chris Dodd Sharron Angle Pat Toomey Jan Brewer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)