Feed aggregator

In response to continued illegal and reckless Houthi attacks against vessels transiting the Red Sea and surrounding waterways, the armed forces of the United States and United Kingdom, with support from Australia, Bahrain, Canada, the Netherlands, and New Zealand, conducted additional strikes against eight targets in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen in accordance with the inherent right of individual and collective self-defense, consistent with the UN Charter.  These strikes were designed to disrupt and degrade the capability of the Houthis to continue their attacks on global trade and innocent mariners from around the world, while avoiding escalation. 

The thirty-plus attacks that the Houthis have launched on commercial and naval vessels since mid-November constitute a threat to all countries that rely on international maritime shipping.  We condemn these attacks, and demand an end to them.  We also underscore that those who supply the Houthis with the weapons to conduct these attacks are violating UN Security Council Resolution 2216 and international law.  The January 22 international response to the continuing Houthi attacks demonstrated shared resolve to uphold navigational rights and freedoms, and to defend the lives of mariners from illegal and unjustifiable attacks.

###

The post Joint Statement from the Governments of Albania, Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Guinea-Bissau, Hungary, Italy, Kenya, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, United Kingdom, and the United States appeared first on The White House.

In response to continued illegal and reckless Houthi attacks against vessels transiting the Red Sea and surrounding waterways, the armed forces of the United States and United Kingdom, with support from Australia, Bahrain, Canada, the Netherlands, and New Zealand, conducted additional strikes against eight targets in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen in accordance with the inherent right of individual and collective self-defense, consistent with the UN Charter.  These strikes were designed to disrupt and degrade the capability of the Houthis to continue their attacks on global trade and innocent mariners from around the world, while avoiding escalation. 

The thirty-plus attacks that the Houthis have launched on commercial and naval vessels since mid-November constitute a threat to all countries that rely on international maritime shipping.  We condemn these attacks, and demand an end to them.  We also underscore that those who supply the Houthis with the weapons to conduct these attacks are violating UN Security Council Resolution 2216 and international law.  The January 22 international response to the continuing Houthi attacks demonstrated shared resolve to uphold navigational rights and freedoms, and to defend the lives of mariners from illegal and unjustifiable attacks.

###

The post Joint Statement from the Governments of Albania, Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Guinea-Bissau, Hungary, Italy, Kenya, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, United Kingdom, and the United States appeared first on The White House.

National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan met today with National Security Advisor Henrik Landerholm of Sweden.  Mr. Sullivan underscored the United States’ strong support for Sweden joining NATO as soon as possible and applauded the Turkish parliament’s ratification of Sweden’s NATO accession today. They welcomed the recent signing of the U.S.-Sweden Defense Cooperation Agreement.  Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Landerholm emphasized their commitment to continue supporting Ukraine as it defends itself from Russia’s invasion.  They discussed the ongoing Iranian-backed Houthi attacks against merchant and naval vessels transiting the Red Sea, as well as the importance of increasing humanitarian aid and civilian protections for people in Gaza as Israel defends itself from Hamas.  They also discussed our growing bilateral cooperation on emerging technologies and the close partnership on a range of shared global challenges.

###

The post Readout of National Security Advisor Sullivan’s Meeting with Swedish National Security Advisor Henrik Landerholm appeared first on The White House.

National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan met today with National Security Advisor Henrik Landerholm of Sweden.  Mr. Sullivan underscored the United States’ strong support for Sweden joining NATO as soon as possible and applauded the Turkish parliament’s ratification of Sweden’s NATO accession today. They welcomed the recent signing of the U.S.-Sweden Defense Cooperation Agreement.  Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Landerholm emphasized their commitment to continue supporting Ukraine as it defends itself from Russia’s invasion.  They discussed the ongoing Iranian-backed Houthi attacks against merchant and naval vessels transiting the Red Sea, as well as the importance of increasing humanitarian aid and civilian protections for people in Gaza as Israel defends itself from Hamas.  They also discussed our growing bilateral cooperation on emerging technologies and the close partnership on a range of shared global challenges.

###

The post Readout of National Security Advisor Sullivan’s Meeting with Swedish National Security Advisor Henrik Landerholm appeared first on The White House.

Today, the Biden-Harris Administration will announce new commitments to workforce development from the Advanced Manufacturing Workforce Sprint. The Sprint, which First Lady Jill Biden announced in May and the Administration kicked off in October, is an intensive drive to build a diverse, skilled pipeline of workers for good advanced manufacturing jobs, including union jobs, many of which do not require a four-year college degree. This comes as President Biden’s historic Investing in America agenda—including the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, CHIPS and Science Act, Inflation Reduction Act, and American Rescue Plan—is creating strong demand for skilled advanced manufacturing workers in clean energy, biotechnology, semiconductors, and more.

