Your Thoughts Matter
Feed aggregator
President Biden Announces Key Appointments to Boards and Commissions
WASHINGTON – Today, President Biden announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to serve in key roles:
- Doreen Patricia Greenwald, Member, Federal Salary Council
- Juan A. Sabater, Member, Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico
- Timothy D. Murray, Member, National Museum and Library Services Board
- Gregory C. Simon, Member, President’s Commission on White House Fellowships
- Daniel Mathews, Member, Public Buildings Reform Board
Federal Salary Council
The Federal Salary Council is an advisory board that provides recommendations on the federal employee locality pay program to the President’s Pay Agent. These recommendations include the establishment or modification of pay localities, the coverage of salary surveys used to set locality pay, the process for making pay comparisons, and the level of comparability payments that should be made. The council consists of a total of nine seats: three seats are meant to be filled by experts in pay policy and six seats are reserved for representatives of federal government employee organizations.
Doreen Patricia Greenwald, Member, Federal Salary Council
Doreen Patricia Greenwald was elected National President of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) in August 2023. As the NTEU’s top elected official, she is the spokesperson for the union representing NTEU on issues important to union members and federal employees. Greenwald was a frontline federal employee for 35 years. She previously served as the Special Assistant to the National NTEU President and was elected National Executive Vice President in 2022. Greenwald spent her federal career at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), where she worked as a revenue officer and served for 14 years as President of NTEU Chapter 1, IRS Wisconsin.
Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico
The Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico was created under the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management and Economic Stability Act of 2016. The Board consists of seven members appointed by the President and one ex officio member designated by the Governor of Puerto Rico. The Board is tasked with working with the people and government of Puerto Rico to create the necessary foundation for economic growth and to restore opportunity to the people of Puerto Rico.
Juan A. Sabater, Member, Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico
Juan A. Sabater is a Partner and Co-President of Valor Equity Partners, a growth focused private equity firm with approximately $16 billion in assets under management and recognized for the operational support it provides to the companies in which it invests. He is a member of all Valor Investment Committees. Sabater currently serves on the boards of directors of Harmony Biosciences, Addepar, and Premise Data, and as a board observer for Dataminr and BlueVoyant, all companies in which Valor is an investor. Prior to Valor, Sabater was a Managing Director at Goldman Sachs in the firm’s Investment Banking Division. Following Goldman Sachs, Sabater partnered with a law school friend to grow and scale Augeo Affinity Marketing. Together with his business partner, Sabater grew Augeo into a leading private company in the engagement and loyalty industry. Augeo today works with many Fortune 500 companies in the U.S. and internationally, managing programs reaching millions of employees and consumers globally. In 2014, Augeo partnered with the Obama-Biden Administration to create GamePlan4me.com, aimed at encouraging young people to obtain healthcare, with athletes articulating why healthcare is important. Sabater currently is Co-Chair of the Board of Augeo.
Sabater serves on the boards of academic, arts, charitable, and professional organizations, including The Frick Collection, Girls Who Code, Lenox Hill Neighborhood House (where he serves as Chair), and the National Association of Investment Companies. He also served as Co-Chair of the Board of The Hewitt School, an independent girls’ school in New York City, and on the board of the New America Alliance. He was one of the founding board members of My Brother’s Keeper Alliance, an initiative addressing the opportunity gaps faced by young men of color and now part of the Obama Foundation. Sabater was appointed by President Biden to the Board of Visitors to the U.S. Military Academy. In Puerto Rico, Sabater serves on the board of Endeavor Puerto Rico, which aims to transform the entrepreneurial ecosystem of Puerto Rico by integrating founders into a global community, and served on the boards of Invest Puerto Rico and Foundation for Puerto Rico. Sabater was also a founding member of Private Equity for Puerto Rico, which raised funds in 2017 for hurricane relief following Hurricane Maria. Sabater holds an A.B. in History from Princeton University, studied history at the University of Oxford, Mansfield College, and holds a J.D. from Stanford Law School. He is formerly an officer in the United States Army Reserve. Sabater, who was born in Puerto Rico and lived his childhood on the island, resides with his wife and three daughters in New York City.
National Museum and Library Services Board
The National Museum and Library Services Board advises the Institute of Museum and Library Services on general policies with respect to the duties, powers, and authority of the agency relating to museum, library, and information services, as well as the annual selection of National Medals recipients.
Timothy D. Murray, Member, National Museum and Library Services Board
Timothy D. Murray served as a Special Collections Librarian for over forty years. He has worked in the Special Collections departments of the University of Buffalo, Washington University in St. Louis, and the University of Delaware. He served as Head of Special Collections at Delaware from 1987 to 2022. A specialist in 20th century literary collections, Murray has curated exhibitions, written, taught, and lectured on figures such as Samuel Beckett, Paul Bowles, Kay Boyle, Ernest Hemingway, Abraham Lincoln, Hugh MacDiarmid, Ishmael Reed, and Tennessee Williams. From 2008 to 2009 he served as the University of Delaware’s representative on the Delaware Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission.
Murray has been active and held leadership positions in the Rare Books and Manuscripts Section of the American Library Association and the Society of American Archivists. In 2011, he was inducted as a fellow of the Society of American Archivists. In his award statement he was celebrated for his work as a mentor to students and young librarians, his expertise as an archivist and Special Collections librarian, and for his ability and willingness to bridge the gap between archives and librarianship.
President’s Commission on White House Fellowships
The President’s Commission on White House Fellowships is composed of outstanding citizens who reflect the diversity and strength of America while representing a broad range of backgrounds, experiences, and professions. Commissioners are responsible for recommending a group of candidates to the President for selection as White House Fellows, a prestigious program for leadership and public service that provides young Americans experience working at the highest levels of the federal government.
Gregory C. Simon, Member, President’s Commission on White House Fellowships
Gregory Simon began his government service as General Counsel and then Staff Director of the House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on investigations and Oversight. He served as the Legislative Director for then-Senator Al Gore (D-TN) and was commissioned by President Clinton to be Vice President Gore’s Chief Domestic Policy Advisor. He next served in the White House as the Executive Director of the White House Cancer Moonshot Task Force, under then-Vice President Biden. After leaving office in 2017, Vice President Biden and Dr. Biden asked Simon to launch and serve as the President of the Biden Cancer Initiative, an independent nonprofit organization.
Outside of his government service, Simon started Simon Strategies, LLC, an international consulting firm in science and technology policy. He launched two non-profits, FasterCures and the Melanoma Research Alliance. FasterCures is an organization devoted to speeding the pace of medical research in all diseases, and the Melanoma Research Alliance is the largest non-profit funder of melanoma research worldwide, which co-funded the work of Dr. James Allison who won the Nobel Prize in 2018.
Simon was born in Blytheville, Arkansas and received his B.A. from the University of Arkansas and his law degree from the University of Washington. He is married to Margo L. Reid and has two children, Kallile S. Simon and Michael Reid Simon, and two grandchildren, Charlie Walsh Simon and Jack Burns Simon.
Public Buildings Reform Board
The Public Buildings Reform Board was established under the Federal Assets Sale & Transfer Act of 2016 as an independent agency to identify opportunities for the Federal government to significantly reduce its inventory of civilian real property and thereby reduce costs.
Daniel Mathews, Member, Public Buildings Reform Board
Daniel Mathews is currently President of Mathews Associates LLC, where he advises companies on a variety of real estate issues. Mathews also serves on the Industry Advisory Group of the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations, where he and other noted industry professionals advise the State Department on how to provide the most effective facilities for United States diplomacy abroad. In addition, Mathews is a board member of both the Federal Real Property Association and the National Federal Development Association.
Mathews has extensive experience with federal real estate issues and served as Commissioner of the U.S. General Services Administration’s Public Buildings Service, where he led the 375 million square foot civilian real estate portfolio of the federal government, over 5,000 employees, and a $12 billion budget. Prior to that, he was the Staff Director of the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management. He worked on several major legislative initiatives involving public buildings, emergency management, and transportation, including most recently the Federal Assets Sale and Transfer Act of 2016, which established the Public Buildings Reform Board. Mathews graduated from Georgetown University with a degree in government and philosophy. He is married with two daughters and resides in Alexandria, Virginia.
###
The post President Biden Announces Key Appointments to Boards and Commissions appeared first on The White House.
Readout of National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s Meeting with Nigerian National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan met today with Nigerian National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu about bilateral security cooperation, efforts to counter terrorism in West Africa, and the importance of respect for human rights, strengthening democratic institutions, and good governance across the continent. Mr. Sullivan reiterated President Biden’s commitment to Africa and underscored the strength of the U.S.-Nigerian relationship, including welcoming Nigeria’s strong leadership of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). Mr. Sullivan also raised areas where the United States and Nigeria share interests, particularly in supporting peace and stability in countries that have recently experienced political transitions. Both decided to maintain close coordination and continue to deepen our partnership to advance shared interests.
###
The post Readout of National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s Meeting with Nigerian National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu appeared first on The White House.
Readout of National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s Meeting with Nigerian National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan met today with Nigerian National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu about bilateral security cooperation, efforts to counter terrorism in West Africa, and the importance of respect for human rights, strengthening democratic institutions, and good governance across the continent. Mr. Sullivan reiterated President Biden’s commitment to Africa and underscored the strength of the U.S.-Nigerian relationship, including welcoming Nigeria’s strong leadership of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). Mr. Sullivan also raised areas where the United States and Nigeria share interests, particularly in supporting peace and stability in countries that have recently experienced political transitions. Both decided to maintain close coordination and continue to deepen our partnership to advance shared interests.
###
The post Readout of National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s Meeting with Nigerian National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu appeared first on The White House.
Remarks by President Biden Before Marine One Departure
11:46 A.M. EST
Q What do you make of these attacks between Iran and Pakistan?
THE PRESIDENT: As you can see, Iran is not particularly well-liked in the region.
Q Yeah.
THE PRESIDENT: And where — where that goes, we’re working on now. I don’t know where that goes.
Q And how was your — how was your meeting yesterday?
THE PRESIDENT: I thought the meeting went well yesterday. I thought the meeting went well.
Q What are the sticking points on the border agreement? Where are the disagreements you’re working on?
THE PRESIDENT: I don’t think we have any sticking points left.
Q Are the airstrikes in Yemen working?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, when you say “working,” are they stopping the Houthis? No. Are they going to continue? Yes.
Q Mr. President, how do you feel about aid for Ukraine after yesterday’s meeting with members of Congress?
THE PRESIDENT: I think the vast majority of members of Congress support aid to Ukraine. The question is whether or not a small minority are going to hold it up, which would be — which would be a disaster.
Q How concerned are you with the Arab American votes during this election? And what Iowa means to you, to your reelection race?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I don’t think Iowa means anything. The President got 50-some-thousand votes — the lowest number of votes anybody who’s won got. You know, this idea that it’s been a runaway, I think he can characterize it any way he wants. I’ll let them make that judgment.
What was the second part of the question?
Q The part was: Are you concerned with the Arab American votes voting for you during this election because of Gaza? Many say they will not vote for you.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, look, the President wants to put a — the former President wants to put a ban on Arabs coming into the country. We’ll make sure he — we understand who cares about the Arab population, number one.
Number two, we got a long way to go in terms of settling the situation in Gaza.
(Cross-talk.)
Q The March for Life is tomorrow in Washington, D.C. — the March for Life is tomorrow in Washington, D.C.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I know that.
Q What’s your message to those attending?
THE PRESIDENT: March.
(Cross-talk.)
Q Sir — sir, can you talk about inflation? When will prices come down?
Q Should anybody be held for — should anybody be held criminally responsible for failures after the Uvalde shooting? Should anybody be held responsible with criminal charges?
THE PRESIDENT: I have not read the full report. The report will be out today —
Q Today.
THE PRESIDENT: — number one. We’re going to do what we can to implement the recommendations of the Justice Department. But I don’t know if there is any criminal liability. I — I have not read the report.
Q Were you — were you briefed by the Attorney General on this?
THE PRESIDENT: I was briefed by my staff on it.
(Cross-talk.)
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
11:48 A.M. EST
The post Remarks by President Biden Before Marine One Departure appeared first on The White House.
Remarks by President Biden Before Marine One Departure
11:46 A.M. EST
Q What do you make of these attacks between Iran and Pakistan?
THE PRESIDENT: As you can see, Iran is not particularly well-liked in the region.
Q Yeah.
THE PRESIDENT: And where — where that goes, we’re working on now. I don’t know where that goes.
Q And how was your — how was your meeting yesterday?
THE PRESIDENT: I thought the meeting went well yesterday. I thought the meeting went well.
Q What are the sticking points on the border agreement? Where are the disagreements you’re working on?
THE PRESIDENT: I don’t think we have any sticking points left.
Q Are the airstrikes in Yemen working?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, when you say “working,” are they stopping the Houthis? No. Are they going to continue? Yes.
Q Mr. President, how do you feel about aid for Ukraine after yesterday’s meeting with members of Congress?
THE PRESIDENT: I think the vast majority of members of Congress support aid to Ukraine. The question is whether or not a small minority are going to hold it up, which would be — which would be a disaster.
Q How concerned are you with the Arab American votes during this election? And what Iowa means to you, to your reelection race?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I don’t think Iowa means anything. The President got 50-some-thousand votes — the lowest number of votes anybody who’s won got. You know, this idea that it’s been a runaway, I think he can characterize it any way he wants. I’ll let them make that judgment.
What was the second part of the question?
Q The part was: Are you concerned with the Arab American votes voting for you during this election because of Gaza? Many say they will not vote for you.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, look, the President wants to put a — the former President wants to put a ban on Arabs coming into the country. We’ll make sure he — we understand who cares about the Arab population, number one.
Number two, we got a long way to go in terms of settling the situation in Gaza.
(Cross-talk.)
Q The March for Life is tomorrow in Washington, D.C. — the March for Life is tomorrow in Washington, D.C.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I know that.
Q What’s your message to those attending?
THE PRESIDENT: March.
(Cross-talk.)
Q Sir — sir, can you talk about inflation? When will prices come down?
Q Should anybody be held for — should anybody be held criminally responsible for failures after the Uvalde shooting? Should anybody be held responsible with criminal charges?
THE PRESIDENT: I have not read the full report. The report will be out today —
Q Today.
THE PRESIDENT: — number one. We’re going to do what we can to implement the recommendations of the Justice Department. But I don’t know if there is any criminal liability. I — I have not read the report.
Q Were you — were you briefed by the Attorney General on this?
THE PRESIDENT: I was briefed by my staff on it.
(Cross-talk.)
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
11:48 A.M. EST
The post Remarks by President Biden Before Marine One Departure appeared first on The White House.
Statement from President Joe Biden on Today’s Justice Department Report on the Uvalde School Shooting Response
In May 2022, Jill and I traveled to Uvalde to grieve 21 students and educators senselessly and tragically gunned down at Robb Elementary School. Twenty-one souls stolen from us in a place where they are supposed to feel safe—their classroom.
Following this tragedy, my administration conducted a review to determine lessons learned from the response that day and best practices to ensure a swifter and more effective response to future active shooter incidents. Today’s report makes clear several things: that there was a failure to establish a clear command and control structure, that law enforcement should have quickly deemed this incident an active shooter situation and responded accordingly, and that clearer and more detailed plans in the school district were required to prepare for the possibility that this could occur. There were multiple points of failure that hold lessons for the future, and my team will work with the Justice Department and Department of Education to implement policy changes necessary to help communities respond more effectively in the future.
No community should ever have to go through what the Uvalde community suffered. After the Uvalde shooting, the families of the victims turned their pain into purpose and pushed for the passage of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the most significant gun safety legislation in nearly 30 years, which I signed into law. And I continue to take historic executive action, including the establishment of the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention.
Congress must now pass commonsense gun safety laws to ensure that mass shootings like this one don’t happen in the first place. We need universal background checks, we need a national red flag law, and we must ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. The families of Uvalde – and all American communities — deserve nothing less.
The longer we wait to take action, the more communities like Uvalde will continue to suffer due to this epidemic of gun violence.
###
The post Statement from President Joe Biden on Today’s Justice Department Report on the Uvalde School Shooting Response appeared first on The White House.
Statement from President Joe Biden on Today’s Justice Department Report on the Uvalde School Shooting Response
In May 2022, Jill and I traveled to Uvalde to grieve 21 students and educators senselessly and tragically gunned down at Robb Elementary School. Twenty-one souls stolen from us in a place where they are supposed to feel safe—their classroom.
Following this tragedy, my administration conducted a review to determine lessons learned from the response that day and best practices to ensure a swifter and more effective response to future active shooter incidents. Today’s report makes clear several things: that there was a failure to establish a clear command and control structure, that law enforcement should have quickly deemed this incident an active shooter situation and responded accordingly, and that clearer and more detailed plans in the school district were required to prepare for the possibility that this could occur. There were multiple points of failure that hold lessons for the future, and my team will work with the Justice Department and Department of Education to implement policy changes necessary to help communities respond more effectively in the future.
No community should ever have to go through what the Uvalde community suffered. After the Uvalde shooting, the families of the victims turned their pain into purpose and pushed for the passage of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the most significant gun safety legislation in nearly 30 years, which I signed into law. And I continue to take historic executive action, including the establishment of the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention.
Congress must now pass commonsense gun safety laws to ensure that mass shootings like this one don’t happen in the first place. We need universal background checks, we need a national red flag law, and we must ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. The families of Uvalde – and all American communities — deserve nothing less.
The longer we wait to take action, the more communities like Uvalde will continue to suffer due to this epidemic of gun violence.
###
The post Statement from President Joe Biden on Today’s Justice Department Report on the Uvalde School Shooting Response appeared first on The White House.
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and NSC Coordinator For Strategic Communications John Kirby
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
(January 17, 2024)
2:33 P.M. EST
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Good afternoon, everyone.
Q Good afternoon.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, today, the Biden-Harris administ- –(the briefing room sound system experiences technical difficulties) — the levels. Is there a — should I start? Sou- — is — do I sound, like, echoey?
Q Yes.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay, well, sorry. Here we go.
Today, the Biden-Harris administration took new actions to tackle hidden junk fess by proposing a rule that would end excessive overdraft fees.
For too long, some banks have charged extreme overdraft fees, sometimes $30 or more, that often hit the most vulnerable Americans the hardest.
Today’s proposal by Consumer Financial Protection Bureau would cut the average overdraft fee by more than half, saving them — saving the millions of families that pay these fees an average of $150 a year. That would add up to save Americans $3.5 billion a year. Unfortunately, some Republicans in Congress continue to defend the rights of big banks to exploit their customers.
President Biden believes it’s wrong that some companies rip off Americans simply because they can, and his administration won’t let them.
As we work to lower costs and build the economy from the middle out and the bottom up, we got more evidence today that Americans are feeling the strength of the economy. Retail sales beat expectation last month, capping a record holiday shopping season. From TVs to toys, Americans were able to buy gifts for their loved ones that were more affordable and arrived on time thanks to the President’s work to fix and strengthen supply chains.
And today, a new poll from Axios showed Americans have a surprising degree of satisfaction where — with their economic situation. The poll showed Americans are optimistic about their finances. Sixty-three percent say their finances are currently good, and eighty-five percent believe they will get better this year. That’s not an accident; that’s Bidenomics at work.
(Referring to the briefing room sound system.) The volumes are incredibly weird right now. Did we get that fixed?
Q I think so.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay, I think so. All right.
And now, as you all know, today, we’re joined by my colleague, Admiral John Kirby, who’s here to discuss the United States’ continued response to the ongoing and escalating attacks by the Houthis in the Red Sea.
And with that, all — I think it’s all fixed for you now, Admiral. It’s all fixed.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Karine. That was kind of weird.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: That was very weird. Sounds like a gremlin was attacking.
MR. KIRBY: Good afternoon, everybody.
Look, as you all saw, United States today designated the Houthis as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Group. We took this action because of their continued reckless and indiscriminate attacks on ships transiting the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. These attacks are a clear example of terrorism, violation of international law, and a major threat to innocent lives and to global commerce.
Now, just a couple of points. First, today’s designation targets the Houthis, not the Yemeni people. The United States remains the world’s leading donor of humanitarian assistance for Yemen. We recognize that more than 15 million people in Yemen are still in desperate need of food, water, and medicine. And we are taking a range of steps to ensure that these sanctions preserve the ability of aid organizations to be able to deliver all those much-needed supplies.
Second, this designation takes effect 30 days from now. And the reason for that is it’ll give us time to work closely with those aid organizations to make sure that they understand all the ramifications of this designation, answer all their questions, and be able to provide enough context for them to have a measure of assurance as they continue to provide that humanitarian assistance.
Now, look, if the Houthis cease the attacks, we can certainly reconsider this designation. If they don’t, as the President said, we will not hesitate to take further actions to protect our people and the free flow of international commerce.
With that —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right. Go ahead.
Q Thanks. John, can you talk a little bit about why the President decided not to redesignate the Houthis as a foreign terrorist organization, which obviously would have restricted some of that aid? Is it purely because of that humanitarian assistance piece?
MR. KIRBY: Yeah, you sort of answered the question. This particular designation gives us — it actually gives us more flexibility, but it also gives aid organizations a higher level of comfort that they’ll be able to provide this assistance without running afoul of sanctions.
You’ve — we’ve already — in designating them, already issued a number of licenses. The license, as you know, is basically like a waiver. It’s a carveout — when you have a sanctions regime that — that allows for certain goods to continue to flow despite the sanction regime.
And so, yes, that’s the big reason here.
Q And then, (inaudible) the President could reconsider that designation should the Houthis stop these attacks? Are you essentially using this as a bargaining chip in negotiations or — in public negotiations with the Houthis?
MR. KIRBY: Yeah, I mean, that would suggest there’s negotiations going on, and we’re — there’s no negotiations here. It’s not a bargaining chip; it’s a way of holding the Hou- — the Houthis accountable — additional ways to hold them accountable.
I think, you know, if you look at the — the levers of national power — you know, there’s an acronym for it: DIME — right? — diplomacy, information, military, economic. We’re using all of those levers of national power and, frankly, international power to try to convince the Houthis to stop these attacks and, if they don’t — and they clearly haven’t — to make sure that we’re holding them accountable for that.
Q And just, lastly, on a different topic: the meeting that’s taking place in a few — in a few minutes with congressional leaders. We understand this is going to be focused mostly on situation in Ukraine. Is there a version you can provide publicly? What are they going — what are lawmakers going to hear from the national security staff —
MR. KIRBY: Yeah —
Q — that you’ve not already telegraphed publicly about what’s happening on the ground?
MR. KIRBY: Well, again, I don’t want to get ahold — ahead of the discussion. And I suspect that in that discussion there could be some classified content that they’ll discuss.
But in the main, this will be an opportunity for the President and for the national security team to make sure that members of Congress fully understand the desperate, urgent need for weapons and capabilities for Ukraine to continue to flow.
As you know, the last security assistance package was December 27th. There hasn’t been one since. There won’t be one unless or until we can get some funding.
And it’s not as if the war stopped just because our aid stopped. The Ukrainians continue to get attacked. They’re moving into some defensive positions along that line, in the east in particular, and they continue to come under artillery shell, air attacks, ballistic and cruise missile, as well as drone attacks from the Russians.
And they are expending what they have. And I won’t get into their inventory lists, but there are some weapons systems for which they are in more need than others right now. And the — and they have to expend them, given ongoing combat.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Karen.
Q Thanks. Last week, the President said it was “irrelevant” whether or not the Houthis were designated as a terrorist organization. Now, five days later, this announcement. Did he need to be convinced that this was the right step?
MR. KIRBY: No.
Q And looking back, was it a mistake to take them off of the terrorist list back in 2021 — just, like, consideration over these years?
MR. KIRBY: No. No, again, the previous designation was FTO — Foreign Terrorist Organization — which doesn’t have quite the measure of flexibility in terms of humanitarian assistance. And so, a big reason why we delisted them — literally, on day one — was to address a dire, dire humanitarian situation on the ground. And, as I said today, it remains dire in many cases.
The Houthis are more concerned about getting weapons and capabilities and attacking ships in the Red Sea than they are about helping to look after the Yemeni people.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q Thank you, Karine. The President said last week that a private message had been delivered to Iran about the Houthi attacks. Could you talk a little bit about that message?
MR. KIRBY: No, I cannot.
Q What can you tell us about what was communicated to the Houthis?
MR. KIRBY: That’s the same question you just asked. (Laughter.) I’m not going to get into that. The — as the President said, there was a private message delivered to Iran, and I need to leave it at that.
Q Has that been effective?
MR. KIRBY: I’m just going to leave it right there. A message was delivered. And, of course, publicly, we have made clear our — our concerns about what the Houthis are doing. We’ve made clear the support that — that we know they’re getting from Iran. And we’re going to continue to take actions.
I would remind — it doesn’t get mentioned a lot in the context of the Red Sea attacks — but this administration alone has issued some 500 sanctions — or 500 entities have been sanctioned under this administration in just the last three years.
Q And — and a quick question on —
MR. KIRBY: Iranian entities.
Q And a quick question on Iran’s foreign minister, who spoke at Davos earlier today. He said , “The security of the Red Sea is tied to the developments in Gaza, and everyone will suffer if Israel’s crimes in Gaza do not stop.” He basically warned that all fronts will remain active until then. Do you have a response to that?
MR. KIRBY: Well, I mean, let’s — to take it at — just in a couple of pieces there. If you look at the — it’s 32-some-odd attacks that the Houthis have conducted now — for the ones that were targeted at ships that were identifiable, because sometimes they launch a barrage and there’s multiple ships and you’re not really sure what ship is being targeted. But let’s just take a look at the majority of the 32 where you can identify the ship that’s being targeted. Not a single one was destined for Israel, and they were all destined for other ports with others — other bits of commerce.
So, the whole argument that this is about the war in Gaza — I mean, they’re just driving a stake through a straw man. There’s nothing there.
And as for the, quote, unquote, “resistance continuing,” I — I’ve said it many times; I’m happy to repeat it: We have national security interests in the region — significant interests. And we have moved additional military resources, at the President’s order, into the region to make sure we can protect those interests.
And we mean what we say. And if you doubt it, take a look at what happened just a few nights ago.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, M.J.
Q In — in his statement on the Houthis’ designation, Jake Sullivan said that there would be an immediate reevaluation of the designation were they to stop the attacks. Can you just help us understand why that reevaluation would happen immediately? You know, would that sort of risk the potential of them starting up the attacks again if that designation were to be taken away pretty quickly?
MR. KIRBY: The — the thing about sanctions designations that — they are a pliable form of economic pressure. You can scale them up. You can scale them down. You can lay them on. You can take them off in a fairly simple way. So, Jake is right.
As I said in my opening statement, if they — if they choose to stop these attacks, then we certainly have the option at our disposal to remove this designation that we just — that we just issued.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q (Inaudible.) Thank you so much. I wanted to give you a chance to respond to Speaker Johnson, who said earlier today — about the meeting on Ukraine, he said , “Before we even talk about Ukraine, I’m going to tell the President what I’m telling you, which is border, border, border.” Do you think that’s a legitimate position to say that even before you can have conversations about Ukraine, you have to settle the situation with the border?
MR. KIRBY: Today’s meeting is about Ukraine. That’s what we’re going to focus on in this discussion. And, as the Speaker knows quite well, we continue to negotiate in good faith in a bipartisan way with the Senate — with Republicans and Democrats up there on Capitol Hill — about the national security supplemental and — and about — which obviously includes money for border security.
Q And the Speaker also said that he has been asking the administration for more details about the spending, what has already been spent in Ukraine and also the endgame in Ukraine. What kind of message can the President deliver to the Speaker? He says that he hasn’t gotten the answers that he’s looking for in terms of how Ukraine should not become another situation like what we’ve seen in the Middle East?
MR. KIRBY: He’ll get an opportunity to ask all those questions today at the meeting, and I’m sure our national security team would be happy to help give him the context that he says — he says he’s not getting.
I would remind that, since the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine in February of ‘22, we have provided multiple classified and unclassified briefings to members of Congress. And this whole idea of a blank check also is not true. Every single aid package that we provided Ukraine we have done the consultations with Congress. So, there have been and will continue to be a lot of outreach from the administration with members of Congress about Ukraine.
Right now, though, you can’t have those consultations because there’s no aid going to Ukraine because we don’t have the funding. And that’s what the meeting about — today is really all about, stressing the urgent need for that additional funding.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q Thanks, Karine. Thank you, Kirby. So, with regard to national security and Ukraine, has the threat level changed since the President last spoke from the Oval Office, spoke to congressional leaders about the urgency for this funding?
MR. KIRBY: No.
Q I just wonder —
MR. KIRBY: Not at all.
Q So, what — what can he say that hasn’t already been said to convince them to all get on board and take action?
MR. KIRBY: Well, again, without getting ahead of the President and the conversation that he hasn’t had yet, one of the reasons our National Security Advisor and our Deputy National Security Advisor will be in this meeting is to bring members of Congress up to speed on what we’re seeing right now on the battlefield and what the Ukrainian forces are facing now as winter is full upon them and the war hasn’t stopped and aid hasn’t continued to flow from the United States.
I mean, I think we’re at — we’re in a bit of a different situation now in that regard than we were when the President gave his speech. Not that the national security implications are not all still valid; they are just as valid, in terms of the threat that Putin face- — poses to the, quote, unquote, “world order” and to European st- — stability and security.
But the situation now is different in terms of the — the stoppage now of assistance going to Ukraine.
Q And then on the southern border. Could the President use the Insurrection Act to federalize the Texas National Guard?
MR. KIRBY: I am not a legal expert on that. I’ll have to take that question and — and get back to you. I know of no — just to — just to make clear, I know of no intention by the President to do that.
Q Thank you.
Q John, I understand that the last provision of aid to Ukraine was December 27th. Right now, is Ukraine fighting with 100 percent of its capabilities? Do they have everything that at this moment they require?
MR. KIRBY: Without getting into their operational security and — and — and letting the Russians know what they have in their inventory, Peter, we’ll — what I can tell you is that, as I said earlier, there are certain types of munitions, certain types of weapons that they are expending at greater rates than others.
Q So, you can’t communicate —
MR. KIRBY: Given that —
Q — that they’ve run out —
MR. KIRBY: Given the threat —
Q — of anything because you don’t want to give away —
MR. KIRBY: I’m not going to give —
Q — disadvantages?
MR. KIRBY: — away their inventory list. But I’m not going to — I mean, I’m not going to pull any punches here. They are still going through artillery shells and HIMARS rockets and air defense capabilities at a pretty advanced clip, depending on what they’re facing on the battlefield. And so, their inventories are running lower, without question.
Q Shalanda Young said in — I think it was December 5th — in her letter, she said that we are running out of money and out of time . Should this be measured by Americans understanding the urgency as an issue of days, weeks, or months?
MR. KIRBY: It would depend really on the kind of system we’re talking about, Peter. I mean, the — there are — there are some — there are some munitions that — that they have ample stores — enough to get them into, you know, the next couple — two, three months.
There are others where they don’t have that kind of time. And a lot of that depends on what Russia does and how — what they have to defend against. One of the key capabilities right now for them is air defense, because the drones and the missiles keep flying from the Russian side, and they’re not stopping. So, air defense is definitely one of those critical capabilities.
Q And then just a quick follow-up on the conversation that started here. Yesterday, we’ve been asking about the Houthis. Now, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin fortunately is now recovering; he’s no longer in the hospital.
He and the President last spoke one-on-one December 6th. The last it was publicly read out, they shared a conversation that took place on December 9th. There have been at least three separate strikes — the 11th, the 12th, and the 16th — against the Houthis in that time, a time during which the two haven’t spoken.
So, our understanding is they haven’t shared a call — at least dating back to the 9th — for more than a week. Is that normal that he wouldn’t speak to the Defense Secretary —
MR. KIRBY: I think they —
Q — with three separate operations in the course of that time?
MR. KIRBY: My dates are messed up, but the — the — I know the last time they spoke was Friday — last Friday.
Q Was last Friday?
MR. KIRBY: Just this past Friday —
Q So just a few —
MR. KIRBY: — whatever that date is.
Q Whatever days ago that was.
MR. KIRBY: Yes.
Q Okay. So more recent than we had —
MR. KIRBY: Yeah.
Q — publicly heard. Fine.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q Thanks, Admiral Kirby. On Turkey. The outgoing Turkish ambassador told VOA that he expects to see some positive developments in a month or so with regard to the sale of F-16s to Turkey. So, can you give us an update on this? And once Turkey completes the ratification process for Sweden’s NATO membership, can we assume that the road for the F-16s will be cleared?
MR. KIRBY: The President has been pretty consistent: We continue to support the additional sale of F-16s and the modernization of the current F-16 fleet for — for Turkey. That’s a — that’s a consistent policy position that would — that we’ve had since coming into office. That hasn’t changed.
I don’t have an update for you on dates and the calendar items in terms of what that looks like. But — but our policy with respect to F-16s for Turkey has not changed.
Q And, if I may, on Ukraine. So, there is — there is still $4 billion in the PDA and — for Ukraine. And I was wondering if, given the fact that the negotiations on the border are not moving, is it possible to use that authority now and replenish American stocks later when the Congress approves the supplemental budget?
MR. KIRBY: First of all, I — I would disagree with the notion that talks are not moving. As I just said, the — we believe those conversations with the Senate, in a bipartisan way, are making some progress.
And on your — the — the real central idea of your question is — is this punishment authority? And, yes, there’s additional funds authorized under PDA, but there’s no replenishment authority funds to go with them, to back them up. And that’s why we — we don’t have any additional ability to provide security assistance for Ukraine, because there’s no replenishment authority built in.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: A couple more. Go ahead, Aurelia.
Q Thank you so much. On Ukraine, I had a follow-up to Peter’s question. Are you saying that the stoppage of U.S. aid already has an impact on the battlefield, in the sense that Ukrainians are refraining from certain moves or are on the — doing stuff that they would do if they were, you know, assured of — of continuing assistance?
And maybe another one, more specific. While he’s trying to secure additional funding, does the President wish that European countries would do more themselves to support Ukraine? And more specifically, has he asked Germany to supply long-range Taurus missiles to Ukraine?
MR. KIRBY: I’ll let Germany speak for what they will or won’t provide Ukraine. We are grateful for the support that more than 50 nations continue to provide Ukraine. And each nation gets to decide for itself what that looks like, as appropriate. I mean, these are sovereign decisions. And there has been tremendous international support for Ukraine.
But, look, they’re going to look at us, too. They’re going to see how the United States reacts here. And I think we can expect that some nations may take cues from the United States. If we just pack it in and can’t get the funding and decide, “That’s it, we’re not going to provide anything more for Ukraine,” you can certainly see where there might be other nations who might feel like they want to follow suit here without our leadership. American leadership matters here.
On your first question, I certainly won’t speak for Ukrainian military commanders and what they are deciding to expend on the battlefield or not. But you can ex- — I would — I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if they aren’t making battlefield decisions right now that are affected — those decisions are affected — or I should say informed by the uncertainty as they look to the West, as they look to the United States for additional support.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q Thanks a lot, Karine. John, the air campaign by the U.S. has not had a noticeable impact in terms of defer- –deterrence with the Houthi rebels. What makes you think that this terror designation will change that in any way?
MR. KIRBY: It’s part of a — as I said, a suite of — of — of tools at our disposal to hold them accountable.
Q Will —
MR. KIRBY: And — and I just want to remind: The attacks last week — the large attacks that we conducted were designed to disrupt and degrade Houthi offensive capabilities. And we believe we did that.
That doesn’t mean that we eliminated every single missile they own or every drone they can fly or every radar system that they operate. But we believe it had good effect on degrading their capabilities to conduct attacks.
And as I said at the end of my opening statement, we will take further action if we feel like we need to. They have a choice to make. They continue to have a choice to make. The right choice is to stop these attacks. If they don’t, we’ll continue to — to act appropriately.
Q Do you happen to know if the EU is going to take similar action to designate the Houthi rebels a terrorist organization in the way the U.S. has?
MR. KIRBY: I do not.
Q No coordination with them on this front?
MR. KIRBY: I’m not aware of any prior coordination with the EU specifically on this, and you’ll have to talk to EU officials about whether they’re willing to take a similar approach.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Going to wrap it up.
Go ahead.
Q Yeah. When was the last time President Biden spoke on the phone with Netanyahu?
MR. KIRBY: There has not been another call since the last one we read out. I don’t have the exact date in front of me. It’s been more than 20 days, I think.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay. Go ahead. Last question.
Q Thanks, John. Over the weekend, the NSC issued a statement in response to a HuffPost report on the administration’s post-war plans in Gaza stating that the quotes attributed to U.S. officials in the story were, quote, unquote, “made up.” HuffPost has been seeking an apology and a retraction at the insinuation that their reporter made up or fabricated quotes in the story. Can you tell us on what basis did the NSC issue that statement? Why is the NSC suggesting that a reporter made up quotes?
MR. KIRBY: The — the issue, as I understand it, Sabrina, was related to a document that was purported to exist that was — in this article, and the — the quotes from the purported document that were not accurate. And that was the issue. The issue was that the — whoever was reading out this document was reading things that — that there’s not a record of a document that — that says those things.
Q Because the NSC said, “We stand by our original statement,” which seemed to just generally imply that the quotes attributed to U.S. officials broadly in the story were made up. Obviously, as I said, HuffPost is seeking an apology and a retraction. Do you have any reaction?
MR. KIRBY: This wasn’t an attempt to — to question the journalism or to cast aspersions on journalistic ethics. This was a reaction to quotes attributed to a document that — for which we don’t — we don’t have — we don’t have a document that says those things. And that’s — and that’s why the — that’s why the response was — was drafted and written the way that it was.
I — I have read it — I can see where some people might see that reaction and — and think we were trying to, again, cast aspersions on journalistic ethics and procedure, and that was not the intent.
Okay? Thank you.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Thanks, Admiral. Appreciate that.
Q Admiral, any update on the missing SEALs?
Q Thanks, John.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right. Zeke, you want to reset us?
Q Thanks, Karine. On the meeting this afternoon. Can you talk about what the President hopes to accom- — hopes to accomplish? Is he — is he trying to get a deal here, walking out of this meeting today?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, as the Admiral said, the focus on the meeting today is going to be on Ukraine and making sure that Congress — the congressional members who attend understand that we need to continue the support for Ukraine.