Today, Neera Tanden, Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, in partnership with the National Economic Council, will highlight some of the many new commitments in remarks to 850 community college and other labor and workforce leaders in New Orleans, Louisiana. More than 160 organizations are participating in the Sprint—including community colleges, employers, unions, education and training providers, community-based groups, philanthropic organizations, and state and local governments—by taking tangible steps to help more Americans train for and succeed in good advanced manufacturing jobs and careers.

In the three months since the Administration kicked off the Advanced Manufacturing Workforce Sprint:

• Over 160 organizations have made new commitments to workforce development and job quality in advanced manufacturing.
• Over 150 new advanced manufacturing-related Registered Apprenticeship programs and occupations have been created or are newly under development.
• Over 4,700 new apprentices have been hired in advanced manufacturing occupations.
• The Administration is announcing new investments—including more than $50 million in January alone—to grow and diversify America’s advanced manufacturing workforce.
• The AFL-CIO Working for America Institute, in partnership with labor and industry, will lead development of a universal pathway curriculum for advanced manufacturing to provide students and workers an onramp to good advanced manufacturing careers.

The Biden-Harris Administration continues to encourage and support expansion of high-quality pathways into advanced manufacturing, and invites additional interested organizations to join the Sprint by submitting a commitment.

Alongside Director Tanden’s remarks today, the Administration is highlighting dozens of concrete actions by Sprint participants and agencies to expand high-quality pathways into good advanced manufacturing jobs and careers:

• The Department of Labor announced that more than 4,700 apprentices have been hired and more than 150 new programs and occupations created or under development during the course of its Advanced Manufacturing Registered Apprenticeship Accelerator Series. The effort was launched on October 6 to meet critical recruitment, retention, and training needs in advanced manufacturing occupations—including in the clean energy, semiconductor, aerospace, automotive, and biotechnology sectors. Registered Apprenticeship programs offer a proven earn-and-learn pathway that benefit workers and employers alike.
• Examples of employer and non-profit actions to expand Registered Apprenticeship programs and other high-quality pathways include:
  • Multiverse, in collaboration with partners such as Rolls Royce, will scale its advanced manufacturing-related Registered Apprenticeship programs to support 1,000 roles, such as Data Analyst, over the next two years.
  • Rockwell Automation, a smart manufacturing company, will expand its Academy of Advanced Manufacturing, a 12-week residential program in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Cleveland, Ohio that equips veterans with the technical and workplace skills to fill in-demand manufacturing jobs. The program has served over 500 participants, 38 percent of whom are people of color.
  • Micron, the only U.S.-based leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing company, partnered with the Idaho Manufacturing Alliance and College of Western Idaho to expand their first-ever Registered Apprenticeship Program in Advanced Mechatronics. Micron is also advancing its partnerships with community colleges to increase recruitment of underrepresented students, including with a $5 million investment to Onondaga Community College to support a new Micron Cleanroom Simulation Laboratory.
  • Independent Electrical Contractors (IEC) – Atlanta/Georgia Chapters, a non-profit trade organization, committed to hiring 125 additional Electrical Registered Apprentices. 
  • Global Foundries, semiconductor contract manufacturing and design company, has committed to enrolling 130 incumbent workers in its Industrial Manufacturing Technician Registered Apprenticeship program.
  • Jobs for the Future (JFF), a workforce development organization, will register at least 825 apprentices annually, at least 50 percent of whom will be from populations underrepresented in the advanced manufacturing workforce. JFF will also provide free coaching and technical assistance—including on equitable recruiting strategies—for employers and other group sponsors launching a registered apprenticeship in manufacturing.

• Examples of community college actions to increase high-quality programming and partnerships include:
  • Delta College in Michigan plans to enroll 300 students during the first two years of a new 15-week accelerated technician certificate program or engineering degree programs this year, both developed in partnership with local semiconductor manufacturers Hemlock and SK Siltron. Delta will recruit students from local K-12 schools and provide wraparound supports such as housing stipends, child care, transportation and food assistance, and healthcare, partnering with local community groups.
  • Nunez Community College in Louisiana, in partnership with NASA and Boeing, will register its Aerospace Manufacturing Technology Training program as a Registered Apprenticeship program. 
  • Fullerton Community College in Californiawill work with up to 100 area employers to implement Registered Apprenticeships for CNC/Machinists.
  • St. Petersburg Community College in Florida, in partnership with GE Aerospace, plans to launch a new Registered Apprenticeship program in Avionic Technology in early 2024.  
  • Leeward Community College in Hawaii will create new specializations in Advanced Additive Manufacturing, Robotics, Cobotics, accessible as part of an associate’s degree in Integrated Industrial Technology or as a stackable credential for workers seeking to upskill.
  • Parkland College in Illinois, in partnership with AGCO, an American agricultural machinery manufacturer, will launch a Registered Apprenticeship program in 2024 for Agricultural Equipment Technicians, which will target underserved youth. 