It’s — he’s going to particularly underscore that if we abandon Ukraine, there will be — there will be consequences — right? — to Ukraine, to the people of Ukraine, to the people who have been fighting for their democracy for so long. And let’s not forget, they’re fighting against — they’re fighting against the aggression from Putin.
So, we have to be really clear here. A failure to — a failure to act will — certainly means that it will — it will, you know, not be helpful to our national security. So — and history has taught us — history has taught us that if we do not, you know, get involved and — and we’re not — and stop a dictator, we see what could happen. It could — it could actually put our national security at risk.
So, that’s going to be the focus today. It’s going to be on Ukraine and really laying out why it’s important to continue that support that we’ve been providing them.
Q But if it’s going to, you know — the negotiations right now on immigration are taking place in the Senate. Does the — you know, the President has the Speaker here. Will he discuss immigration with the Speaker?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I’ll say this. The President obviously wel- — is welcoming congressional members here. He’s open to hearing whatever conversations that they want to have, right? And so, it is important, you know, to have these conversations, obviously, in a bipartisan way.
So, that may come up. I certainly don’t want to get ahead of those conversation. But the purpose — the purpose of this meeting is about Ukraine. That is the purpose of this meeting, and that’s what the President wants to really lay out and — the urgency to continue to support Ukraine and why that’s needed now and how that affects our own national security.
So, that is the purpose. But, of course, members of Congress are going to come, and they’re going to have things that they want to talk to with the President. We certainly welcome that.
Q But why hasn’t the President engaged in negotiations with the House? The White House (inaudible) on — on border security, on — on immigration — this negotiation today was in the Senate, but obviously, you know, the House has a say here, and they are not happy with what’s happening on the Senate side of things.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, look, the House went home in mid-December — right? — while — while the negotiations were occurring and happening in the Senate in a bipartisan way. Obviously, Republicans and Democrats and here at the White House, we were having those conversations, trying to find a bipartisan agreement.
We were — we were having those conversations, even through — even through the holiday weekend — I mean, sorry, the holiday break. And they decided to go home. Literally, they decided to go home.
And so, those conversations are going to continue. This meeting does not stop those conversations from continuing. We think it’s headed in the right direction. So, that’s important as we’re talking about the border security and what we can do to make sure that we’re dealing with that issue.
And so, we appreciate Republicans and Democrats in the Senate operating with us in good faith. And we think it’s headed in the right direction.
Q And, finally, do you think that, like — that criticizing the House for going home improves your odds of getting whatever deals, should there be a deal with Senate, through the House? I mean —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean — well, part —
Q — I’m just curious what strategy is here.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Here’s the thing — and I appreciate the question, and I get the question, but Republicans in the House have been incredibly — they’ve gotten in the way. They have gotten in the way when it comes to border security. They have gotten in the way and voted — and actually voted on pieces of legislation to take away some of the law enforcement, the CBP — right? — at the border. That’s what they voted on in — back in May.
So, we want to work with them. But they’ve been very clear where they stand. So, look, we’re going to have — the President is — is looking forward to having a conversation with members of Congress, obviously, here with his own national security team, with other members of his team here. They’re going to talk at 3:15.
And he wants to really lay out the importance of Ukraine. He is — he’s willing — always willing to hear out members of Congress on what they want to discuss.
But we’ve been very clear, the Senate has been — Republicans in the Senate have wanted to work with us. They’re talking through us with — negotiating, trying to find a bipartisan agreement, and that’s the way to move forward.
Go ahead, Weijia.
Q Thank you, Karine. To follow up on Tolu’s question to Kirby —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q — Speaker Johnson has made clear that they’re not even going to talk about Ukraine until the border is addressed. And he’s made clear that it’s H.R.2 or bust. So, how is the President going to navigate that in today’s meeting?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: He’s not the only congress- — congressperson in the room today. He’s not. He’s not the only person that’s going to be in the room. There will be other congressional members. The President has been really clear: He wants to talk about Ukraine, the urgency of making sure we continue that assistance to Ukraine; what that means not just for the broader world national security but also for us.
And so, Speaker Johnson is not going to be the only person in the room. And so, look — but obviously, the President is going to bring people together. He wants to hear from — from folks. And so, he’s willing to hear what — what these congressional members want to talk about. But the purpose of this meeting is to talk about Ukraine.
Q But what can you get done without Speaker Johnson and —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I’m not saying we can’t —
Q — Republican support?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I’m not — I’m not saying that. I’m saying he’s not — you’re saying if — if he wants to talk about — about something else, like border security, how can he — how can the President manage the conversation. There will be other people in — in the room.
And I think folks understand that U- — that there is a national security importance of having this meeting. That’s why the President is bringing folks together. And not only that — let’s not forget, they’re going to hear, also, from the national security — his national security team as well.
Q Some people who won’t be in the room are members of the press. And in the past, meetings with congressional leaders have been open. Is there a reason why today’s is closed?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, we had a similar meeting back in October, as you know. And so, that was an important meeting about national security, the supplemental as well. And so, that occurred.
Look, not all meetings are — are public or have a — a press component. The President, as you know, has a long track record in Washington, D.C., of — of, you know, bringing folks together, getting a bipartisan deal. And so, we want to — he wants to make sure we get straight to work. He wants to make sure that we have this really important conversation. He wants to get straight to it.
We expect some members of these — members of — of Congress to go to the sticks after — after their meeting. So, you certainly will hear directly from them. And we will have a readout, as well, of the meeting.
So, there will be an opportunity to ask questions of the members. They’ll be at the sticks. And then you’ll hear directly from us as well.
Q Thank you, Karine.
Q To follow up somewhat on Weijia. Also, House Speaker Johnson said today — I mean, he seemed to throw cold water on the Senate border negotiations when he said, “I don’t think now is the time for comprehensive immigration reform because we know how complicated that is. You can’t do that quickly.”
How will the President receive that message today if Johnson says this is too complicated to do right now?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Making sure that we take care of our border is not too complicated. It’s not. It’s not. If people come together in good faith, as they’ve been doing in the Senate, we can get this done. We can get this done.
And let’s not forget, the President actually put forth a comprehensive immigration proposal almost three years ago. Very — almost three years ago. We had three years — three years to work on something. If that was what the — Speaker Johnson is concerned about, we had three years to work on it.
And so, look — and if he — and if he was really — really concerned about it, then when these negotiations started before — before the holiday break, they would have stayed. They would have stayed and — and actually, you know, tried to be part of the solution.
Look, we want to have a bipartisan agreement. That’s what we want. We want a bipartisan agreement because the President understands that’s how we’re going to fix the problem. That is it.
And — and so, look, it’s continuing. We’re going to see what happens in — with the Senate negotiations. We’re going to see what — where they land. Certainly not going to get ahead of that from here.
But it is important. It is important to get this done. And the President is not going to stop from — from negotiating with the senators.
Q And just a quick one. Beyond the congressional leaders, who exactly is going to be in this meeting? How did the White House come up with this list? Why this group?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I can say, as you all know and been mentioning, Speaker Johnson will be there, Leader Schumer, McConnell, and Jeffries, and the chairs and ranking members of the House and the Senate Committees on Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Appropriations, and Intelligence. So, that’s incredibly important as we’re talking about Ukraine, obviously, and that — that part of our national security supplemental.
And also from the White House, so you all know, the Chief of Staff, Jeff Zients, will be there; National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan; Counselor Steve Ricchetti; Legislative Affairs Director Shuwanza Goff; Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines; OMB Director Shalanda Young; and Principal Deputy National Security Advisor Jon Finer.
Again, this is going to be about Ukraine. Some of this will be classified — will have classified content. And so, that is why it’s important for all of those folks to be in the room as we’re having these conversations.
Q Thank you. I understand you’re saying the meeting is about Ukraine. If and when bo- — the issue of border security comes up, which we know it will and is — is expected to, what specific concessions is the President willing to make on the issue of border security?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I’m not going to negotiate from here. I’m not. There’s been negotiations happening as it relates to the border security in the Senate for some months now between Republicans and Democrats. We’re going to let that process continue. We’re going to let that — that — that doesn’t stop. Those negotiations, those conversations is not going to stop because the President is meeting with congressional members today.
Again, our focus today, the President’s focus today is going to be about Ukraine and the importance of continuing to support Ukraine as they fight against tyranny, as they fight against President Putin’s aggression. That’s going to be the focus.
And I said the President is — you know, he brings people together. Obviously, is — is willing to — to listen to what folks have to say. But that is the purpose — is Ukraine. And those negotiations on the Hill, on the Senate side, is going to continue.
Q And a quick one on the Vice President’s abortion tour that is expected to start on Monday. She’s headed to Wisconsin. She’s kickstarting the — the tour in Wisconsin. Can you share more details on that trip? And where else is she planning to go? What is the White House planning to achieve with this?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, more broadly, on Monday is the 51st anniversary of the landmark decision Roe v. Wade. So, both — both the President and the Vice Pre- — President is going to be marking that landmark decision, that anniversary.
It’s an important anniversary, as the administration works to defend reproductive rights for women across the country, while Republican elected officials pu- — push extreme abortion bans that deny women the care that they need, force families to travel out of state for healthcare, and threaten healthcare providers with prosecution for providing the care that they are trained to provide.
So, obviously, it’s an important day. We’re going to — we’re going to mark that 51st anniversary. And you’ll hear more from the Vice President’s office as to what her kickoff tour is going to look like. So, I’d certainly refer you to her office. And then we will have more on what the President — how the President is going to mark that day.
Q Is — is the President planning to join her at any point during this tour?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t — I don’t have any — I don’t have anything to — to lay out on any — of the President joining the Vice President on this particular tour. But what I can say is both the Vice President and the President are going to be marking this day on Monday. We will have more to share on what that will look like.
Go ahead, M.J.
Q Karine, does the White House believe that Democrats have already made significant concessions on the border? And does it believe that Democrats, you know, have more room for additional concessions?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, I want to be really careful. There are negotiations happening. If I speak t- — from — from here about it, I don’t want to get in the way of what they’re trying to make happen, which is come up with a bipartisan agreement to deal with border security.
Look, what the President understands — and he’s been around for some time, right? He’s been in Washington for some time. He’s been a senator, as you all know. He’s been Vice President, as you all know. And he understands that it takes both sides to come together to deal with — to deal with an issue.
And when you deal with a bipartisan situation, you put a — put forth an agreement, you know, there are going to be concessions that are going to be made. I don’t want to speak to them from here. I’m going to let the negotiators have those conversations. They will decide what works, what kind of deal that they can put forth.
But obviously, a bipartisan agreement — that means both sides have to give up a little something. That’s how bipartisan agreements work, obviously.
Q And on a separate matter. Yesterday, in response to Governor Hutchinson suspending his presidential campaign, a DNC spokesperson said in a statement, “This news comes as a shock to those of us who could have sworn he had already dropped out.”
Seems rather gratuitous, you know, not to mention not serious. I just wonder if the tone of that statement reflects how President Biden views the governor and views his now-suspended campaign?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No, I appreciate the question. This is something that we definitely want to address.
President Biden has deep respect for Governor Hutchinson and admires the race that he ran. The President knows him to be a man of principle who cares about our country and has a strong record of public service.
This morning, the Chief of Staff here, Jeff Zients, called the governor to convey this and apologized for the statement that did not — that did not represent the President’s views.
So, again, as — as I just stated, Jeff Zients called the governor to apologize on behalf of the President and it did not — it did not reflect his views.
Q So, there was an apology that was conveyed to the governor. Was any action taken? Or was anything communicated to the decision by the DNC to put this statement out?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I can’t speak to — I can’t speak to how the communication — communication with the DNC. Obviously, it is a — it is a — the Democratic political arm, so I can’t — I don’t want to speak to that. You would have to reach out to the DNC directly.
But what I can say is how the President felt. It did not represent his views. We apologized to the governor. He has — he respects the governor’s public service. And we just wanted to make that very clear.
Go ahead, sir.
Q Yeah, another question on the border. Why hasn’t the Vice President’s Root Causes Strategy made a bigger difference in lowering the number of people who have been apprehended at the border?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, look, the Pres- — the Vice President’s — what she’s been able to do is meet with leaders in the region and talk about how do we — to your point, the root causes — how do we deal with what’s happening in — in those said countries and — and offer up any — any support that we could — could offer up.
But, look, it’s not just the Vice President here or this President or this administration. When it comes to immigration, it has been a problem that has existed for decades — for decades. This sa- — this system has been broken way before this administration stepped in.
So, the President took this very seriously. The first day of his administration, he put forth a po- — he put forth policy ideas, a legislation in a comprehensive way to deal with this issue.
And so, now, I think what’s really important — and we can’t miss this — right? — now there is an actual conversation, negotiations happening in the Senate, in Congress in a bipartisan way to figure out how to deal with border security. And I think that is the most important thing here. And we’re — we feel like it’s going in the di- — right direction.
Q Is that — is that particular strategy, though — did it — was it too narrow? Did it fail to anticipate the poss- —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: What strategy?
Q The — the Root Causes Strategy. Targeting those —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No, not at all. Not at all.
Q — three countries —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No, but the —
Q — when we know now that —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Wait, but hold —
Q — the migration is coming —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Hold on. There’s — there’s root causes. There’s dealing with a broken system, which is why we put forth a — a immigration — immigration proposal that deals with policy and funding.
And so, now we’re having those conversation in Congress, and I think that’s really important. And that’s what we’re hoping — we’re hoping that we can get to — to a place where we come into a bipartisan agreement. And that’s going to be the focus.
Go ahead.
Q Thanks, Karine. Another question on the border. Can you, sort of, talk about how the President views humanitarian parole for asylum seekers? Does he believe that asylum seekers should be able to stay in this country until their cases are heard?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Look, I — I want to be — and I get the question. I just want to be super careful here, because I don’t want to get into what’s being discussed in Congress. So, I’m going to, you know, not say anything beyond what I have said — is, like, there’s negotiations happening. There’s going to be different policy components that are going to come up, obviously. They’re going to come up with a — an agreement here that both Republicans and Democrats agree on on the Senate side. And then we hope that we can really deal with this issue. I just want to be super, super mindful and not get into specifics on policies.
Q But even on the basic principle of someone seeking asylum, does the President believe they should be able to if they have legitimate concerns?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, obviously. We’ve been very clear about that. But I just want to be super careful. I don’t want to go into a rabbit hole about each policy and what the President supports or believes in because there is a there con- — there — there are negotiations happening.
Q Yeah. And my last question. Just — Speaker Johnson says that he wants the border to be completed as one of his stipulations in this deal — or the border wall — I’m sorry — the border wall to be completed as one of his stipulations. What’s the White House’s response to that (inaudible)?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: We’re having a — a bipartisan conversation in the Senate about how we deal with border security. Going to leave it there and let the Republicans and Democrats who are actually coming to the table in good faith and have been doing that for months, which we appreciate — and we think it’s headed in the right direction — we’re going to let them have that conversation.
Go ahead.
Q Thank you, Karine. Why are you repeating this false claim that Republicans voted to reduce the number of Border Patrol agents, even though the Washington Post gave the administration three “Pinocchios” for that?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, we don’t believe it’s a false claim. Our statements were very direct here.
Last year, House GOP voted — voted — and not only did they vote for it, but they touted — they touted their Limit, Save, Grow Act. That’s the act.
Q But there’s no appropriations in that.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, let me —
Q And they vowed —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: They — they limit —
Q — that it would never affect Border Patrol.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: They — they — they voted for and touted it. Right? This is an act. And this would have forced the elimination of 2,000 Border Patrol agents. That’s what this act that they touted, that they voted for in the House. So, that was their proposal.
Q It wasn’t their proposal.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: And — and that was what they —
Q They clearly —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — voted for back in — in May.
Q They — they clearly stated at that time that Border Patrol — also veterans’ benefits and entitlements — would never be impacted by any of the reductions. The — and also, the bill never had any appropriations in it.
So, this claim that you guys are rolling out — you know, it’s the White House applying White House math to a bill that never had any appropriations. And moreover, the administra- — or the members in Congress who, you know, put this together vowed that it wouldn’t affect these things.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: If you —
Q So, the reason I —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q — I ask is because it’s just — you know, to voters, don’t you think they know the difference between, you know, what is a truthful statement and what is spin? And is it insulting to them at all to keep saying it when it was — it’s just not true?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: (Laughs.) One thing that the President does not do is insult vot- — insult voters or American people, to be more exact, because I want to be careful about — about this — what I can say about this upcoming election.
What I will say is, if you look at the bill — this act that they touted, that they voted for — House Republicans — back in May, they were — it was very clear that it would have forced — it would have forced the emil- — elim- — elimination of 2,000 Border Patrol agents. That’s what that act would have done.
We were very direct about that. We were very clear about that. This is what they touted. This is what they put out there. This is what House Republicans voted for. I mean, that’s where they are.
They have gotten in the way. Every time we are trying to deal with the border, House Republicans have gotten in the way.
So, we appreciate the bipartisan conversation that we’re having with Republicans — let’s not forget — with Republicans in the Senate — that’s why it’s bipartisan — and Democrats on dealing with the border — the border.
House Republicans get in the way. They wanted to literally eliminate 2,000 Border Patrol agents in this particular act that they touted, that they voted for back in May.
Q So, notwithstanding all of the factchecks on that, if you’re saying that, you know, the White House, the President doesn’t want to, you know, insult the American people, will the administration, then, amend its separate statement that implied that Texas officials were responsible for the deaths of three migrants, when, in fact, they had nothing to do with it? They had already been dead for an hour by the time Mexico told anyone in the U.S. about it. And the administration admitted as much in their court filing. They — they acknowledged that in their court filing.
But the statement from the White House implies that Texas was responsible. And a number of outlets were forced to issue corrections and editor’s notes because of that White House statement. So, will the White House amend that statement?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, let’s be sensitive here. Three people died. Three migrants died: two children and a woman. That was devastating — devastating situation, heartbreaking situation. So, let’s be really mindful of what we’re talking about here.
Q Of course.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I want to take a step back and — and just, as you’re talking about our statement — look, as I — as I mentioned, a woman and two children died. They drowned near Eagle Pass — which is, as I said, devastating — and that Texas officials blocked Border Patrol from access- — accessing the area. That’s what was happening at that time.
Our statement is consistent with DOJ’s filing. As the DOJ filing said, there was an ongoing emergency situation that Border Patrol was blocked from accessing. There were other migrants in the — in the water as well.
Q That was separate, though. The ongoing emergency situation —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: But I’m just saying there was —
Q — was separate.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — there was an ongoing —
Q And the —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: But —
Q The White House statement implied — it says — the White House statement says that Texas officials blocked U.S. Border Patrol from attempting to provide emergency assistance.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: To — there were other — there were other migrants in the water as well.
Q Then why wasn’t that included in the statement —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: There were other migrants in the water.
Q — that that — that that’s what you were referring to?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Our — our statement is the — is ver- –very much consistent with DOJ filing. Anything else specific you want to know about that, I would certainly refer you to DOJ.
AIDE: Time for a couple more.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay. Go ahead, Peter.
Q Three college students — Palestinian college students — were shot in Vermont in November. I know you’re aware of that.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q Nearly two months have passed since that time. They’re speaking out publicly now for the first time. Has President Biden or this White House spoken to those individuals or their families in the period since?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: First of all, obviously, we — we offered up our — you know, our — our sympathies and, obviously, were devastated to hear about this. And it’s — glad to hear that they have — they are recovering.