• Examples of partnerships between unions, employers, and education providers to deliver high-quality pathways into good advanced manufacturing jobs and careers include:
  • The American Federation of Teachers (AFT)—in partnership with the New York State United Teachers, the United Federation of Teachers, Micron, and Governor Kathy Hochul—launched a $4 million project to develop an Advanced Technology Framework for students to hone technical skills for semiconductor jobs, which will be piloted in 10 school districts starting next fall.
  • In March, the Department of Labor will launch a National Manufacturing Sector Table of leading labor, industry and workforce organizations in the manufacturing sector and support them to develop and lift up workforce solutions that equitably build and grow the next generation of the manufacturing workforce.
  • The AFL-CIO Working for America Institute (WAI) will support DOL’s Sector Table by working with other organizations to develop, scale, and adopt a universal pathway curriculum for advanced manufacturing. The universal pathway will provide workers and students an onramp to a variety of good manufacturing jobs and careers, while creating a pipeline of job-ready workers for employers.
  • SME—a nonprofit association of professionals, manufacturers, educators, and students committed to supporting the manufacturing industry—announced the Manufacturing Imperative – Workforce Pipeline Challenge (MI-WPC), a collaboration with 25 community and technical colleges, each of member which aims to enroll 1,000 individuals per year in pathways that lead to family-sustaining manufacturing jobs.
  • North America’s Building Trades Unions (NABTU), the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), and the National Education Association (NEA) will develop and disseminate a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) template to help local school districts, community colleges, and unions form partnerships to build students’ awareness of and access to good union careers—building on similar MOUs announced in the Augusta Workforce Hub. The template may include language for developing training partnerships such as pre-apprenticeship and Registered Apprenticeship programs; engaging education professionals such as school counselors and career and technical education (CTE) instructors; and reaching underrepresented students. Local areas can adapt the template for their needs and apply it in construction trades, advanced manufacturing, and other sectors.

• The White House Workforce Hubs—announced in five cities across the country that are seeing significant public- and private-sector investment—continue to lead the way on equitable workforce development, including for good advanced manufacturing jobs and careers. For example:
  • In Columbus, Columbus State Community College (CSCC) launched its semiconductor technician certificate program developed with Intel—announced during First Lady Jill Biden’s visit to the Columbus Workforce Hub in July—which is part of a suite of engineering technology programs that CSCC plans to grow fourfold by 2030, enrolling 5,000 students a year.
  • In Pittsburgh, the German American Chamber of Commerce, Pittsburgh Chapter will launch a new Electric Vehicle (EV) Technician Registered Apprenticeship in August 2024. Five employers have signed on to host apprentices; the program is committed to having the highest safety standards for its apprentices in the industry.
  • In Augusta, Augusta Technical College, in collaboration with the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL), announced it will enhance its Nuclear Engineering Technology program curriculum, supported by a $500,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Minority Serving Institutions Partnership Program (MSIPP). The initiative includes establishing a new apprenticeship program at SRNL; adding modules for radiation control and protection; and engaging high school students early through site visits, hands-on learning experiences, and a summer internship program.
  • In Phoenix, the City—in partnership with Arizona State University (ASU), Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD), and Western Maricopa Education Center (West-MEC)—is establishing Innovation 27, a workforce training and education collaborative focused on semiconductor, bioscience, information technology, healthcare, and other emerging industries. It is supported by $18.5 million in funding from President Biden’s American Rescue Plan.

• The 17 Manufacturing USA Institutes, which collectively comprise over 2,500 member organizations across the nation and engage more than 106,000 people in advanced manufacturing training, announced recent steps to expand workforce development:
  • Revitalizing America’s Manufacturing Workforce—a national roadmap to develop advanced manufacturing technologies, grow the advanced manufacturing workforce, and connect workers to good jobs in advanced manufacturing.
  • BioFabUSA welcomed the inaugural cohort of the first-of-its-kind Biofabrication Technician Registered Apprenticeship Program in November. Apprentices completed customized coursework in math, biology, chemistry, and cell culture, along with soft skills and hands-on training to prepare them for the workplace. Participants will begin a year of on-the-job training, with pay and benefits, in late January 2024.
  • NIMBL, the Department of Commerce Manufacturing USA Institute, launched its 2024 application for the NIMBL eXperience program, which will offer postsecondary students real-world exploration of careers in the biopharmaceutical industry, targeting students of color, including at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs).

These commitments complement new and ongoing federal investments to expand and diversify the advanced manufacturing workforce, including:

• The Department of Labor awarded more than $65 million to develop, scale, and diversify Registered Apprenticeship programs to 46 states and territories—with 19 states focusing on advanced manufacturing as a target sector with $36 million in formula funds.
• The U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) launched a $28 million Future Manufacturing competition on January 10 to catalyze new manufacturing capabilities that do not exist today through research, education, and workforce training that will overcome scientific, technological, educational, economic, and social barriers. Applicants must develop a plan to prepare diverse students and a skilled technical workforce that can transition new discoveries into U.S. manufacturing enterprise.
• NSF will announce upwards of $20 million for its Experiential Learning in Emerging and Novel Technologies (ExLENT) program in March. ExLENT is a first-of-a-kind training initiative that provides paid experiential learning opportunities such as Registered Apprenticeships to current professionals in any field, helping them build the skills they need to pivot into careers in emerging technology fields, such as advanced manufacturing, microelectronics, biomanufacturing, and energy. This new announcement will build on NSF’s inaugural ExLENT awards of $18.8 million to 27 project teams.
• On January 22, Department of Energy (DOE) announced its intent to invest up to $24 million in high-quality training for union apprentices, incumbent workers, and students for in-demand jobs in advanced manufacturing and clean energy through the Industrial Assessment Centers (IAC) Program. The announcement is part of the IAC Program’s unprecedented expansion to include Registered Apprenticeship, union-led training, and community and technical college programs through President Biden’s Investing in America agenda. It follows DOE’s $40 million investment, announced in November, to support 17 new IACs as well as the inaugural cohort of 10 Building Training and Assessment Centers. 

The Biden-Harris Administration’s Advanced Manufacturing Sprint builds on the Administration’s prior workforce sprints, which have driven commitments to equitable workforce development and job quality improvement to address critical needs. These include efforts to expand Registered Apprenticeships in trucking and cybersecurity, and to build pathways into good jobs and careers in broadband, electrification, and construction through the Talent Pipeline Challenge. The Sprint also supports the goals of the plan to expand education and training opportunities to biotechnology and biomanufacturing released in July.

###

The post FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Highlights New Commitments Toward Equitable Workforce Development in Advanced Manufacturing appeared first on The White House.

Today, the Biden-Harris Administration will announce new commitments to workforce development from the Advanced Manufacturing Workforce Sprint. The Sprint, which First Lady Jill Biden announced in May and the Administration kicked off in October, is an intensive drive to build a diverse, skilled pipeline of workers for good advanced manufacturing jobs, including union jobs, many of which do not require a four-year college degree. This comes as President Biden’s historic Investing in America agenda—including the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, CHIPS and Science Act, Inflation Reduction Act, and American Rescue Plan—is creating strong demand for skilled advanced manufacturing workers in clean energy, biotechnology, semiconductors, and more.

Today, Neera Tanden, Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, in partnership with the National Economic Council, will highlight some of the many new commitments in remarks to 850 community college and other labor and workforce leaders in New Orleans, Louisiana. More than 160 organizations are participating in the Sprint—including community colleges, employers, unions, education and training providers, community-based groups, philanthropic organizations, and state and local governments—by taking tangible steps to help more Americans train for and succeed in good advanced manufacturing jobs and careers.

In the three months since the Administration kicked off the Advanced Manufacturing Workforce Sprint:

• Over 160 organizations have made new commitments to workforce development and job quality in advanced manufacturing.
• Over 150 new advanced manufacturing-related Registered Apprenticeship programs and occupations have been created or are newly under development.
• Over 4,700 new apprentices have been hired in advanced manufacturing occupations.
• The Administration is announcing new investments—including more than $50 million in January alone—to grow and diversify America’s advanced manufacturing workforce.
• The AFL-CIO Working for America Institute, in partnership with labor and industry, will lead development of a universal pathway curriculum for advanced manufacturing to provide students and workers an onramp to good advanced manufacturing careers.

The Biden-Harris Administration continues to encourage and support expansion of high-quality pathways into advanced manufacturing, and invites additional interested organizations to join the Sprint by submitting a commitment.

Alongside Director Tanden’s remarks today, the Administration is highlighting dozens of concrete actions by Sprint participants and agencies to expand high-quality pathways into good advanced manufacturing jobs and careers:

• The Department of Labor announced that more than 4,700 apprentices have been hired and more than 150 new programs and occupations created or under development during the course of its Advanced Manufacturing Registered Apprenticeship Accelerator Series. The effort was launched on October 6 to meet critical recruitment, retention, and training needs in advanced manufacturing occupations—including in the clean energy, semiconductor, aerospace, automotive, and biotechnology sectors. Registered Apprenticeship programs offer a proven earn-and-learn pathway that benefit workers and employers alike.
• Examples of employer and non-profit actions to expand Registered Apprenticeship programs and other high-quality pathways include:
  • Multiverse, in collaboration with partners such as Rolls Royce, will scale its advanced manufacturing-related Registered Apprenticeship programs to support 1,000 roles, such as Data Analyst, over the next two years.
  • Rockwell Automation, a smart manufacturing company, will expand its Academy of Advanced Manufacturing, a 12-week residential program in Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Cleveland, Ohio that equips veterans with the technical and workplace skills to fill in-demand manufacturing jobs. The program has served over 500 participants, 38 percent of whom are people of color.
  • Micron, the only U.S.-based leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing company, partnered with the Idaho Manufacturing Alliance and College of Western Idaho to expand their first-ever Registered Apprenticeship Program in Advanced Mechatronics. Micron is also advancing its partnerships with community colleges to increase recruitment of underrepresented students, including with a $5 million investment to Onondaga Community College to support a new Micron Cleanroom Simulation Laboratory.
  • Independent Electrical Contractors (IEC) – Atlanta/Georgia Chapters, a non-profit trade organization, committed to hiring 125 additional Electrical Registered Apprentices. 
  • Global Foundries, semiconductor contract manufacturing and design company, has committed to enrolling 130 incumbent workers in its Industrial Manufacturing Technician Registered Apprenticeship program.
  • Jobs for the Future (JFF), a workforce development organization, will register at least 825 apprentices annually, at least 50 percent of whom will be from populations underrepresented in the advanced manufacturing workforce. JFF will also provide free coaching and technical assistance—including on equitable recruiting strategies—for employers and other group sponsors launching a registered apprenticeship in manufacturing.