We don’t have any — any readouts to give you on any conversation that we’ve had with these three students.
Q I guess the question would be: The President, obviously, and other members of the White House have spoken with regularity with those who have been held hostage in Gaza. Recognizing the circumstances are very different, nonetheless, the White House does reach out to individuals of all sorts of communities, certainly marginalized communities, in circumstances not too dissimilar from this. So, why wouldn’t the White House reach out to these individuals?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: It’s — it’s a very good question. I just don’t have — it could have happened. I just don’t have a readout to share with you at this time.
Q Even without a readout, can you just confirm to the press corps at some point if it did happen so we can be accurate?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Absolutely.
Q And if it didn’t, just let us know.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Absolutely. Happy to let you know. But I — it’s hard for me to say — to confirm or not —
Q Okay.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — if they — if they read it out —
Q We’ll wait for your confirmation either way.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Absolutely. Thanks, Peter.
Q Thank you.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Appreciate that.
Okay. I think I have one more that I can go to.
Q Afghanistan, please.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Owen. I haven’t called on you in a while. Way in the back.
Q Karine, good afternoon.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Good afternoon.
Q Is the — by any chance, is the White House following the trial in Hong Kong of pro-democracy advocate Jimmy Lai?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, the U.S. strongly condemns the prosecution of pro-democracy advocate and media owner Jimmy Lai in Hong Kong under the PRC-imposed National Security Law. The U.S. renews our call for the immediate and unconditional release of Jimmy Lai, who has been in prison under Hong Kong’s National Security Law.
The United States will continue to closely monitor developments with this and other prosecutions under the National Security Law.
Q If he’s convicted — many call this a sham trial and, you know, that his conviction will — is virtually guaranteed from the outset. And he’s still got weeks to go in this trial. But if he’s — if he’s convicted — I know you’re — I know you don’t have a crystal ball, but what will the President do in that likelihood?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t want to get into hypotheticals from here. We just condemned — I just very forcefully, strongly condemned the prosecution of — of Jimmy Lai. And so, we’re going to continue to do that. And obviously, we’re going to monitor the situation closely.
I just don’t want to get it — ahead and getting into hypotheticals or — or how this is going to turn out. But obviously, we strongly condemn.
Go ahead, Ed.
Q Thanks, Karine. I want to ask you about —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: This is the last one.
Q — ships being redirected around the Red Sea. Freightos tracked shipping costs and found that the ships going to Europe — the weekly cost for containers going to Europe are up 386 percent from a yea- — last October; costs going to North America are up 99 percent. So, when does the White House feel like this could start putting pressure on prices and pass on to the consumer?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, obviously, our national security team here and our economic teams are — are closely monitoring the — the evolving situation in the Red Sea. It’s something that we’re keeping a close — close eye on.
But what we’ve seen so far is that the impact of the ongoing conflict has had limited impact on the U.S. supply chains and energy prices. Diversions of vessels from the Suez Canal and to the Cape — Cape of — Cape of Good Hope has not had major impact on availability of products in the U.S. or capacity at the West Coast ports.
Again, our teams are going to closely monitor this. This is our national security team and also economic team. We’re going to monitor this, but we haven’t seen an impact at this time.
Q And one last one. Last Friday, the President was at a coffee shop in Pennsylvania, and he seemed to be surprised that the smoothie was $6 and how expensive it was. I’m curious, is — so, is the President now realizing the costs that Americans are bearing?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, when he went over to you all to — to — to the — to the press corps, he was having a good time, right? Offered up to — as you know, offered up to — to buy them coffee. There was a big group there, and he made sure everyone got coffee and pastries. So, I just want to make that really clear.
Q But his comment was $6, and “I’ll — I’ll do it anyway.”
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, look, I hear you, and that — let’s not forget what the trip was about. The trip was about small businesses, right? There have been 6 — 16 million small businesses that have tried — that have started and filled out for applications. That’s a big deal. That is really important.
What that means is that they have the confidence — small businesses, folks who are starting them, have the confidence in the economy to start a business. And that is — I think that’s also really important too. And the President was able to do this or — we’ve seen Americans able to start — file for applications to start small businesses because of the American Rescue Plan. By the way, no Republican voted for that. And so, it’s gotten the — it’s gotten the economy back on its feet and also given the confidence for small-business owners to start — right? — for people to start a small business. Sixteen million applications that we have seen.
And so, I think that’s important. And look, you know, Republicans don’t want to do that, right? They don’t — they’re — they’re not interested in that at all. They’re not interested in fighting Big Pharma. They’re not interested in making sure that we’re lowering — lowering healthcare costs for the Americans.
They’re not interested in that. That’s why they didn’t vote for the Inflation Reduction Act. That’s why they didn’t vote for the American Rescue Plan. And so, that was the — that was the — the point and the important part of the President going there to — to Allentown. And I think it was a good trip. And you all saw that.
Q But he still seemed surprised that the cost was so expensive.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: He was joking around. He was certainly joking around with the press corps. He — you — you know that. He offered to buy coffee — that’s what he did — and pastries.
But I think the most important thing about that trip is that he was able to visit a small business. He was able to talk about how this administration, because of Bidenomics, because of the economic policies that we put forward — that we are seeing now a historic number of small-business applications. And I think that’s important. They have the confidence now — they have the confidence now to start their small business.
Thanks, everybody. We’ll see you out on the road in North Carolina tomorrow. Thanks, everybody.
Q Thanks, Karine.
###
The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and NSC Coordinator For Strategic Communications John Kirby appeared first on The White House.
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and NSC Coordinator For Strategic Communications John Kirby
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
(January 17, 2024)
2:33 P.M. EST
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Good afternoon, everyone.
Q Good afternoon.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, today, the Biden-Harris administ- –(the briefing room sound system experiences technical difficulties) — the levels. Is there a — should I start? Sou- — is — do I sound, like, echoey?
Q Yes.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay, well, sorry. Here we go.
Today, the Biden-Harris administration took new actions to tackle hidden junk fess by proposing a rule that would end excessive overdraft fees.
For too long, some banks have charged extreme overdraft fees, sometimes $30 or more, that often hit the most vulnerable Americans the hardest.
Today’s proposal by Consumer Financial Protection Bureau would cut the average overdraft fee by more than half, saving them — saving the millions of families that pay these fees an average of $150 a year. That would add up to save Americans $3.5 billion a year. Unfortunately, some Republicans in Congress continue to defend the rights of big banks to exploit their customers.
President Biden believes it’s wrong that some companies rip off Americans simply because they can, and his administration won’t let them.
As we work to lower costs and build the economy from the middle out and the bottom up, we got more evidence today that Americans are feeling the strength of the economy. Retail sales beat expectation last month, capping a record holiday shopping season. From TVs to toys, Americans were able to buy gifts for their loved ones that were more affordable and arrived on time thanks to the President’s work to fix and strengthen supply chains.
And today, a new poll from Axios showed Americans have a surprising degree of satisfaction where — with their economic situation. The poll showed Americans are optimistic about their finances. Sixty-three percent say their finances are currently good, and eighty-five percent believe they will get better this year. That’s not an accident; that’s Bidenomics at work.
(Referring to the briefing room sound system.) The volumes are incredibly weird right now. Did we get that fixed?
Q I think so.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay, I think so. All right.
And now, as you all know, today, we’re joined by my colleague, Admiral John Kirby, who’s here to discuss the United States’ continued response to the ongoing and escalating attacks by the Houthis in the Red Sea.
And with that, all — I think it’s all fixed for you now, Admiral. It’s all fixed.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you, Karine. That was kind of weird.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: That was very weird. Sounds like a gremlin was attacking.
MR. KIRBY: Good afternoon, everybody.
Look, as you all saw, United States today designated the Houthis as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Group. We took this action because of their continued reckless and indiscriminate attacks on ships transiting the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. These attacks are a clear example of terrorism, violation of international law, and a major threat to innocent lives and to global commerce.
Now, just a couple of points. First, today’s designation targets the Houthis, not the Yemeni people. The United States remains the world’s leading donor of humanitarian assistance for Yemen. We recognize that more than 15 million people in Yemen are still in desperate need of food, water, and medicine. And we are taking a range of steps to ensure that these sanctions preserve the ability of aid organizations to be able to deliver all those much-needed supplies.
Second, this designation takes effect 30 days from now. And the reason for that is it’ll give us time to work closely with those aid organizations to make sure that they understand all the ramifications of this designation, answer all their questions, and be able to provide enough context for them to have a measure of assurance as they continue to provide that humanitarian assistance.
Now, look, if the Houthis cease the attacks, we can certainly reconsider this designation. If they don’t, as the President said, we will not hesitate to take further actions to protect our people and the free flow of international commerce.
With that —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right. Go ahead.
Q Thanks. John, can you talk a little bit about why the President decided not to redesignate the Houthis as a foreign terrorist organization, which obviously would have restricted some of that aid? Is it purely because of that humanitarian assistance piece?
MR. KIRBY: Yeah, you sort of answered the question. This particular designation gives us — it actually gives us more flexibility, but it also gives aid organizations a higher level of comfort that they’ll be able to provide this assistance without running afoul of sanctions.
You’ve — we’ve already — in designating them, already issued a number of licenses. The license, as you know, is basically like a waiver. It’s a carveout — when you have a sanctions regime that — that allows for certain goods to continue to flow despite the sanction regime.
And so, yes, that’s the big reason here.
Q And then, (inaudible) the President could reconsider that designation should the Houthis stop these attacks? Are you essentially using this as a bargaining chip in negotiations or — in public negotiations with the Houthis?
MR. KIRBY: Yeah, I mean, that would suggest there’s negotiations going on, and we’re — there’s no negotiations here. It’s not a bargaining chip; it’s a way of holding the Hou- — the Houthis accountable — additional ways to hold them accountable.
I think, you know, if you look at the — the levers of national power — you know, there’s an acronym for it: DIME — right? — diplomacy, information, military, economic. We’re using all of those levers of national power and, frankly, international power to try to convince the Houthis to stop these attacks and, if they don’t — and they clearly haven’t — to make sure that we’re holding them accountable for that.
Q And just, lastly, on a different topic: the meeting that’s taking place in a few — in a few minutes with congressional leaders. We understand this is going to be focused mostly on situation in Ukraine. Is there a version you can provide publicly? What are they going — what are lawmakers going to hear from the national security staff —
MR. KIRBY: Yeah —
Q — that you’ve not already telegraphed publicly about what’s happening on the ground?
MR. KIRBY: Well, again, I don’t want to get ahold — ahead of the discussion. And I suspect that in that discussion there could be some classified content that they’ll discuss.
But in the main, this will be an opportunity for the President and for the national security team to make sure that members of Congress fully understand the desperate, urgent need for weapons and capabilities for Ukraine to continue to flow.
As you know, the last security assistance package was December 27th. There hasn’t been one since. There won’t be one unless or until we can get some funding.
And it’s not as if the war stopped just because our aid stopped. The Ukrainians continue to get attacked. They’re moving into some defensive positions along that line, in the east in particular, and they continue to come under artillery shell, air attacks, ballistic and cruise missile, as well as drone attacks from the Russians.
And they are expending what they have. And I won’t get into their inventory lists, but there are some weapons systems for which they are in more need than others right now. And the — and they have to expend them, given ongoing combat.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Karen.
Q Thanks. Last week, the President said it was “irrelevant” whether or not the Houthis were designated as a terrorist organization. Now, five days later, this announcement. Did he need to be convinced that this was the right step?
MR. KIRBY: No.
Q And looking back, was it a mistake to take them off of the terrorist list back in 2021 — just, like, consideration over these years?
MR. KIRBY: No. No, again, the previous designation was FTO — Foreign Terrorist Organization — which doesn’t have quite the measure of flexibility in terms of humanitarian assistance. And so, a big reason why we delisted them — literally, on day one — was to address a dire, dire humanitarian situation on the ground. And, as I said today, it remains dire in many cases.
The Houthis are more concerned about getting weapons and capabilities and attacking ships in the Red Sea than they are about helping to look after the Yemeni people.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q Thank you, Karine. The President said last week that a private message had been delivered to Iran about the Houthi attacks. Could you talk a little bit about that message?
MR. KIRBY: No, I cannot.
Q What can you tell us about what was communicated to the Houthis?
MR. KIRBY: That’s the same question you just asked. (Laughter.) I’m not going to get into that. The — as the President said, there was a private message delivered to Iran, and I need to leave it at that.
Q Has that been effective?
MR. KIRBY: I’m just going to leave it right there. A message was delivered. And, of course, publicly, we have made clear our — our concerns about what the Houthis are doing. We’ve made clear the support that — that we know they’re getting from Iran. And we’re going to continue to take actions.
I would remind — it doesn’t get mentioned a lot in the context of the Red Sea attacks — but this administration alone has issued some 500 sanctions — or 500 entities have been sanctioned under this administration in just the last three years.
Q And — and a quick question on —
MR. KIRBY: Iranian entities.
Q And a quick question on Iran’s foreign minister, who spoke at Davos earlier today. He said , “The security of the Red Sea is tied to the developments in Gaza, and everyone will suffer if Israel’s crimes in Gaza do not stop.” He basically warned that all fronts will remain active until then. Do you have a response to that?
MR. KIRBY: Well, I mean, let’s — to take it at — just in a couple of pieces there. If you look at the — it’s 32-some-odd attacks that the Houthis have conducted now — for the ones that were targeted at ships that were identifiable, because sometimes they launch a barrage and there’s multiple ships and you’re not really sure what ship is being targeted. But let’s just take a look at the majority of the 32 where you can identify the ship that’s being targeted. Not a single one was destined for Israel, and they were all destined for other ports with others — other bits of commerce.
So, the whole argument that this is about the war in Gaza — I mean, they’re just driving a stake through a straw man. There’s nothing there.
And as for the, quote, unquote, “resistance continuing,” I — I’ve said it many times; I’m happy to repeat it: We have national security interests in the region — significant interests. And we have moved additional military resources, at the President’s order, into the region to make sure we can protect those interests.
And we mean what we say. And if you doubt it, take a look at what happened just a few nights ago.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, M.J.
Q In — in his statement on the Houthis’ designation, Jake Sullivan said that there would be an immediate reevaluation of the designation were they to stop the attacks. Can you just help us understand why that reevaluation would happen immediately? You know, would that sort of risk the potential of them starting up the attacks again if that designation were to be taken away pretty quickly?
MR. KIRBY: The — the thing about sanctions designations that — they are a pliable form of economic pressure. You can scale them up. You can scale them down. You can lay them on. You can take them off in a fairly simple way. So, Jake is right.
As I said in my opening statement, if they — if they choose to stop these attacks, then we certainly have the option at our disposal to remove this designation that we just — that we just issued.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q (Inaudible.) Thank you so much. I wanted to give you a chance to respond to Speaker Johnson, who said earlier today — about the meeting on Ukraine, he said , “Before we even talk about Ukraine, I’m going to tell the President what I’m telling you, which is border, border, border.” Do you think that’s a legitimate position to say that even before you can have conversations about Ukraine, you have to settle the situation with the border?
MR. KIRBY: Today’s meeting is about Ukraine. That’s what we’re going to focus on in this discussion. And, as the Speaker knows quite well, we continue to negotiate in good faith in a bipartisan way with the Senate — with Republicans and Democrats up there on Capitol Hill — about the national security supplemental and — and about — which obviously includes money for border security.
Q And the Speaker also said that he has been asking the administration for more details about the spending, what has already been spent in Ukraine and also the endgame in Ukraine. What kind of message can the President deliver to the Speaker? He says that he hasn’t gotten the answers that he’s looking for in terms of how Ukraine should not become another situation like what we’ve seen in the Middle East?
MR. KIRBY: He’ll get an opportunity to ask all those questions today at the meeting, and I’m sure our national security team would be happy to help give him the context that he says — he says he’s not getting.
I would remind that, since the beginning of the conflict in Ukraine in February of ‘22, we have provided multiple classified and unclassified briefings to members of Congress. And this whole idea of a blank check also is not true. Every single aid package that we provided Ukraine we have done the consultations with Congress. So, there have been and will continue to be a lot of outreach from the administration with members of Congress about Ukraine.
Right now, though, you can’t have those consultations because there’s no aid going to Ukraine because we don’t have the funding. And that’s what the meeting about — today is really all about, stressing the urgent need for that additional funding.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q Thanks, Karine. Thank you, Kirby. So, with regard to national security and Ukraine, has the threat level changed since the President last spoke from the Oval Office, spoke to congressional leaders about the urgency for this funding?
MR. KIRBY: No.
Q I just wonder —
MR. KIRBY: Not at all.
Q So, what — what can he say that hasn’t already been said to convince them to all get on board and take action?
MR. KIRBY: Well, again, without getting ahead of the President and the conversation that he hasn’t had yet, one of the reasons our National Security Advisor and our Deputy National Security Advisor will be in this meeting is to bring members of Congress up to speed on what we’re seeing right now on the battlefield and what the Ukrainian forces are facing now as winter is full upon them and the war hasn’t stopped and aid hasn’t continued to flow from the United States.
I mean, I think we’re at — we’re in a bit of a different situation now in that regard than we were when the President gave his speech. Not that the national security implications are not all still valid; they are just as valid, in terms of the threat that Putin face- — poses to the, quote, unquote, “world order” and to European st- — stability and security.
But the situation now is different in terms of the — the stoppage now of assistance going to Ukraine.
Q And then on the southern border. Could the President use the Insurrection Act to federalize the Texas National Guard?
MR. KIRBY: I am not a legal expert on that. I’ll have to take that question and — and get back to you. I know of no — just to — just to make clear, I know of no intention by the President to do that.
Q Thank you.
Q John, I understand that the last provision of aid to Ukraine was December 27th. Right now, is Ukraine fighting with 100 percent of its capabilities? Do they have everything that at this moment they require?
MR. KIRBY: Without getting into their operational security and — and — and letting the Russians know what they have in their inventory, Peter, we’ll — what I can tell you is that, as I said earlier, there are certain types of munitions, certain types of weapons that they are expending at greater rates than others.
Q So, you can’t communicate —
MR. KIRBY: Given that —
Q — that they’ve run out —
MR. KIRBY: Given the threat —
Q — of anything because you don’t want to give away —
MR. KIRBY: I’m not going to give —
Q — disadvantages?
MR. KIRBY: — away their inventory list. But I’m not going to — I mean, I’m not going to pull any punches here. They are still going through artillery shells and HIMARS rockets and air defense capabilities at a pretty advanced clip, depending on what they’re facing on the battlefield. And so, their inventories are running lower, without question.
Q Shalanda Young said in — I think it was December 5th — in her letter, she said that we are running out of money and out of time . Should this be measured by Americans understanding the urgency as an issue of days, weeks, or months?
MR. KIRBY: It would depend really on the kind of system we’re talking about, Peter. I mean, the — there are — there are some — there are some munitions that — that they have ample stores — enough to get them into, you know, the next couple — two, three months.
There are others where they don’t have that kind of time. And a lot of that depends on what Russia does and how — what they have to defend against. One of the key capabilities right now for them is air defense, because the drones and the missiles keep flying from the Russian side, and they’re not stopping. So, air defense is definitely one of those critical capabilities.
Q And then just a quick follow-up on the conversation that started here. Yesterday, we’ve been asking about the Houthis. Now, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin fortunately is now recovering; he’s no longer in the hospital.
He and the President last spoke one-on-one December 6th. The last it was publicly read out, they shared a conversation that took place on December 9th. There have been at least three separate strikes — the 11th, the 12th, and the 16th — against the Houthis in that time, a time during which the two haven’t spoken.
So, our understanding is they haven’t shared a call — at least dating back to the 9th — for more than a week. Is that normal that he wouldn’t speak to the Defense Secretary —
MR. KIRBY: I think they —
Q — with three separate operations in the course of that time?
MR. KIRBY: My dates are messed up, but the — the — I know the last time they spoke was Friday — last Friday.
Q Was last Friday?
MR. KIRBY: Just this past Friday —
Q So just a few —
MR. KIRBY: — whatever that date is.
Q Whatever days ago that was.
MR. KIRBY: Yes.
Q Okay. So more recent than we had —
MR. KIRBY: Yeah.
Q — publicly heard. Fine.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q Thanks, Admiral Kirby. On Turkey. The outgoing Turkish ambassador told VOA that he expects to see some positive developments in a month or so with regard to the sale of F-16s to Turkey. So, can you give us an update on this? And once Turkey completes the ratification process for Sweden’s NATO membership, can we assume that the road for the F-16s will be cleared?
MR. KIRBY: The President has been pretty consistent: We continue to support the additional sale of F-16s and the modernization of the current F-16 fleet for — for Turkey. That’s a — that’s a consistent policy position that would — that we’ve had since coming into office. That hasn’t changed.
I don’t have an update for you on dates and the calendar items in terms of what that looks like. But — but our policy with respect to F-16s for Turkey has not changed.
Q And, if I may, on Ukraine. So, there is — there is still $4 billion in the PDA and — for Ukraine. And I was wondering if, given the fact that the negotiations on the border are not moving, is it possible to use that authority now and replenish American stocks later when the Congress approves the supplemental budget?
MR. KIRBY: First of all, I — I would disagree with the notion that talks are not moving. As I just said, the — we believe those conversations with the Senate, in a bipartisan way, are making some progress.
And on your — the — the real central idea of your question is — is this punishment authority? And, yes, there’s additional funds authorized under PDA, but there’s no replenishment authority funds to go with them, to back them up. And that’s why we — we don’t have any additional ability to provide security assistance for Ukraine, because there’s no replenishment authority built in.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: A couple more. Go ahead, Aurelia.
Q Thank you so much. On Ukraine, I had a follow-up to Peter’s question. Are you saying that the stoppage of U.S. aid already has an impact on the battlefield, in the sense that Ukrainians are refraining from certain moves or are on the — doing stuff that they would do if they were, you know, assured of — of continuing assistance?
And maybe another one, more specific. While he’s trying to secure additional funding, does the President wish that European countries would do more themselves to support Ukraine? And more specifically, has he asked Germany to supply long-range Taurus missiles to Ukraine?
MR. KIRBY: I’ll let Germany speak for what they will or won’t provide Ukraine. We are grateful for the support that more than 50 nations continue to provide Ukraine. And each nation gets to decide for itself what that looks like, as appropriate. I mean, these are sovereign decisions. And there has been tremendous international support for Ukraine.
But, look, they’re going to look at us, too. They’re going to see how the United States reacts here. And I think we can expect that some nations may take cues from the United States. If we just pack it in and can’t get the funding and decide, “That’s it, we’re not going to provide anything more for Ukraine,” you can certainly see where there might be other nations who might feel like they want to follow suit here without our leadership. American leadership matters here.
On your first question, I certainly won’t speak for Ukrainian military commanders and what they are deciding to expend on the battlefield or not. But you can ex- — I would — I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if they aren’t making battlefield decisions right now that are affected — those decisions are affected — or I should say informed by the uncertainty as they look to the West, as they look to the United States for additional support.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q Thanks a lot, Karine. John, the air campaign by the U.S. has not had a noticeable impact in terms of defer- –deterrence with the Houthi rebels. What makes you think that this terror designation will change that in any way?
MR. KIRBY: It’s part of a — as I said, a suite of — of — of tools at our disposal to hold them accountable.
Q Will —
MR. KIRBY: And — and I just want to remind: The attacks last week — the large attacks that we conducted were designed to disrupt and degrade Houthi offensive capabilities. And we believe we did that.
That doesn’t mean that we eliminated every single missile they own or every drone they can fly or every radar system that they operate. But we believe it had good effect on degrading their capabilities to conduct attacks.
And as I said at the end of my opening statement, we will take further action if we feel like we need to. They have a choice to make. They continue to have a choice to make. The right choice is to stop these attacks. If they don’t, we’ll continue to — to act appropriately.
Q Do you happen to know if the EU is going to take similar action to designate the Houthi rebels a terrorist organization in the way the U.S. has?
MR. KIRBY: I do not.
Q No coordination with them on this front?
MR. KIRBY: I’m not aware of any prior coordination with the EU specifically on this, and you’ll have to talk to EU officials about whether they’re willing to take a similar approach.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Going to wrap it up.
Go ahead.
Q Yeah. When was the last time President Biden spoke on the phone with Netanyahu?
MR. KIRBY: There has not been another call since the last one we read out. I don’t have the exact date in front of me. It’s been more than 20 days, I think.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay. Go ahead. Last question.
Q Thanks, John. Over the weekend, the NSC issued a statement in response to a HuffPost report on the administration’s post-war plans in Gaza stating that the quotes attributed to U.S. officials in the story were, quote, unquote, “made up.” HuffPost has been seeking an apology and a retraction at the insinuation that their reporter made up or fabricated quotes in the story. Can you tell us on what basis did the NSC issue that statement? Why is the NSC suggesting that a reporter made up quotes?
MR. KIRBY: The — the issue, as I understand it, Sabrina, was related to a document that was purported to exist that was — in this article, and the — the quotes from the purported document that were not accurate. And that was the issue. The issue was that the — whoever was reading out this document was reading things that — that there’s not a record of a document that — that says those things.
Q Because the NSC said, “We stand by our original statement,” which seemed to just generally imply that the quotes attributed to U.S. officials broadly in the story were made up. Obviously, as I said, HuffPost is seeking an apology and a retraction. Do you have any reaction?
MR. KIRBY: This wasn’t an attempt to — to question the journalism or to cast aspersions on journalistic ethics. This was a reaction to quotes attributed to a document that — for which we don’t — we don’t have — we don’t have a document that says those things. And that’s — and that’s why the — that’s why the response was — was drafted and written the way that it was.
I — I have read it — I can see where some people might see that reaction and — and think we were trying to, again, cast aspersions on journalistic ethics and procedure, and that was not the intent.
Okay? Thank you.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Thanks, Admiral. Appreciate that.
Q Admiral, any update on the missing SEALs?
Q Thanks, John.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right. Zeke, you want to reset us?
Q Thanks, Karine. On the meeting this afternoon. Can you talk about what the President hopes to accom- — hopes to accomplish? Is he — is he trying to get a deal here, walking out of this meeting today?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, as the Admiral said, the focus on the meeting today is going to be on Ukraine and making sure that Congress — the congressional members who attend understand that we need to continue the support for Ukraine.
It’s — he’s going to particularly underscore that if we abandon Ukraine, there will be — there will be consequences — right? — to Ukraine, to the people of Ukraine, to the people who have been fighting for their democracy for so long. And let’s not forget, they’re fighting against — they’re fighting against the aggression from Putin.
So, we have to be really clear here. A failure to — a failure to act will — certainly means that it will — it will, you know, not be helpful to our national security. So — and history has taught us — history has taught us that if we do not, you know, get involved and — and we’re not — and stop a dictator, we see what could happen. It could — it could actually put our national security at risk.
So, that’s going to be the focus today. It’s going to be on Ukraine and really laying out why it’s important to continue that support that we’ve been providing them.
Q But if it’s going to, you know — the negotiations right now on immigration are taking place in the Senate. Does the — you know, the President has the Speaker here. Will he discuss immigration with the Speaker?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I’ll say this. The President obviously wel- — is welcoming congressional members here. He’s open to hearing whatever conversations that they want to have, right? And so, it is important, you know, to have these conversations, obviously, in a bipartisan way.
So, that may come up. I certainly don’t want to get ahead of those conversation. But the purpose — the purpose of this meeting is about Ukraine. That is the purpose of this meeting, and that’s what the President wants to really lay out and — the urgency to continue to support Ukraine and why that’s needed now and how that affects our own national security.
So, that is the purpose. But, of course, members of Congress are going to come, and they’re going to have things that they want to talk to with the President. We certainly welcome that.
Q But why hasn’t the President engaged in negotiations with the House? The White House (inaudible) on — on border security, on — on immigration — this negotiation today was in the Senate, but obviously, you know, the House has a say here, and they are not happy with what’s happening on the Senate side of things.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, look, the House went home in mid-December — right? — while — while the negotiations were occurring and happening in the Senate in a bipartisan way. Obviously, Republicans and Democrats and here at the White House, we were having those conversations, trying to find a bipartisan agreement.
We were — we were having those conversations, even through — even through the holiday weekend — I mean, sorry, the holiday break. And they decided to go home. Literally, they decided to go home.
And so, those conversations are going to continue. This meeting does not stop those conversations from continuing. We think it’s headed in the right direction. So, that’s important as we’re talking about the border security and what we can do to make sure that we’re dealing with that issue.
And so, we appreciate Republicans and Democrats in the Senate operating with us in good faith. And we think it’s headed in the right direction.
Q And, finally, do you think that, like — that criticizing the House for going home improves your odds of getting whatever deals, should there be a deal with Senate, through the House? I mean —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean — well, part —
Q — I’m just curious what strategy is here.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Here’s the thing — and I appreciate the question, and I get the question, but Republicans in the House have been incredibly — they’ve gotten in the way. They have gotten in the way when it comes to border security. They have gotten in the way and voted — and actually voted on pieces of legislation to take away some of the law enforcement, the CBP — right? — at the border. That’s what they voted on in — back in May.
So, we want to work with them. But they’ve been very clear where they stand. So, look, we’re going to have — the President is — is looking forward to having a conversation with members of Congress, obviously, here with his own national security team, with other members of his team here. They’re going to talk at 3:15.
And he wants to really lay out the importance of Ukraine. He is — he’s willing — always willing to hear out members of Congress on what they want to discuss.
But we’ve been very clear, the Senate has been — Republicans in the Senate have wanted to work with us. They’re talking through us with — negotiating, trying to find a bipartisan agreement, and that’s the way to move forward.
Go ahead, Weijia.
Q Thank you, Karine. To follow up on Tolu’s question to Kirby —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q — Speaker Johnson has made clear that they’re not even going to talk about Ukraine until the border is addressed. And he’s made clear that it’s H.R.2 or bust. So, how is the President going to navigate that in today’s meeting?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: He’s not the only congress- — congressperson in the room today. He’s not. He’s not the only person that’s going to be in the room. There will be other congressional members. The President has been really clear: He wants to talk about Ukraine, the urgency of making sure we continue that assistance to Ukraine; what that means not just for the broader world national security but also for us.
And so, Speaker Johnson is not going to be the only person in the room. And so, look — but obviously, the President is going to bring people together. He wants to hear from — from folks. And so, he’s willing to hear what — what these congressional members want to talk about. But the purpose of this meeting is to talk about Ukraine.
Q But what can you get done without Speaker Johnson and —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I’m not saying we can’t —
Q — Republican support?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I’m not — I’m not saying that. I’m saying he’s not — you’re saying if — if he wants to talk about — about something else, like border security, how can he — how can the President manage the conversation. There will be other people in — in the room.
And I think folks understand that U- — that there is a national security importance of having this meeting. That’s why the President is bringing folks together. And not only that — let’s not forget, they’re going to hear, also, from the national security — his national security team as well.
Q Some people who won’t be in the room are members of the press. And in the past, meetings with congressional leaders have been open. Is there a reason why today’s is closed?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, we had a similar meeting back in October, as you know. And so, that was an important meeting about national security, the supplemental as well. And so, that occurred.
Look, not all meetings are — are public or have a — a press component. The President, as you know, has a long track record in Washington, D.C., of — of, you know, bringing folks together, getting a bipartisan deal. And so, we want to — he wants to make sure we get straight to work. He wants to make sure that we have this really important conversation. He wants to get straight to it.
We expect some members of these — members of — of Congress to go to the sticks after — after their meeting. So, you certainly will hear directly from them. And we will have a readout, as well, of the meeting.
So, there will be an opportunity to ask questions of the members. They’ll be at the sticks. And then you’ll hear directly from us as well.
Q Thank you, Karine.
Q To follow up somewhat on Weijia. Also, House Speaker Johnson said today — I mean, he seemed to throw cold water on the Senate border negotiations when he said, “I don’t think now is the time for comprehensive immigration reform because we know how complicated that is. You can’t do that quickly.”
How will the President receive that message today if Johnson says this is too complicated to do right now?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Making sure that we take care of our border is not too complicated. It’s not. It’s not. If people come together in good faith, as they’ve been doing in the Senate, we can get this done. We can get this done.
And let’s not forget, the President actually put forth a comprehensive immigration proposal almost three years ago. Very — almost three years ago. We had three years — three years to work on something. If that was what the — Speaker Johnson is concerned about, we had three years to work on it.
And so, look — and if he — and if he was really — really concerned about it, then when these negotiations started before — before the holiday break, they would have stayed. They would have stayed and — and actually, you know, tried to be part of the solution.
Look, we want to have a bipartisan agreement. That’s what we want. We want a bipartisan agreement because the President understands that’s how we’re going to fix the problem. That is it.
And — and so, look, it’s continuing. We’re going to see what happens in — with the Senate negotiations. We’re going to see what — where they land. Certainly not going to get ahead of that from here.
But it is important. It is important to get this done. And the President is not going to stop from — from negotiating with the senators.
Q And just a quick one. Beyond the congressional leaders, who exactly is going to be in this meeting? How did the White House come up with this list? Why this group?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I can say, as you all know and been mentioning, Speaker Johnson will be there, Leader Schumer, McConnell, and Jeffries, and the chairs and ranking members of the House and the Senate Committees on Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Appropriations, and Intelligence. So, that’s incredibly important as we’re talking about Ukraine, obviously, and that — that part of our national security supplemental.
And also from the White House, so you all know, the Chief of Staff, Jeff Zients, will be there; National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan; Counselor Steve Ricchetti; Legislative Affairs Director Shuwanza Goff; Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines; OMB Director Shalanda Young; and Principal Deputy National Security Advisor Jon Finer.
Again, this is going to be about Ukraine. Some of this will be classified — will have classified content. And so, that is why it’s important for all of those folks to be in the room as we’re having these conversations.
Q Thank you. I understand you’re saying the meeting is about Ukraine. If and when bo- — the issue of border security comes up, which we know it will and is — is expected to, what specific concessions is the President willing to make on the issue of border security?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I’m not going to negotiate from here. I’m not. There’s been negotiations happening as it relates to the border security in the Senate for some months now between Republicans and Democrats. We’re going to let that process continue. We’re going to let that — that — that doesn’t stop. Those negotiations, those conversations is not going to stop because the President is meeting with congressional members today.
Again, our focus today, the President’s focus today is going to be about Ukraine and the importance of continuing to support Ukraine as they fight against tyranny, as they fight against President Putin’s aggression. That’s going to be the focus.
And I said the President is — you know, he brings people together. Obviously, is — is willing to — to listen to what folks have to say. But that is the purpose — is Ukraine. And those negotiations on the Hill, on the Senate side, is going to continue.
Q And a quick one on the Vice President’s abortion tour that is expected to start on Monday. She’s headed to Wisconsin. She’s kickstarting the — the tour in Wisconsin. Can you share more details on that trip? And where else is she planning to go? What is the White House planning to achieve with this?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, more broadly, on Monday is the 51st anniversary of the landmark decision Roe v. Wade. So, both — both the President and the Vice Pre- — President is going to be marking that landmark decision, that anniversary.
It’s an important anniversary, as the administration works to defend reproductive rights for women across the country, while Republican elected officials pu- — push extreme abortion bans that deny women the care that they need, force families to travel out of state for healthcare, and threaten healthcare providers with prosecution for providing the care that they are trained to provide.
So, obviously, it’s an important day. We’re going to — we’re going to mark that 51st anniversary. And you’ll hear more from the Vice President’s office as to what her kickoff tour is going to look like. So, I’d certainly refer you to her office. And then we will have more on what the President — how the President is going to mark that day.
Q Is — is the President planning to join her at any point during this tour?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t — I don’t have any — I don’t have anything to — to lay out on any — of the President joining the Vice President on this particular tour. But what I can say is both the Vice President and the President are going to be marking this day on Monday. We will have more to share on what that will look like.
Go ahead, M.J.
Q Karine, does the White House believe that Democrats have already made significant concessions on the border? And does it believe that Democrats, you know, have more room for additional concessions?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, I want to be really careful. There are negotiations happening. If I speak t- — from — from here about it, I don’t want to get in the way of what they’re trying to make happen, which is come up with a bipartisan agreement to deal with border security.
Look, what the President understands — and he’s been around for some time, right? He’s been in Washington for some time. He’s been a senator, as you all know. He’s been Vice President, as you all know. And he understands that it takes both sides to come together to deal with — to deal with an issue.
And when you deal with a bipartisan situation, you put a — put forth an agreement, you know, there are going to be concessions that are going to be made. I don’t want to speak to them from here. I’m going to let the negotiators have those conversations. They will decide what works, what kind of deal that they can put forth.
But obviously, a bipartisan agreement — that means both sides have to give up a little something. That’s how bipartisan agreements work, obviously.
Q And on a separate matter. Yesterday, in response to Governor Hutchinson suspending his presidential campaign, a DNC spokesperson said in a statement, “This news comes as a shock to those of us who could have sworn he had already dropped out.”
Seems rather gratuitous, you know, not to mention not serious. I just wonder if the tone of that statement reflects how President Biden views the governor and views his now-suspended campaign?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No, I appreciate the question. This is something that we definitely want to address.
President Biden has deep respect for Governor Hutchinson and admires the race that he ran. The President knows him to be a man of principle who cares about our country and has a strong record of public service.
This morning, the Chief of Staff here, Jeff Zients, called the governor to convey this and apologized for the statement that did not — that did not represent the President’s views.
So, again, as — as I just stated, Jeff Zients called the governor to apologize on behalf of the President and it did not — it did not reflect his views.
Q So, there was an apology that was conveyed to the governor. Was any action taken? Or was anything communicated to the decision by the DNC to put this statement out?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I can’t speak to — I can’t speak to how the communication — communication with the DNC. Obviously, it is a — it is a — the Democratic political arm, so I can’t — I don’t want to speak to that. You would have to reach out to the DNC directly.
But what I can say is how the President felt. It did not represent his views. We apologized to the governor. He has — he respects the governor’s public service. And we just wanted to make that very clear.
Go ahead, sir.
Q Yeah, another question on the border. Why hasn’t the Vice President’s Root Causes Strategy made a bigger difference in lowering the number of people who have been apprehended at the border?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, look, the Pres- — the Vice President’s — what she’s been able to do is meet with leaders in the region and talk about how do we — to your point, the root causes — how do we deal with what’s happening in — in those said countries and — and offer up any — any support that we could — could offer up.