• Examples of community college actions to increase high-quality programming and partnerships include:
  • Delta College in Michigan plans to enroll 300 students during the first two years of a new 15-week accelerated technician certificate program or engineering degree programs this year, both developed in partnership with local semiconductor manufacturers Hemlock and SK Siltron. Delta will recruit students from local K-12 schools and provide wraparound supports such as housing stipends, child care, transportation and food assistance, and healthcare, partnering with local community groups.
  • Nunez Community College in Louisiana, in partnership with NASA and Boeing, will register its Aerospace Manufacturing Technology Training program as a Registered Apprenticeship program. 
  • Fullerton Community College in Californiawill work with up to 100 area employers to implement Registered Apprenticeships for CNC/Machinists.
  • St. Petersburg Community College in Florida, in partnership with GE Aerospace, plans to launch a new Registered Apprenticeship program in Avionic Technology in early 2024.  
  • Leeward Community College in Hawaii will create new specializations in Advanced Additive Manufacturing, Robotics, Cobotics, accessible as part of an associate’s degree in Integrated Industrial Technology or as a stackable credential for workers seeking to upskill.
  • Parkland College in Illinois, in partnership with AGCO, an American agricultural machinery manufacturer, will launch a Registered Apprenticeship program in 2024 for Agricultural Equipment Technicians, which will target underserved youth. 

• Examples of partnerships between unions, employers, and education providers to deliver high-quality pathways into good advanced manufacturing jobs and careers include:
  • The American Federation of Teachers (AFT)—in partnership with the New York State United Teachers, the United Federation of Teachers, Micron, and Governor Kathy Hochul—launched a $4 million project to develop an Advanced Technology Framework for students to hone technical skills for semiconductor jobs, which will be piloted in 10 school districts starting next fall.
  • In March, the Department of Labor will launch a National Manufacturing Sector Table of leading labor, industry and workforce organizations in the manufacturing sector and support them to develop and lift up workforce solutions that equitably build and grow the next generation of the manufacturing workforce.
  • The AFL-CIO Working for America Institute (WAI) will support DOL’s Sector Table by working with other organizations to develop, scale, and adopt a universal pathway curriculum for advanced manufacturing. The universal pathway will provide workers and students an onramp to a variety of good manufacturing jobs and careers, while creating a pipeline of job-ready workers for employers.
  • SME—a nonprofit association of professionals, manufacturers, educators, and students committed to supporting the manufacturing industry—announced the Manufacturing Imperative – Workforce Pipeline Challenge (MI-WPC), a collaboration with 25 community and technical colleges, each of member which aims to enroll 1,000 individuals per year in pathways that lead to family-sustaining manufacturing jobs.
  • North America’s Building Trades Unions (NABTU), the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), and the National Education Association (NEA) will develop and disseminate a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) template to help local school districts, community colleges, and unions form partnerships to build students’ awareness of and access to good union careers—building on similar MOUs announced in the Augusta Workforce Hub. The template may include language for developing training partnerships such as pre-apprenticeship and Registered Apprenticeship programs; engaging education professionals such as school counselors and career and technical education (CTE) instructors; and reaching underrepresented students. Local areas can adapt the template for their needs and apply it in construction trades, advanced manufacturing, and other sectors.

• The White House Workforce Hubs—announced in five cities across the country that are seeing significant public- and private-sector investment—continue to lead the way on equitable workforce development, including for good advanced manufacturing jobs and careers. For example:
  • In Columbus, Columbus State Community College (CSCC) launched its semiconductor technician certificate program developed with Intel—announced during First Lady Jill Biden’s visit to the Columbus Workforce Hub in July—which is part of a suite of engineering technology programs that CSCC plans to grow fourfold by 2030, enrolling 5,000 students a year.
  • In Pittsburgh, the German American Chamber of Commerce, Pittsburgh Chapter will launch a new Electric Vehicle (EV) Technician Registered Apprenticeship in August 2024. Five employers have signed on to host apprentices; the program is committed to having the highest safety standards for its apprentices in the industry.
  • In Augusta, Augusta Technical College, in collaboration with the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL), announced it will enhance its Nuclear Engineering Technology program curriculum, supported by a $500,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Minority Serving Institutions Partnership Program (MSIPP). The initiative includes establishing a new apprenticeship program at SRNL; adding modules for radiation control and protection; and engaging high school students early through site visits, hands-on learning experiences, and a summer internship program.
  • In Phoenix, the City—in partnership with Arizona State University (ASU), Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD), and Western Maricopa Education Center (West-MEC)—is establishing Innovation 27, a workforce training and education collaborative focused on semiconductor, bioscience, information technology, healthcare, and other emerging industries. It is supported by $18.5 million in funding from President Biden’s American Rescue Plan.