But, look, it’s not just the Vice President here or this President or this administration. When it comes to immigration, it has been a problem that has existed for decades — for decades. This sa- — this system has been broken way before this administration stepped in.
So, the President took this very seriously. The first day of his administration, he put forth a po- — he put forth policy ideas, a legislation in a comprehensive way to deal with this issue.
And so, now, I think what’s really important — and we can’t miss this — right? — now there is an actual conversation, negotiations happening in the Senate, in Congress in a bipartisan way to figure out how to deal with border security. And I think that is the most important thing here. And we’re — we feel like it’s going in the di- — right direction.
Q Is that — is that particular strategy, though — did it — was it too narrow? Did it fail to anticipate the poss- —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: What strategy?
Q The — the Root Causes Strategy. Targeting those —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No, not at all. Not at all.
Q — three countries —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No, but the —
Q — when we know now that —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Wait, but hold —
Q — the migration is coming —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Hold on. There’s — there’s root causes. There’s dealing with a broken system, which is why we put forth a — a immigration — immigration proposal that deals with policy and funding.
And so, now we’re having those conversation in Congress, and I think that’s really important. And that’s what we’re hoping — we’re hoping that we can get to — to a place where we come into a bipartisan agreement. And that’s going to be the focus.
Go ahead.
Q Thanks, Karine. Another question on the border. Can you, sort of, talk about how the President views humanitarian parole for asylum seekers? Does he believe that asylum seekers should be able to stay in this country until their cases are heard?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Look, I — I want to be — and I get the question. I just want to be super careful here, because I don’t want to get into what’s being discussed in Congress. So, I’m going to, you know, not say anything beyond what I have said — is, like, there’s negotiations happening. There’s going to be different policy components that are going to come up, obviously. They’re going to come up with a — an agreement here that both Republicans and Democrats agree on on the Senate side. And then we hope that we can really deal with this issue. I just want to be super, super mindful and not get into specifics on policies.
Q But even on the basic principle of someone seeking asylum, does the President believe they should be able to if they have legitimate concerns?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, obviously. We’ve been very clear about that. But I just want to be super careful. I don’t want to go into a rabbit hole about each policy and what the President supports or believes in because there is a there con- — there — there are negotiations happening.
Q Yeah. And my last question. Just — Speaker Johnson says that he wants the border to be completed as one of his stipulations in this deal — or the border wall — I’m sorry — the border wall to be completed as one of his stipulations. What’s the White House’s response to that (inaudible)?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: We’re having a — a bipartisan conversation in the Senate about how we deal with border security. Going to leave it there and let the Republicans and Democrats who are actually coming to the table in good faith and have been doing that for months, which we appreciate — and we think it’s headed in the right direction — we’re going to let them have that conversation.
Go ahead.
Q Thank you, Karine. Why are you repeating this false claim that Republicans voted to reduce the number of Border Patrol agents, even though the Washington Post gave the administration three “Pinocchios” for that?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, we don’t believe it’s a false claim. Our statements were very direct here.
Last year, House GOP voted — voted — and not only did they vote for it, but they touted — they touted their Limit, Save, Grow Act. That’s the act.
Q But there’s no appropriations in that.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, let me —
Q And they vowed —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: They — they limit —
Q — that it would never affect Border Patrol.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: They — they — they voted for and touted it. Right? This is an act. And this would have forced the elimination of 2,000 Border Patrol agents. That’s what this act that they touted, that they voted for in the House. So, that was their proposal.
Q It wasn’t their proposal.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: And — and that was what they —
Q They clearly —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — voted for back in — in May.
Q They — they clearly stated at that time that Border Patrol — also veterans’ benefits and entitlements — would never be impacted by any of the reductions. The — and also, the bill never had any appropriations in it.
So, this claim that you guys are rolling out — you know, it’s the White House applying White House math to a bill that never had any appropriations. And moreover, the administra- — or the members in Congress who, you know, put this together vowed that it wouldn’t affect these things.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: If you —
Q So, the reason I —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q — I ask is because it’s just — you know, to voters, don’t you think they know the difference between, you know, what is a truthful statement and what is spin? And is it insulting to them at all to keep saying it when it was — it’s just not true?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: (Laughs.) One thing that the President does not do is insult vot- — insult voters or American people, to be more exact, because I want to be careful about — about this — what I can say about this upcoming election.
What I will say is, if you look at the bill — this act that they touted, that they voted for — House Republicans — back in May, they were — it was very clear that it would have forced — it would have forced the emil- — elim- — elimination of 2,000 Border Patrol agents. That’s what that act would have done.
We were very direct about that. We were very clear about that. This is what they touted. This is what they put out there. This is what House Republicans voted for. I mean, that’s where they are.
They have gotten in the way. Every time we are trying to deal with the border, House Republicans have gotten in the way.
So, we appreciate the bipartisan conversation that we’re having with Republicans — let’s not forget — with Republicans in the Senate — that’s why it’s bipartisan — and Democrats on dealing with the border — the border.
House Republicans get in the way. They wanted to literally eliminate 2,000 Border Patrol agents in this particular act that they touted, that they voted for back in May.
Q So, notwithstanding all of the factchecks on that, if you’re saying that, you know, the White House, the President doesn’t want to, you know, insult the American people, will the administration, then, amend its separate statement that implied that Texas officials were responsible for the deaths of three migrants, when, in fact, they had nothing to do with it? They had already been dead for an hour by the time Mexico told anyone in the U.S. about it. And the administration admitted as much in their court filing. They — they acknowledged that in their court filing.
But the statement from the White House implies that Texas was responsible. And a number of outlets were forced to issue corrections and editor’s notes because of that White House statement. So, will the White House amend that statement?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, let’s be sensitive here. Three people died. Three migrants died: two children and a woman. That was devastating — devastating situation, heartbreaking situation. So, let’s be really mindful of what we’re talking about here.
Q Of course.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I want to take a step back and — and just, as you’re talking about our statement — look, as I — as I mentioned, a woman and two children died. They drowned near Eagle Pass — which is, as I said, devastating — and that Texas officials blocked Border Patrol from access- — accessing the area. That’s what was happening at that time.
Our statement is consistent with DOJ’s filing. As the DOJ filing said, there was an ongoing emergency situation that Border Patrol was blocked from accessing. There were other migrants in the — in the water as well.
Q That was separate, though. The ongoing emergency situation —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: But I’m just saying there was —
Q — was separate.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — there was an ongoing —
Q And the —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: But —
Q The White House statement implied — it says — the White House statement says that Texas officials blocked U.S. Border Patrol from attempting to provide emergency assistance.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: To — there were other — there were other migrants in the water as well.
Q Then why wasn’t that included in the statement —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: There were other migrants in the water.
Q — that that — that that’s what you were referring to?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Our — our statement is the — is ver- –very much consistent with DOJ filing. Anything else specific you want to know about that, I would certainly refer you to DOJ.
AIDE: Time for a couple more.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay. Go ahead, Peter.
Q Three college students — Palestinian college students — were shot in Vermont in November. I know you’re aware of that.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q Nearly two months have passed since that time. They’re speaking out publicly now for the first time. Has President Biden or this White House spoken to those individuals or their families in the period since?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: First of all, obviously, we — we offered up our — you know, our — our sympathies and, obviously, were devastated to hear about this. And it’s — glad to hear that they have — they are recovering.
We don’t have any — any readouts to give you on any conversation that we’ve had with these three students.
Q I guess the question would be: The President, obviously, and other members of the White House have spoken with regularity with those who have been held hostage in Gaza. Recognizing the circumstances are very different, nonetheless, the White House does reach out to individuals of all sorts of communities, certainly marginalized communities, in circumstances not too dissimilar from this. So, why wouldn’t the White House reach out to these individuals?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: It’s — it’s a very good question. I just don’t have — it could have happened. I just don’t have a readout to share with you at this time.
Q Even without a readout, can you just confirm to the press corps at some point if it did happen so we can be accurate?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Absolutely.
Q And if it didn’t, just let us know.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Absolutely. Happy to let you know. But I — it’s hard for me to say — to confirm or not —
Q Okay.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — if they — if they read it out —
Q We’ll wait for your confirmation either way.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Absolutely. Thanks, Peter.
Q Thank you.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Appreciate that.
Okay. I think I have one more that I can go to.
Q Afghanistan, please.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Owen. I haven’t called on you in a while. Way in the back.
Q Karine, good afternoon.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Good afternoon.
Q Is the — by any chance, is the White House following the trial in Hong Kong of pro-democracy advocate Jimmy Lai?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, the U.S. strongly condemns the prosecution of pro-democracy advocate and media owner Jimmy Lai in Hong Kong under the PRC-imposed National Security Law. The U.S. renews our call for the immediate and unconditional release of Jimmy Lai, who has been in prison under Hong Kong’s National Security Law.
The United States will continue to closely monitor developments with this and other prosecutions under the National Security Law.
Q If he’s convicted — many call this a sham trial and, you know, that his conviction will — is virtually guaranteed from the outset. And he’s still got weeks to go in this trial. But if he’s — if he’s convicted — I know you’re — I know you don’t have a crystal ball, but what will the President do in that likelihood?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t want to get into hypotheticals from here. We just condemned — I just very forcefully, strongly condemned the prosecution of — of Jimmy Lai. And so, we’re going to continue to do that. And obviously, we’re going to monitor the situation closely.
I just don’t want to get it — ahead and getting into hypotheticals or — or how this is going to turn out. But obviously, we strongly condemn.
Go ahead, Ed.
Q Thanks, Karine. I want to ask you about —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: This is the last one.
Q — ships being redirected around the Red Sea. Freightos tracked shipping costs and found that the ships going to Europe — the weekly cost for containers going to Europe are up 386 percent from a yea- — last October; costs going to North America are up 99 percent. So, when does the White House feel like this could start putting pressure on prices and pass on to the consumer?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, obviously, our national security team here and our economic teams are — are closely monitoring the — the evolving situation in the Red Sea. It’s something that we’re keeping a close — close eye on.
But what we’ve seen so far is that the impact of the ongoing conflict has had limited impact on the U.S. supply chains and energy prices. Diversions of vessels from the Suez Canal and to the Cape — Cape of — Cape of Good Hope has not had major impact on availability of products in the U.S. or capacity at the West Coast ports.
Again, our teams are going to closely monitor this. This is our national security team and also economic team. We’re going to monitor this, but we haven’t seen an impact at this time.
Q And one last one. Last Friday, the President was at a coffee shop in Pennsylvania, and he seemed to be surprised that the smoothie was $6 and how expensive it was. I’m curious, is — so, is the President now realizing the costs that Americans are bearing?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, when he went over to you all to — to — to the — to the press corps, he was having a good time, right? Offered up to — as you know, offered up to — to buy them coffee. There was a big group there, and he made sure everyone got coffee and pastries. So, I just want to make that really clear.
Q But his comment was $6, and “I’ll — I’ll do it anyway.”
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, look, I hear you, and that — let’s not forget what the trip was about. The trip was about small businesses, right? There have been 6 — 16 million small businesses that have tried — that have started and filled out for applications. That’s a big deal. That is really important.
What that means is that they have the confidence — small businesses, folks who are starting them, have the confidence in the economy to start a business. And that is — I think that’s also really important too. And the President was able to do this or — we’ve seen Americans able to start — file for applications to start small businesses because of the American Rescue Plan. By the way, no Republican voted for that. And so, it’s gotten the — it’s gotten the economy back on its feet and also given the confidence for small-business owners to start — right? — for people to start a small business. Sixteen million applications that we have seen.
And so, I think that’s important. And look, you know, Republicans don’t want to do that, right? They don’t — they’re — they’re not interested in that at all. They’re not interested in fighting Big Pharma. They’re not interested in making sure that we’re lowering — lowering healthcare costs for the Americans.
They’re not interested in that. That’s why they didn’t vote for the Inflation Reduction Act. That’s why they didn’t vote for the American Rescue Plan. And so, that was the — that was the — the point and the important part of the President going there to — to Allentown. And I think it was a good trip. And you all saw that.
Q But he still seemed surprised that the cost was so expensive.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: He was joking around. He was certainly joking around with the press corps. He — you — you know that. He offered to buy coffee — that’s what he did — and pastries.
But I think the most important thing about that trip is that he was able to visit a small business. He was able to talk about how this administration, because of Bidenomics, because of the economic policies that we put forward — that we are seeing now a historic number of small-business applications. And I think that’s important. They have the confidence now — they have the confidence now to start their small business.
Thanks, everybody. We’ll see you out on the road in North Carolina tomorrow. Thanks, everybody.
Q Thanks, Karine.
###
The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and NSC Coordinator For Strategic Communications John Kirby appeared first on The White House.
FACT SHEET: President Biden to Announce New Funding to Connect Thousands of Households in North Carolina to High-Speed Internet, Highlight Milestones in Lowering Costs, Expanding Internet Access to Everyone in America
Today, President Biden will travel to the Raleigh-Durham area to announce $82 million in new investments from the American Rescue Plan’s (ARP) Capital Projects Fund to connect an additional 16,000 North Carolina homes and businesses to high-speed internet as part of the Biden-Harris Administration’s Investing in America agenda. Overall, the Biden-Harris Administration is investing over $3 billion in North Carolina to lower costs for families and connect everyone in the state to affordable, reliable high-speed internet through the American Rescue Plan and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. These investments are creating thousands of good-paying manufacturing and construction jobs in places like North Carolina to produce Made-in-America fiber-optic cable that will build out internet infrastructure across the country. And, because of the Biden-Harris Administration’s Affordable Connectivity Program, 885,000 households in North Carolina are saving money on their internet bills every month.
High-speed internet is no longer a luxury—it is necessary for Americans to participate equally in school, access health care, do their jobs, and stay connected with family and friends. Yet more than 7 million households and small businesses across the country are in areas where there is no high-speed internet infrastructure, and millions more struggle with limited, unreliable, or unaffordable internet options. With $90 billion from President Biden’s American Rescue Plan and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, President Biden and Vice President Harris are closing that digital divide. Through the Affordable Connectivity Program, the Biden-Harris Administration has helped over 22 million Americans save $30-$75 per month on their internet bills. The Administration has called on Congress to extend funding for this bipartisan program, so that millions of families can continue to access affordable high-speed internet.
In North Carolina, President Biden will highlight how the over $3 billion in Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and American Rescue Plan funding is helping North Carolina:
- Connect well over 300,000 more homes and businesses to high-speed internet by the end of 2026 through $1 billion in American Rescue Plan funding. Construction on these American Rescue Plan funded projects is beginning or has begun in 90% of North Carolina counties. This includes over $700 million that North Carolina invested in high-speed internet and connectivity through the American Rescue Plan’s State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund.
- Finish the job by connecting all remaining homes, small businesses, schools, healthcare facilities, and libraries to high-speed internet by the end of 2029 using $1.5 billion in funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law’s BEAD Program.
- Help 885,000 North Carolina households—about 1 in 5 households in the state—save up to $30/month on their monthly internet bills through the Affordable Connectivity Program. Already, North Carolina families have saved a total of $442 million on their internet bills.
- Spur private sector investment in fiber manufacturing: Thanks to the Biden-Harris Administration’s historic high-speed internet investments and Made-in-America policies that require fiber-optic cable to be manufactured in the United States, CommScope and Corning are investing nearly $550 million combined to build American-made fiber-optic cable, adding hundreds of new jobs in Catawba County. North Carolina is home to two of the largest fiber plants in the world, and is known as the Fiber Capital of America. As a result of these and other investments, Hickory, North Carolina is now producing 40% of the country’s fiber-optic cable.
President Biden will also discuss key progress his Administration has made to meet his goal of connecting every American to high-speed internet by 2030, including:
- Thanks to the Administration’s historic high-speed internet investments and Made-in-America policies, network equipment manufacturers have invested nearly $1 billion across 11 states to expand manufacturing facilities capacity so that fiber optic cable and network electronics get made here in the United States by American workers.
- By the end of December 2023, every state and territory had developed a roadmap for how they will use their share of the $42 billion Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) Program funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to connect every home and business in their state or territory to affordable, reliable high-speed internet access.
- Through the Affordable Connectivity Program, enacted under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, over 22 million households are saving over $600 million each month on their internet bills.
###
The post FACT SHEET: President Biden to Announce New Funding to Connect Thousands of Households in North Carolina to High-Speed Internet, Highlight Milestones in Lowering Costs, Expanding Internet Access to Everyone in America appeared first on The White House.
FACT SHEET: President Biden to Announce New Funding to Connect Thousands of Households in North Carolina to High-Speed Internet, Highlight Milestones in Lowering Costs, Expanding Internet Access to Everyone in America
Today, President Biden will travel to the Raleigh-Durham area to announce $82 million in new investments from the American Rescue Plan’s (ARP) Capital Projects Fund to connect an additional 16,000 North Carolina homes and businesses to high-speed internet as part of the Biden-Harris Administration’s Investing in America agenda. Overall, the Biden-Harris Administration is investing over $3 billion in North Carolina to lower costs for families and connect everyone in the state to affordable, reliable high-speed internet through the American Rescue Plan and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. These investments are creating thousands of good-paying manufacturing and construction jobs in places like North Carolina to produce Made-in-America fiber-optic cable that will build out internet infrastructure across the country. And, because of the Biden-Harris Administration’s Affordable Connectivity Program, 885,000 households in North Carolina are saving money on their internet bills every month.
High-speed internet is no longer a luxury—it is necessary for Americans to participate equally in school, access health care, do their jobs, and stay connected with family and friends. Yet more than 7 million households and small businesses across the country are in areas where there is no high-speed internet infrastructure, and millions more struggle with limited, unreliable, or unaffordable internet options. With $90 billion from President Biden’s American Rescue Plan and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, President Biden and Vice President Harris are closing that digital divide. Through the Affordable Connectivity Program, the Biden-Harris Administration has helped over 22 million Americans save $30-$75 per month on their internet bills. The Administration has called on Congress to extend funding for this bipartisan program, so that millions of families can continue to access affordable high-speed internet.
In North Carolina, President Biden will highlight how the over $3 billion in Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and American Rescue Plan funding is helping North Carolina:
- Connect well over 300,000 more homes and businesses to high-speed internet by the end of 2026 through $1 billion in American Rescue Plan funding. Construction on these American Rescue Plan funded projects is beginning or has begun in 90% of North Carolina counties. This includes over $700 million that North Carolina invested in high-speed internet and connectivity through the American Rescue Plan’s State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund.
- Finish the job by connecting all remaining homes, small businesses, schools, healthcare facilities, and libraries to high-speed internet by the end of 2029 using $1.5 billion in funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law’s BEAD Program.
- Help 885,000 North Carolina households—about 1 in 5 households in the state—save up to $30/month on their monthly internet bills through the Affordable Connectivity Program. Already, North Carolina families have saved a total of $442 million on their internet bills.
- Spur private sector investment in fiber manufacturing: Thanks to the Biden-Harris Administration’s historic high-speed internet investments and Made-in-America policies that require fiber-optic cable to be manufactured in the United States, CommScope and Corning are investing nearly $550 million combined to build American-made fiber-optic cable, adding hundreds of new jobs in Catawba County. North Carolina is home to two of the largest fiber plants in the world, and is known as the Fiber Capital of America. As a result of these and other investments, Hickory, North Carolina is now producing 40% of the country’s fiber-optic cable.