• The 17 Manufacturing USA Institutes, which collectively comprise over 2,500 member organizations across the nation and engage more than 106,000 people in advanced manufacturing training, announced recent steps to expand workforce development:
  • Revitalizing America’s Manufacturing Workforce—a national roadmap to develop advanced manufacturing technologies, grow the advanced manufacturing workforce, and connect workers to good jobs in advanced manufacturing.
  • BioFabUSA welcomed the inaugural cohort of the first-of-its-kind Biofabrication Technician Registered Apprenticeship Program in November. Apprentices completed customized coursework in math, biology, chemistry, and cell culture, along with soft skills and hands-on training to prepare them for the workplace. Participants will begin a year of on-the-job training, with pay and benefits, in late January 2024.
  • NIMBL, the Department of Commerce Manufacturing USA Institute, launched its 2024 application for the NIMBL eXperience program, which will offer postsecondary students real-world exploration of careers in the biopharmaceutical industry, targeting students of color, including at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs).

These commitments complement new and ongoing federal investments to expand and diversify the advanced manufacturing workforce, including:

• The Department of Labor awarded more than $65 million to develop, scale, and diversify Registered Apprenticeship programs to 46 states and territories—with 19 states focusing on advanced manufacturing as a target sector with $36 million in formula funds.
• The U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) launched a $28 million Future Manufacturing competition on January 10 to catalyze new manufacturing capabilities that do not exist today through research, education, and workforce training that will overcome scientific, technological, educational, economic, and social barriers. Applicants must develop a plan to prepare diverse students and a skilled technical workforce that can transition new discoveries into U.S. manufacturing enterprise.
• NSF will announce upwards of $20 million for its Experiential Learning in Emerging and Novel Technologies (ExLENT) program in March. ExLENT is a first-of-a-kind training initiative that provides paid experiential learning opportunities such as Registered Apprenticeships to current professionals in any field, helping them build the skills they need to pivot into careers in emerging technology fields, such as advanced manufacturing, microelectronics, biomanufacturing, and energy. This new announcement will build on NSF’s inaugural ExLENT awards of $18.8 million to 27 project teams.
• On January 22, Department of Energy (DOE) announced its intent to invest up to $24 million in high-quality training for union apprentices, incumbent workers, and students for in-demand jobs in advanced manufacturing and clean energy through the Industrial Assessment Centers (IAC) Program. The announcement is part of the IAC Program’s unprecedented expansion to include Registered Apprenticeship, union-led training, and community and technical college programs through President Biden’s Investing in America agenda. It follows DOE’s $40 million investment, announced in November, to support 17 new IACs as well as the inaugural cohort of 10 Building Training and Assessment Centers. 

The Biden-Harris Administration’s Advanced Manufacturing Sprint builds on the Administration’s prior workforce sprints, which have driven commitments to equitable workforce development and job quality improvement to address critical needs. These include efforts to expand Registered Apprenticeships in trucking and cybersecurity, and to build pathways into good jobs and careers in broadband, electrification, and construction through the Talent Pipeline Challenge. The Sprint also supports the goals of the plan to expand education and training opportunities to biotechnology and biomanufacturing released in July.

###

The post FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Highlights New Commitments Toward Equitable Workforce Development in Advanced Manufacturing appeared first on The White House.

Today, on the 20th anniversary of the creation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), I commend the entire MCC team for the tremendous impact they have had on the lives of millions of people around the world through their innovative, cost-effective, data-driven development model. MCC’s novel approach is one based on partnership, in which it partners with low-income and lower-middle income countries that share a commitment to good governance, democracy, and investing in their people, to tackle key constraints to growth. Over the past 20 years, MCC has made critical investments to support farmers and strengthen food systems; unlocked critical policy reforms; strengthened the delivery of essential health services; built educational facilities and supported training opportunities for educators, healthcare workers, and nearly half a million students; and invested billions of dollars in climate-resilient infrastructure, including roads, water and sanitation, energy, and agriculture-related infrastructure in countries around the world. With strong bipartisan support from Congress, MCC has delivered nearly $17 billion in aid to 47 low-income and lower-middle income countries across six continents, lifted more than 300 million people out of poverty, generated economic growth in hard-to-reach communities, and strengthened democratic institutions across five continents. MCC’s projects have left a lasting and monumental impact on every community they have touched. I look forward to seeing the positive impact this model of development will have on millions more people in the years to come.

###

The post Statement from National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on the Millennium Challenge Corporation’s 20th Anniversary appeared first on The White House.

Today, on the 20th anniversary of the creation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), I commend the entire MCC team for the tremendous impact they have had on the lives of millions of people around the world through their innovative, cost-effective, data-driven development model. MCC’s novel approach is one based on partnership, in which it partners with low-income and lower-middle income countries that share a commitment to good governance, democracy, and investing in their people, to tackle key constraints to growth. Over the past 20 years, MCC has made critical investments to support farmers and strengthen food systems; unlocked critical policy reforms; strengthened the delivery of essential health services; built educational facilities and supported training opportunities for educators, healthcare workers, and nearly half a million students; and invested billions of dollars in climate-resilient infrastructure, including roads, water and sanitation, energy, and agriculture-related infrastructure in countries around the world. With strong bipartisan support from Congress, MCC has delivered nearly $17 billion in aid to 47 low-income and lower-middle income countries across six continents, lifted more than 300 million people out of poverty, generated economic growth in hard-to-reach communities, and strengthened democratic institutions across five continents. MCC’s projects have left a lasting and monumental impact on every community they have touched. I look forward to seeing the positive impact this model of development will have on millions more people in the years to come.

###

The post Statement from National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan on the Millennium Challenge Corporation’s 20th Anniversary appeared first on The White House.

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room 

1:04 P.M. EST 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Trevor — (laughter) — what did you do?

Q    (Inaudible.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What’s going on?  You causing problems?

Q    We’re ready.  We’re ready.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Are you sure?

Q    Yes.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  You know, I can — I’m happy to just stand here and wait.

Q    You guys are early.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We’re — we’re —
 
Q    On time.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   — we’re not — we’re on time.  1:02.  I don’t even know if it’s 1:02.  I think that time is a little either fast or slow.

Okay.  Good afternoon, everybody.  Where is the rest of the class? 
 
Q    Good afternoon.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh, my gosh.  Okay, well, good afternoon.  Happy Monday.  Today marks what would have been the 51st anniversary of Roe v. Wade, a ruling from the Supreme Court that recognized a woman’s constitutional right to make deeply personal healthcare decisions free from the interference of politicians.  But then the Supreme Court ruled to take that constitutional right away.

The aftermath has been devastating.  Women’s health and lives now hang in the balance.

Today, 21 states have abortion bans in effect, 27 million women of reproductive age live in states with bans.  That’s more than one in three women.  Over 380 state bills restricting access to abortion care were introduced just last year.  And on Capitol Hill, congressional Republicans have proposed three national abortion bans.

The stories of women being denied care are gut-wrenching.  In Texas, a woman was forced to go to court to ask permission to receive the care her doctor recommended before she ultimately fled Texas to receive the care she desperately needed. 

And she’s not alone.  We’ve seen one harrowing story after another of women who are experiencing a miscarriage and are turned away from emergency rooms, then, later — later, nearly dying — nearly dying because of that.

This should never happen in America.  Never.  But here’s the reality: The overturning of Roe v. Wade has led to the chaos and confusion we’re seeing play out — out across the country.  And it’s exactly why President Biden will continue to fight back and urge Congress to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade back into federal law.

The health and lives of women are on the line here.  So, in about an hour, you will hear directly from the President on this, who will convene a meeting with the Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare, while Vice President Harris today kicks off her reproductive freedoms tour in Wisconsin.

And with that, as you can see to my right, I am grateful to welcome Jen Klein, the Director of the White House Gender Policy Council, back in the briefing room.  And she will talk about our actions that we’re taking today.
Jen.

MS. KLEIN:  Thank you, Karine.  As Karine said and as has — as President Biden has made clear since the day of the Court’s decision to overturn Roe, Congress must pass a federal law restoring the protections of Roe.  And, in the meantime, the Biden-Harris administration will continue to fight to protect access to reproductive healthcare.

Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade, the administration has taken action to help ensure that women receive the care they need in an emergency, to protect access to safe and effective medication abortion, to defend the right to travel for medical care, to expand access to contraception — affordable contraception, to strengthen privacy protections for patients and doctors, to support access to reproductive healthcare for service members and veterans, and to partner with state leaders, who really are on the front lines of protecting reproductive freedom.

To coordinate this work across the federal government, the President established a Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare Access, which I chair alongside HHS Secretary Becerra.  And today, as you heard, as we mark what should have been the 51st anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, President Biden will convene the fourth meeting of that task force with agency leaders.

The task force will hear directly from two physicians who are on the frontlines of the fallout from the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, and who will — who will share their on-the-ground experiences of how state abortion bans have wreaked havoc on their patients and interfered with their ability to practice medicine.
The President will then receive updates from his task force on the efforts to protect access to reproductive healthcare and the continued threats to emergency care and FDA-approved medication abortion.