President Biden will also discuss key progress his Administration has made to meet his goal of connecting every American to high-speed internet by 2030, including:
- Thanks to the Administration’s historic high-speed internet investments and Made-in-America policies, network equipment manufacturers have invested nearly $1 billion across 11 states to expand manufacturing facilities capacity so that fiber optic cable and network electronics get made here in the United States by American workers.
- By the end of December 2023, every state and territory had developed a roadmap for how they will use their share of the $42 billion Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) Program funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to connect every home and business in their state or territory to affordable, reliable high-speed internet access.
- Through the Affordable Connectivity Program, enacted under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, over 22 million households are saving over $600 million each month on their internet bills.
###
The post FACT SHEET: President Biden to Announce New Funding to Connect Thousands of Households in North Carolina to High-Speed Internet, Highlight Milestones in Lowering Costs, Expanding Internet Access to Everyone in America appeared first on The White House.
U.S., Japan, and Republic of Korea Launch Cutting-edge Quantum Collaboration
We, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, National Security Advisor Akiba Takeo, and Director of National Security Hojin Chang, congratulate the University of Tokyo, Seoul National University, and the University of Chicago for signing a new trilateral quantum partnership that will train a quantum workforce and strengthen our collective competitiveness in the new global economy.
At Camp David, the leaders of the United States, Japan, and the Republic of Korea committed to demonstrate to the people of our respective nations the tangible benefits of trilateral cooperation. Today’s signing is one more step towards fulfilling this collective commitment. It also follows the December signing of a Trilateral Framework encouraging scientific cooperation among our national laboratories. United by common purpose, we will harness the power of our leading academic institutions to light a new way forward.
The United States, Japan, and the Republic of Korea are global leaders in research and development investment. Innovative partnerships like this one position our three countries to embrace a transitional moment where cutting-edge scientific research and technology are yielding new industries and modernizing old ones. We wish these universities great success in this new quantum endeavor.
###
The post U.S., Japan, and Republic of Korea Launch Cutting-edge Quantum Collaboration appeared first on The White House.
U.S., Japan, and Republic of Korea Launch Cutting-edge Quantum Collaboration
We, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, National Security Advisor Akiba Takeo, and Director of National Security Hojin Chang, congratulate the University of Tokyo, Seoul National University, and the University of Chicago for signing a new trilateral quantum partnership that will train a quantum workforce and strengthen our collective competitiveness in the new global economy.
At Camp David, the leaders of the United States, Japan, and the Republic of Korea committed to demonstrate to the people of our respective nations the tangible benefits of trilateral cooperation. Today’s signing is one more step towards fulfilling this collective commitment. It also follows the December signing of a Trilateral Framework encouraging scientific cooperation among our national laboratories. United by common purpose, we will harness the power of our leading academic institutions to light a new way forward.
The United States, Japan, and the Republic of Korea are global leaders in research and development investment. Innovative partnerships like this one position our three countries to embrace a transitional moment where cutting-edge scientific research and technology are yielding new industries and modernizing old ones. We wish these universities great success in this new quantum endeavor.
###
The post U.S., Japan, and Republic of Korea Launch Cutting-edge Quantum Collaboration appeared first on The White House.
President Biden Announces Presidential Delegation to the Republic of the Marshall Islands to Attend the Inauguration of Her Excellency Hilda Heine
President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. today announced the designation of a Presidential Delegation to attend the Inauguration of Her Excellency Hilda Heine on Monday, January 22, 2024, in Majuro, Republic of the Marshall Islands.
The Honorable Chantale Wong, United States Executive Director of the Asia Development Bank, will lead the delegation.
Members of the Presidential Delegation:
Mr. Henry Hand, Chargé d’Affaires, a.i., U.S. Embassy Majuro
The Honorable Erika Moritsugu, Deputy Assistant to the President and Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Senior Liaison, The White House
The Honorable Carmen G. Cantor, Assistant Secretary for Insular and International Affairs, Department of the Interior
###
The post President Biden Announces Presidential Delegation to the Republic of the Marshall Islands to Attend the Inauguration of Her Excellency Hilda Heine appeared first on The White House.
President Biden Announces Presidential Delegation to the Republic of the Marshall Islands to Attend the Inauguration of Her Excellency Hilda Heine
President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. today announced the designation of a Presidential Delegation to attend the Inauguration of Her Excellency Hilda Heine on Monday, January 22, 2024, in Majuro, Republic of the Marshall Islands.
The Honorable Chantale Wong, United States Executive Director of the Asia Development Bank, will lead the delegation.
Members of the Presidential Delegation:
Mr. Henry Hand, Chargé d’Affaires, a.i., U.S. Embassy Majuro
The Honorable Erika Moritsugu, Deputy Assistant to the President and Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Senior Liaison, The White House
The Honorable Carmen G. Cantor, Assistant Secretary for Insular and International Affairs, Department of the Interior
###
The post President Biden Announces Presidential Delegation to the Republic of the Marshall Islands to Attend the Inauguration of Her Excellency Hilda Heine appeared first on The White House.
Readout of President Biden’s Meeting with Congressional Leaders on Ukraine and His National Security Supplemental
Today, President Biden convened Congressional Leadership and the Chairs and Ranking Members of the House and Senate Intelligence, Armed Services, and Appropriations Committees, and the Senate Foreign Relations and House Foreign Affairs Committees to discuss the urgent need for Congress to continue supporting Ukraine as part of the global coalition we have built. In the meeting, President Biden underscored the importance of Congress ensuring Ukraine has the resources it needs—including air defense and artillery capabilities—to defend itself against Russia’s brutal invasion. The President discussed the strategic consequences of inaction for Ukraine, the United States, and the world. He was clear: Congress’s continued failure to act endangers the United States’ national security, the NATO Alliance, and the rest of the free world. The President called on Congress to quickly provide additional funding to support Ukraine and send a strong signal of U.S. resolve. The President also made clear that we must act now to address the challenges at the border. He said he is encouraged by the progress being made in the bipartisan negotiations happening in the Senate. He expressed his commitment to reaching a bipartisan agreement on border policy and the need for additional resources at the border. The President called on Congress to swiftly pass his full national security supplemental.
###
The post Readout of President Biden’s Meeting with Congressional Leaders on Ukraine and His National Security Supplemental appeared first on The White House.
Readout of President Biden’s Meeting with Congressional Leaders on Ukraine and His National Security Supplemental
Today, President Biden convened Congressional Leadership and the Chairs and Ranking Members of the House and Senate Intelligence, Armed Services, and Appropriations Committees, and the Senate Foreign Relations and House Foreign Affairs Committees to discuss the urgent need for Congress to continue supporting Ukraine as part of the global coalition we have built. In the meeting, President Biden underscored the importance of Congress ensuring Ukraine has the resources it needs—including air defense and artillery capabilities—to defend itself against Russia’s brutal invasion. The President discussed the strategic consequences of inaction for Ukraine, the United States, and the world. He was clear: Congress’s continued failure to act endangers the United States’ national security, the NATO Alliance, and the rest of the free world. The President called on Congress to quickly provide additional funding to support Ukraine and send a strong signal of U.S. resolve. The President also made clear that we must act now to address the challenges at the border. He said he is encouraged by the progress being made in the bipartisan negotiations happening in the Senate. He expressed his commitment to reaching a bipartisan agreement on border policy and the need for additional resources at the border. The President called on Congress to swiftly pass his full national security supplemental.
###
The post Readout of President Biden’s Meeting with Congressional Leaders on Ukraine and His National Security Supplemental appeared first on The White House.
FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Improving Student Achievement Agenda in 2024
The Biden-Harris Administration is announcing today its Improving Student Achievement Agenda for 2024, which is focused on proven strategies that will accelerate academic performance for every child in school. There is nothing more important to our future than ensuring children are equipped to compete in the 21st century. That’s why the Administration is laying out an agenda for academic achievement for every school in the country, using all of its tools—including accountability, reporting, grants, and technical assistance—to intensify its drive for adoption of three evidence-based strategies that improve student learning: (1) increasing student attendance; (2) providing high-dosage tutoring; and (3) increasing summer learning and extended or afterschool learning time.
School closures launched during the previous administration set students back. President Biden’s American Rescue Plan, the largest one-time education investment in our history, helped schools reopen and regain ground faster. From the start, this Administration has been laser focused on working with school districts to invest these funds to help students recover from the effects of the pandemic through proven strategies like high-dosage tutoring and expanded summer learning. Through the new announcements today, the Department is using every tool in its toolbox so that States and districts achieve greater adoption of these three proven strategies and accelerate academic progress nationwide. These strategies complement the Administration’s continued focus on improving mental health in schools, supporting America’s teachers and other school staff, and strengthening core instruction through the Raise the Bar: Lead the World initiative.
The Strategies and the Evidence[1]:
The Administration is urging States, districts, and schools to adopt three strategies that work to increase effective time on task, based on the evidence:
Increasing attendance: Following the school closures that began in 2020 during the previous administration, chronic absenteeism emerged as a serious challenge. Across the country, the rate of chronic absenteeism reached about 31% in 2021-2022 because of COVID-19. We cannot and will not accept that as a new normal. Students who are chronically absent are much less likely to read at grade level and to graduate high school. According to the Council of Economic Advisers, absenteeism can account for up to 27% and 45% of the test score declines in math and reading, respectively. Low-cost informational interventions, like sending texts to parents about their children’s missed school, can reduce absenteeism by up to 17%. Research also shows that targeted parent and family engagement—such as home visits, the adoption of early warning intervention systems, and the effective use of data and family engagement to identify why a student is absent and what tailored strategy will address the cause—can significantly increase student attendance. Reducing absenteeism can have a major impact on student performance.
Providing high-dosage tutoring: Well-designed and well-implemented tutoring programs can significantly accelerate student learning, including enabling a child to gain as much as 1.5 years of achievement in math. Research shows that to achieve these results, tutoring programs should: (1) provide at least three 30-minute sessions per week; (2) occur in small groups (e.g., 1-4 students); (3) occur during the school day, which helps support consistent participation; (4) use well-trained tutors (e.g., paraprofessionals, teaching candidates, retired teachers, AmeriCorps members, teachers, and others); and (5) aligned with an evidence-based, structured curriculum. School systems across the country, including in Chicago, Baltimore, and Greensboro, have leveraged American Rescue Plan funding to scale strategies with promising evidence of positive impact as the Department of Education has longpromoted. When implemented well, high-dosage tutoring can reduce burdens on teachers and complement other school-based activities such as building educator capacity through the use of math and literacy coaches, which research shows can improve student achievement, and professional development to support data-driven instruction.
Increasing summer learning and extended or afterschool learning time: One study found that when students consistently participate in high-quality afterschool enrichment programs, it adds about four months of student learning to the academic year. Another analysis of 30 schools found that when the school day’s instructional time is extended from 6 ½ to 8 hours for students in low-income areas, test scores improve between 11 to 24%. Summer programs lasting five weeks with at least three hours of academic instruction per day add about two months of learning in math and one month of learning in reading, according to a meta-analysis. The use of data on student participation and program quality helps these programs succeed, and their success enables teachers to deliver instruction more effectively during the regular school day. Close to half of school districts have invested American Rescue Plan funds in expanded summer learning, which has been shown to improve students’ math scores.
Today, we are announcing the following Administration actions and commitments:
- Publishing States’ specific actions to increase student attendance, expand high-dosage tutoring, and provide summer and extended or afterschool learning time. The pandemic caused significant declines in student achievement—across the country and around the world. Since then, leaders at the State, local, and school levels have undertaken historic efforts to get students back on track, fueled by landmark investments in the American Rescue Plan (ARP). Meeting and exceeding pre-pandemic achievement levels will require additional bold actions by States, districts, and communities. The Administration urges States and districts to make specific, quantifiable commitments to double down on their investments in these evidence-based strategies, such as the model commitments in the table below. This Spring, the Administration will highlight actions from States, districts, education non-profit and philanthropic organizations, , and others on:
- Using Data and School Improvement Requirements under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to Advance the Improving Student Success Agenda. To complement these State and local actions, the Department of Education will work with States to improve school performance by:
- Conducting additional monitoring so that States more effectively implement evidence-based responses to challenges. Under ESEA, as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act, States must use a portion of Title I funds to support schools designated for improvement through evidence-based strategies that address specific, identified needs of each school. The Department will engage States to strengthen implementation of these key ESEA requirements. For example, where States are implementing tutoring, the Department will examine whether they are doing so in the most effective form and provide guidance to support improvements.
Tracking progress in closing pandemic gaps. The Department is urging States to identify the local educational agencies (LEAs) with the greatest gaps between latest achievement levels and achievement levels before the pandemic, including gaps at the student group level. States should direct additional school improvement resources to those LEAs and prioritize them for support in order to eliminate gaps as quickly as possible, targeting acceleration efforts like high-dosage tutoring and summer, extended, and afterschool learning time in LEAs and schools with the greatest need.
- Encouraging States to strengthen accountability for addressing chronic absenteeism. To improve student achievement, States and schools need to improve student attendance. The Department will call on States to:
- Adopt chronic absenteeism as an indicator in their Statewide accountability and improvement system under ESSA, if they have not done so already. States can use data from this indicator to drive improvement for student attendance, engagement, and persistence.
- Adopt a strong, consistent definition of chronic absenteeism (e.g., missing at least 10 percent of school days) that captures all students struggling with attendance and better enables comparisons across schools, student groups, and States.
- Apply the chronic absenteeism indicator to all school types: elementary, middle, and high schools with K-12 grade configurations.
- Ensure schools are looking at all student groups who are chronically absent to receive supports that are specifically tailored to meet those students’ needs (e.g., outreach in appropriate languages to families of chronically absent English learners).
- Increase parental engagement and adopt early warning intervention systems and other evidence-based practices to increase attendance.
- Issuing new school improvement guidance focused on evidence-based practices to accelerate academic achievement. To further support States and schools, the Department will issue guidance on implementing ESEA’s school improvement requirements, focused on evidence-based approaches to drive student achievement like addressing chronic absenteeism, and providing high-dosage tutoring, and summer, and extended or afterschool learning. The Department is asking educators, researchers, policymakers, community-based organizations, and others to share evidence-based strategies and resources by submitting them to the Department’s Best Practices Clearinghouse. The Clearinghouse already includes examples of effective approaches to improving student achievement that States, districts, and schools can adopt. The Department will also seek public comment on the school improvement guidance before finalizing.
- Providing technical assistance to States on academic achievement through the Department’s Comprehensive Centers, Regional Education Labs, and other partners. While ESEA focuses on schools with the greatest challenges, all schools have areas for improvement. The Department will use all the tools at its disposal to support school improvement; for example, by working with States to pair schools and districts with faster rates of recovery with schools and districts struggling more as part of a professional learning community.
- Enabling States to Continue Spending Pandemic Relief Funds on Academic Achievement into the 2024-25 School Year and Directing Resources to Support Stronger Outcomes. The Department has issued a letter, Frequently Asked Questions, and template to support States and provide a critical pathway to continue to use ARP dollars in the 2024-2025 school year on academic supports like high-dosage tutoring. Additionally, the Department is:
- Advising States to use other Federal funding, including Title I and Title IV funding under ESEA, to support tutoring, afterschool and summer programs, and activities to increase student attendance – including through valuable programs like 21st Century Community Learning Centers; and
- Fully enforcing the maintenance of effort and maintenance of equity provisions in ARP to ensure that States and districts maintain their own levels of education spending, including in schools and districts with high rates of poverty. To date, under the Department’s robust implementation of these provisions, 43 States increased education spending, post-pandemic compared to pre-pandemic, and 47 States safeguarded funding in high-poverty communities and drove approximately $600 million to high-needs schools.
- Using Grant Programs to Support the Student Achievement Agenda. Pending appropriations, the Department plans to run several competitions in 2024 that support academic achievement through priorities for evidence-based instructional approaches and supports to increase student attendance, engagement, and academic achievement. Across several grant programs, funds may be used to support academic success strategies including high-dosage tutoring; extended, afterschool and summer learning time; ongoing support for educators, such as math and literacy coaching; increased access to rigorous coursework and content across K–12; identifying student and family needs and the community resources and partnerships available to meet those needs; strategies to reengage and support students who have become disengaged from learning; and other evidence-based strategies. While notices inviting applications are still under development, and while appropriations for 2024 are not yet settled, grants such as the Education Innovation and Research program, the Comprehensive Literacy State Development program, and the Comprehensive Centers program could provide hundreds of millions of dollars to further support academic achievement efforts in the years ahead.
- Releasing an Additional Academic Success Resource. To support these action items and state and district planning, today the Department is releasing this resource to support further implementation of academic achievement strategies including evidence for these strategies, components necessary for effective implementation, specific next steps that State and district leaders can take, and examples of States and districts already doing this work.
- Building on the National Partnership for Student Success (NPSS), including calling on colleges and universities to use at least 15% of their federal work study funds for college students employed in NPSS roles. The Administration’s NPSS initiative has expanded collaboration and helped get additional caring adults in student support roles. Last year alone, an additional 187,000 people provided tutoring, mentoring, and other supports in public schools compared to the previous school year, according to estimates by the Everyone Graduates Center at Johns Hopkins University. The Administration is encouraging States, universities, and colleges to start their own initiatives or scale up existing efforts. Colleges and universities should set a goal to use at least 15 percent of their federal work study funds to compensate college students employed in NPSS roles. College students can work in schools and directly with students to provide critical supports while also learning more about education as a future profession. For schools and districts looking for more people-powered supports, the NPSS Support Hub based at the Johns Hopkins Everyone Graduates Center released today this list of key resources to help accelerate learning, reduce chronic absenteeism, and improve student well-being and mental health.
Today, several philanthropic and national organizations are announcing commitments to support academic achievement. The Administration will continue to work with these kinds of organizations to further build on these commitments. Read about the commitments from the organizations below here:
- Afterschool Alliance
- Attendance Works
- AT&T
- Boys & Girls Clubs of America
- Charles Stewart Mott Foundation
- National PTA
- National Summer Learning Association
- Overdeck Family Foundation
- Parent Teacher Home Visits
- Wallace Foundation
- YMCA
- Zearn
This agenda builds on the actions of the Administration to promote school success. The Administration has made historic investments to reopen schools and help students gain ground since the pandemic. These investments include:
- Securing $130 billion for the largest-ever investment in public education in history through direct State and district funding in the American Rescue Plan. COVID-19 created unprecedented challenges for kids. To support the immediate response and the long-term recovery work our students need, the President secured $130 billion through the American Rescue Plan to help schools safely reopen, stay open, and address the academic and mental health needs of students. American Rescue Plan funding has put more teachers in our classrooms and more counselors, social workers, and other staff in our schools; is providing high-dosage tutoring; supporting record expansion of summer and after-school programming; supporting HVAC improvements within school buildings to address air quality and environmental and safety needs in aging school buildings; and providing a wide range of student supports.
- Increased funding and targeting of federal grants to better support academic recovery including:
- $90 million in new awards in 2023 to strengthen math, literacy, and science instruction through the Education Innovation and Research program;
- An additional $120 million in Full-Service Community Schools grants since coming into office to improve students’ mental health and well-being and their academic success;
- $48 million in 2023 in new funding for evidence-based literacy interventions through the Comprehensive Literacy State Development grants and Innovative Approaches to Literacy grants;
- More than $1 billion each year in funding for extended-day programming and enriching afterschool programming through 21st Century Community Learning Centers; and
- More than $2 billion in funding for school-based mental health professionals and services, including through the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.
- $18.4 billion for Title I, $1.9 billion more than when the Administration took office, to help schools in low-income communities provide their students with the academic opportunities and support they need to succeed.
- $14.2 billion for IDEA State Grants, $1.3 billion more than when the Administration took office, to provide special education services to over 7 million students with disabilities and support their academic success.
- Through the Engage Every Student Initiative, nearly 500 entities (including State networks, school districts, cities, and community-based organizations) have committed to expanding access to afterschool and summer learning programs for all students and we encourage other entities to build on these commitments.
[1] The White House does not endorse any nonfederal entity, product, service, or publication. Links to websites and resources outside the U.S. Federal Government are being provided as a convenience and for informational purposes only; they do not constitute an endorsement or an approval by the White House of any of the products, services or opinions of the corporation or organization or individual. The White House bears no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of the external site or for that of subsequent links. Contact the external site for answers to questions regarding its content.
###
The post FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Improving Student Achievement Agenda in 2024 appeared first on The White House.
FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Improving Student Achievement Agenda in 2024
The Biden-Harris Administration is announcing today its Improving Student Achievement Agenda for 2024, which is focused on proven strategies that will accelerate academic performance for every child in school. There is nothing more important to our future than ensuring children are equipped to compete in the 21st century. That’s why the Administration is laying out an agenda for academic achievement for every school in the country, using all of its tools—including accountability, reporting, grants, and technical assistance—to intensify its drive for adoption of three evidence-based strategies that improve student learning: (1) increasing student attendance; (2) providing high-dosage tutoring; and (3) increasing summer learning and extended or afterschool learning time.
School closures launched during the previous administration set students back. President Biden’s American Rescue Plan, the largest one-time education investment in our history, helped schools reopen and regain ground faster. From the start, this Administration has been laser focused on working with school districts to invest these funds to help students recover from the effects of the pandemic through proven strategies like high-dosage tutoring and expanded summer learning. Through the new announcements today, the Department is using every tool in its toolbox so that States and districts achieve greater adoption of these three proven strategies and accelerate academic progress nationwide. These strategies complement the Administration’s continued focus on improving mental health in schools, supporting America’s teachers and other school staff, and strengthening core instruction through the Raise the Bar: Lead the World initiative.
The Strategies and the Evidence[1]:
The Administration is urging States, districts, and schools to adopt three strategies that work to increase effective time on task, based on the evidence:
Increasing attendance: Following the school closures that began in 2020 during the previous administration, chronic absenteeism emerged as a serious challenge. Across the country, the rate of chronic absenteeism reached about 31% in 2021-2022 because of COVID-19. We cannot and will not accept that as a new normal. Students who are chronically absent are much less likely to read at grade level and to graduate high school. According to the Council of Economic Advisers, absenteeism can account for up to 27% and 45% of the test score declines in math and reading, respectively. Low-cost informational interventions, like sending texts to parents about their children’s missed school, can reduce absenteeism by up to 17%. Research also shows that targeted parent and family engagement—such as home visits, the adoption of early warning intervention systems, and the effective use of data and family engagement to identify why a student is absent and what tailored strategy will address the cause—can significantly increase student attendance. Reducing absenteeism can have a major impact on student performance.
Providing high-dosage tutoring: Well-designed and well-implemented tutoring programs can significantly accelerate student learning, including enabling a child to gain as much as 1.5 years of achievement in math. Research shows that to achieve these results, tutoring programs should: (1) provide at least three 30-minute sessions per week; (2) occur in small groups (e.g., 1-4 students); (3) occur during the school day, which helps support consistent participation; (4) use well-trained tutors (e.g., paraprofessionals, teaching candidates, retired teachers, AmeriCorps members, teachers, and others); and (5) aligned with an evidence-based, structured curriculum. School systems across the country, including in Chicago, Baltimore, and Greensboro, have leveraged American Rescue Plan funding to scale strategies with promising evidence of positive impact as the Department of Education has longpromoted. When implemented well, high-dosage tutoring can reduce burdens on teachers and complement other school-based activities such as building educator capacity through the use of math and literacy coaches, which research shows can improve student achievement, and professional development to support data-driven instruction.
Increasing summer learning and extended or afterschool learning time: One study found that when students consistently participate in high-quality afterschool enrichment programs, it adds about four months of student learning to the academic year. Another analysis of 30 schools found that when the school day’s instructional time is extended from 6 ½ to 8 hours for students in low-income areas, test scores improve between 11 to 24%. Summer programs lasting five weeks with at least three hours of academic instruction per day add about two months of learning in math and one month of learning in reading, according to a meta-analysis. The use of data on student participation and program quality helps these programs succeed, and their success enables teachers to deliver instruction more effectively during the regular school day. Close to half of school districts have invested American Rescue Plan funds in expanded summer learning, which has been shown to improve students’ math scores.
Today, we are announcing the following Administration actions and commitments:
- Publishing States’ specific actions to increase student attendance, expand high-dosage tutoring, and provide summer and extended or afterschool learning time. The pandemic caused significant declines in student achievement—across the country and around the world. Since then, leaders at the State, local, and school levels have undertaken historic efforts to get students back on track, fueled by landmark investments in the American Rescue Plan (ARP). Meeting and exceeding pre-pandemic achievement levels will require additional bold actions by States, districts, and communities. The Administration urges States and districts to make specific, quantifiable commitments to double down on their investments in these evidence-based strategies, such as the model commitments in the table below. This Spring, the Administration will highlight actions from States, districts, education non-profit and philanthropic organizations, , and others on:
- Using Data and School Improvement Requirements under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to Advance the Improving Student Success Agenda. To complement these State and local actions, the Department of Education will work with States to improve school performance by:
- Conducting additional monitoring so that States more effectively implement evidence-based responses to challenges. Under ESEA, as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act, States must use a portion of Title I funds to support schools designated for improvement through evidence-based strategies that address specific, identified needs of each school. The Department will engage States to strengthen implementation of these key ESEA requirements. For example, where States are implementing tutoring, the Department will examine whether they are doing so in the most effective form and provide guidance to support improvements.
Tracking progress in closing pandemic gaps. The Department is urging States to identify the local educational agencies (LEAs) with the greatest gaps between latest achievement levels and achievement levels before the pandemic, including gaps at the student group level. States should direct additional school improvement resources to those LEAs and prioritize them for support in order to eliminate gaps as quickly as possible, targeting acceleration efforts like high-dosage tutoring and summer, extended, and afterschool learning time in LEAs and schools with the greatest need.
- Encouraging States to strengthen accountability for addressing chronic absenteeism. To improve student achievement, States and schools need to improve student attendance. The Department will call on States to:
- Adopt chronic absenteeism as an indicator in their Statewide accountability and improvement system under ESSA, if they have not done so already. States can use data from this indicator to drive improvement for student attendance, engagement, and persistence.
- Adopt a strong, consistent definition of chronic absenteeism (e.g., missing at least 10 percent of school days) that captures all students struggling with attendance and better enables comparisons across schools, student groups, and States.
- Apply the chronic absenteeism indicator to all school types: elementary, middle, and high schools with K-12 grade configurations.
- Ensure schools are looking at all student groups who are chronically absent to receive supports that are specifically tailored to meet those students’ needs (e.g., outreach in appropriate languages to families of chronically absent English learners).
- Increase parental engagement and adopt early warning intervention systems and other evidence-based practices to increase attendance.
- Issuing new school improvement guidance focused on evidence-based practices to accelerate academic achievement. To further support States and schools, the Department will issue guidance on implementing ESEA’s school improvement requirements, focused on evidence-based approaches to drive student achievement like addressing chronic absenteeism, and providing high-dosage tutoring, and summer, and extended or afterschool learning. The Department is asking educators, researchers, policymakers, community-based organizations, and others to share evidence-based strategies and resources by submitting them to the Department’s Best Practices Clearinghouse. The Clearinghouse already includes examples of effective approaches to improving student achievement that States, districts, and schools can adopt. The Department will also seek public comment on the school improvement guidance before finalizing.
- Providing technical assistance to States on academic achievement through the Department’s Comprehensive Centers, Regional Education Labs, and other partners. While ESEA focuses on schools with the greatest challenges, all schools have areas for improvement. The Department will use all the tools at its disposal to support school improvement; for example, by working with States to pair schools and districts with faster rates of recovery with schools and districts struggling more as part of a professional learning community.
- Enabling States to Continue Spending Pandemic Relief Funds on Academic Achievement into the 2024-25 School Year and Directing Resources to Support Stronger Outcomes. The Department has issued a letter, Frequently Asked Questions, and template to support States and provide a critical pathway to continue to use ARP dollars in the 2024-2025 school year on academic supports like high-dosage tutoring. Additionally, the Department is:
- Advising States to use other Federal funding, including Title I and Title IV funding under ESEA, to support tutoring, afterschool and summer programs, and activities to increase student attendance – including through valuable programs like 21st Century Community Learning Centers; and
- Fully enforcing the maintenance of effort and maintenance of equity provisions in ARP to ensure that States and districts maintain their own levels of education spending, including in schools and districts with high rates of poverty. To date, under the Department’s robust implementation of these provisions, 43 States increased education spending, post-pandemic compared to pre-pandemic, and 47 States safeguarded funding in high-poverty communities and drove approximately $600 million to high-needs schools.
- Using Grant Programs to Support the Student Achievement Agenda. Pending appropriations, the Department plans to run several competitions in 2024 that support academic achievement through priorities for evidence-based instructional approaches and supports to increase student attendance, engagement, and academic achievement. Across several grant programs, funds may be used to support academic success strategies including high-dosage tutoring; extended, afterschool and summer learning time; ongoing support for educators, such as math and literacy coaching; increased access to rigorous coursework and content across K–12; identifying student and family needs and the community resources and partnerships available to meet those needs; strategies to reengage and support students who have become disengaged from learning; and other evidence-based strategies. While notices inviting applications are still under development, and while appropriations for 2024 are not yet settled, grants such as the Education Innovation and Research program, the Comprehensive Literacy State Development program, and the Comprehensive Centers program could provide hundreds of millions of dollars to further support academic achievement efforts in the years ahead.
- Releasing an Additional Academic Success Resource. To support these action items and state and district planning, today the Department is releasing this resource to support further implementation of academic achievement strategies including evidence for these strategies, components necessary for effective implementation, specific next steps that State and district leaders can take, and examples of States and districts already doing this work.
- Building on the National Partnership for Student Success (NPSS), including calling on colleges and universities to use at least 15% of their federal work study funds for college students employed in NPSS roles. The Administration’s NPSS initiative has expanded collaboration and helped get additional caring adults in student support roles. Last year alone, an additional 187,000 people provided tutoring, mentoring, and other supports in public schools compared to the previous school year, according to estimates by the Everyone Graduates Center at Johns Hopkins University. The Administration is encouraging States, universities, and colleges to start their own initiatives or scale up existing efforts. Colleges and universities should set a goal to use at least 15 percent of their federal work study funds to compensate college students employed in NPSS roles. College students can work in schools and directly with students to provide critical supports while also learning more about education as a future profession. For schools and districts looking for more people-powered supports, the NPSS Support Hub based at the Johns Hopkins Everyone Graduates Center released today this list of key resources to help accelerate learning, reduce chronic absenteeism, and improve student well-being and mental health.
Today, several philanthropic and national organizations are announcing commitments to support academic achievement. The Administration will continue to work with these kinds of organizations to further build on these commitments. Read about the commitments from the organizations below here:
- Afterschool Alliance
- Attendance Works
- AT&T
- Boys & Girls Clubs of America
- Charles Stewart Mott Foundation
- National PTA
- National Summer Learning Association
- Overdeck Family Foundation
- Parent Teacher Home Visits
- Wallace Foundation
- YMCA
- Zearn
This agenda builds on the actions of the Administration to promote school success. The Administration has made historic investments to reopen schools and help students gain ground since the pandemic. These investments include:
- Securing $130 billion for the largest-ever investment in public education in history through direct State and district funding in the American Rescue Plan. COVID-19 created unprecedented challenges for kids. To support the immediate response and the long-term recovery work our students need, the President secured $130 billion through the American Rescue Plan to help schools safely reopen, stay open, and address the academic and mental health needs of students. American Rescue Plan funding has put more teachers in our classrooms and more counselors, social workers, and other staff in our schools; is providing high-dosage tutoring; supporting record expansion of summer and after-school programming; supporting HVAC improvements within school buildings to address air quality and environmental and safety needs in aging school buildings; and providing a wide range of student supports.
- Increased funding and targeting of federal grants to better support academic recovery including:
- $90 million in new awards in 2023 to strengthen math, literacy, and science instruction through the Education Innovation and Research program;
- An additional $120 million in Full-Service Community Schools grants since coming into office to improve students’ mental health and well-being and their academic success;
- $48 million in 2023 in new funding for evidence-based literacy interventions through the Comprehensive Literacy State Development grants and Innovative Approaches to Literacy grants;
- More than $1 billion each year in funding for extended-day programming and enriching afterschool programming through 21st Century Community Learning Centers; and
- More than $2 billion in funding for school-based mental health professionals and services, including through the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.
- $18.4 billion for Title I, $1.9 billion more than when the Administration took office, to help schools in low-income communities provide their students with the academic opportunities and support they need to succeed.
- $14.2 billion for IDEA State Grants, $1.3 billion more than when the Administration took office, to provide special education services to over 7 million students with disabilities and support their academic success.
- Through the Engage Every Student Initiative, nearly 500 entities (including State networks, school districts, cities, and community-based organizations) have committed to expanding access to afterschool and summer learning programs for all students and we encourage other entities to build on these commitments.
[1] The White House does not endorse any nonfederal entity, product, service, or publication. Links to websites and resources outside the U.S. Federal Government are being provided as a convenience and for informational purposes only; they do not constitute an endorsement or an approval by the White House of any of the products, services or opinions of the corporation or organization or individual. The White House bears no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of the external site or for that of subsequent links. Contact the external site for answers to questions regarding its content.
###
The post FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Improving Student Achievement Agenda in 2024 appeared first on The White House.
Statement from National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on the Terrorist Designation of the Houthis
Over the past months, Yemen-based Houthi militants have engaged in unprecedented attacks against United States military forces and international maritime vessels operating in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. These attacks fit the textbook definition of terrorism. They have endangered U.S. personnel, civilian mariners, and our partners, jeopardized global trade, and threatened freedom of navigation. The United States and the international community have been united in our response and in condemning these attacks in the strongest terms.
Today, in response to these continuing threats and attacks, the United States announced the designation of Ansarallah, also known as the Houthis, as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist. This designation is an important tool to impede terrorist funding to the Houthis, further restrict their access to financial markets, and hold them accountable for their actions. If the Houthis cease their attacks in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, the United States will immediately reevaluate this designation.
The designation will take effect 30 days from now, to allow us to ensure robust humanitarian carve outs are in place so our action targets the Houthis and not the people of Yemen. We are rolling out unprecedented carve outs and licenses to help prevent adverse impacts on the Yemeni people. The people of Yemen should not pay the price for the actions of the Houthis. We are sending a clear message: commercial shipments into Yemeni ports on which the Yemeni people rely for food, medicine and fuel should continue and are not covered by our sanctions. This is in addition to the carveouts we include in all sanctions programs for food, medicine, and humanitarian assistance.
As President Biden has said, the United States will not hesitate to take further actions to protect our people and the free flow of international commerce.
###
The post Statement from National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on the Terrorist Designation of the Houthis appeared first on The White House.
POTUS 46 Joe Biden
Whitehouse.gov Feed
- FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Hosts First-Ever White House Summit for Sustainable and Healthy Schools
- A Proclamation on National Small Business Week, 2024
- A Proclamation on Workers Memorial Day, 2024
- Statement from National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard on March PCE Report
- Statement of President Joe Biden on the Passing of U.S. Congressman Donald Payne Jr.
- Remarks by President Biden at a Campaign Event | Irvington, NY
- Remarks by Vice President Harris at the White House Take Your Child to Work Day Event
- Remarks by Vice President Harris Before a Roundtable Conversation on Second Chance Month
- Remarks by President Biden on the CHIPS and Science Act | Syracuse, NY
- FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Celebrates Second Chance Month Announcing New Actions to Strengthen Public Safety, Improve Rehabilitation in Jails and Prisons, and Support Successful Reentry
Blog
Disclosures
Legislation
Presidential Actions
- A Proclamation on National Small Business Week, 2024
- A Proclamation on Workers Memorial Day, 2024
- Press Release: Letter to the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate: Designation of Funding as Emergency Requirements in Accordance with the Act Making Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2024
- Memorandum on Delegation of Authority Under Section 614(a)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
- Press Release: Bill Signed: H.R. 815
- President Biden Names Forty-Eighth Round of Judicial Nominees
- Bill Signed: S. 382
- Bill Signed: H.R. 7888
- President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. Approves Vermont Disaster Declaration
- President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. Approves New Hampshire Disaster Declaration
Press Briefings
- Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby En Route Syracuse, New York
- Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan
- Press Gaggle by Deputy Press Secretary Andrew Bates and National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby En Route Tampa, FL
- Background Press Call by Senior Administration Officials on President Biden’s Historic Actions to Mark Earth Day
- Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre
- Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby En Route Philadelphia, PA
- Press Call by National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard and Senior Administration Officials Previewing President Biden’s Remarks on Steel
- Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby En Route Avoca, PA
- Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby
- Background Press Call by Senior Administration Officials on Iran’s Attacks Against the State of Israel
Speeches and Remarks
- Remarks by Vice President Harris at the White House Take Your Child to Work Day Event
- Remarks by Vice President Harris Before a Roundtable Conversation on Second Chance Month
- Remarks by President Biden on the CHIPS and Science Act | Syracuse, NY
- Remarks by President Biden Before Marine One Departure
- Remarks by President Biden at the North America’s Building Trades Unions National Legislative Conference
- Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by First Lady Jill Biden at the “The Power of Research” Symposium
- Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by First Lady Jill Biden at the Wounded Warrior Project Soldier Ride
- Remarks by President Biden on the Passage of H.R. 815, the National Security Supplemental
- Remarks by President Biden at a Campaign Event | Tampa, FL
- Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by First Lady Jill Biden at “Walkin’ After Midnight: The Music of Patsy Cline” Event
Statements and Releases
- FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Hosts First-Ever White House Summit for Sustainable and Healthy Schools
- Statement from National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard on March PCE Report
- Statement of President Joe Biden on the Passing of U.S. Congressman Donald Payne Jr.
- Remarks by President Biden at a Campaign Event | Irvington, NY
- FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Celebrates Second Chance Month Announcing New Actions to Strengthen Public Safety, Improve Rehabilitation in Jails and Prisons, and Support Successful Reentry
- Vice President Kamala Harris Launches Nationwide Economic Opportunity Tour
- Statement from President Joe Biden on First Quarter 2024 GDP
- Joint Statement from the Leaders of the United States, Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Spain, Thailand, and the United Kingdom Calling for the Release of the...
- FACT SHEET: President Biden Announces New Workforce Hubs to Train and Connect American Workers to Good Jobs Created by the President’s Investing in America Agenda
- Statement from President Joe Biden on World Malaria Day