Task force members will also report on new policy actions the administration is taking to strengthen access to reproductive care.

While the President is convening his Cabinet, the Vice President is in Wisconsin, a state where Republican elected officials want to enforce an extreme abortion ban from 1849 — that’s before women had the right to vote — that includes no exceptions, including in cases of rape or incest.

As you heard from Karine, she’ll kick off her Fight for Reproductive Freedoms tour, and she’ll be hearing and listening to women and healthcare providers about the devastating impact of state abortion bans.

And with that, I am happy to take some questions.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right, go ahead, M.J.

Q    I’m just wondering how much more new action the White House believes they can take between now and November on this front.  Or do you mostly expect that the actions and announcements that are to come will be, you know, expansions on actions we’ve already seen since the Supreme Court took action?

MS. KLEIN:  Yeah, I mean, as the President has been quite clear since Roe was overturned, the ultimate solution is to pass federal national legislation to restore the protections in Roe.  And we will continue to work to hope that Congress will pass that legislation so the President can sign it. 
 
He has also been clear, literally since day one, of — when the decision came down in Dobbs that we will do everything we can.  So, that’s why he’s issued three executive orders and one presidential memorandum.  The executive orders are on strengthening access to abortion and contraception, on protecting patient privacy, on protecting patient safety and security, on protecting access to emergency care, and defending the right to travel. 
 
And we will take actions in all of those areas.  We have already, and we will continue to. 
 
So, to your question, is there anything left to do?  I think the answer is yes.  And today, when the President convenes his task force, you will see actions in a few more areas.  They do build on the executive orders that he has already released. 
 
So, just to outline what — a little bit more about those — what those policy actions today will be — you know, first, on contraception, there will be new guidance to support expanded coverage of a broader range of contraceptives at no cost under the ACA.  The Secretary of Health and Human Services will also issue a letter to private insurers, state Medicaid programs, and Medicare to reinforce their obligations to cover affordable contraception.
 
On emergency care, the — there — they will be — HHS will be announcing a comprehensive plan to educate patients about their rights under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, known as EMTALA, and the process for filing a complaint; and also disseminate training materials for healthcare providers, convene those providers to ensure that they know how to comply with EMTALA, and also establish an expert team at HHS to help hospitals and healthcare providers comply with those legal obligations under EMTALA. 
 
And last piece is we will take additional steps to implement the presidential memorandum on medication abortion to protect the safety and security of patients, providers, and pharmacies who need, prescribe, or dispense medication abortion. 
 
Q    And could you just talk to us a little bit about how the White House is viewing ballot initiatives heading into November — the importance of them, what the landscape is?
 
MS. KLEIN:  Yeah, I think the ba- — the series of ballot initiatives — most recently in Ohio, but also in Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, Vermont, California — really show how salient this issue is and how every time Americans are given the opportunity to make their voices heard, they make their voices heard very loudly and clearly in favor of reproductive freedom.  And there are more ballot initiatives coming, and we will do everything we can to support state leaders, as I said, on the ground, who are on — really on the front lines. 
 
Q    Thank you. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Selina.
 
Q    Thank you.  Can you talk a little bit about the significance of this rally in Virginia tomorrow and just how much more time you think the President is going to spend on the issue of abortion between now and November?
 
MS. KLEIN:  I can’t speak to the rally tomorrow directly because that’s a campaign event.  So, it’s a political event. 
 
What I can say is that the President has been prioritizing and delivering on reproductive freedom for his entire administration, starting with creating the Gender Policy Council and asking me, actually before Dobbs, to help lead the administration’s whole-of-government approach to Texas S.B. 8, and then, of course, once Dobbs came down, to mobilize the entire administration’s efforts, and he will continue to do that. 
 
And, of course, the Vice President, who has been a leader on this issue, will continue to be that leader.  She’s, as you just heard, in Wisconsin right now.  She will, of course, be part of the — of the rally tomorrow with all four of the principals participating.  And she will be around the country — she’s met with legislative leaders, state and local officials around the country.  And they will both continue to draw the sharp contrast between what this administration stands for and what Republican elected officials stand for for the months to come.
 
Q    Just bouncing off of M.J., though, do you feel that the White House is reaching the limits of what it can do when it comes to abortion rights without congressional action?
 
MS. KLEIN:  Again, I think, you know, the President was — was quite clear.  He literally said it, you know, within an hour of the Dobbs decision coming down: that the only way to restore the rights that were lost — the fundamental constitutional right that was lost that was protected for nearly 50 years under Roe vs. Wade is to have federal legislation.
 
And that’s why he is — his entire administration is laser-focused on that.  And he has made it entirely clear that when Congress sends him that legislation, he will sign it immediately. 
 
I don’t think that means that there is nothing we can do.  I think there’s quite a lot we can do.  And I think that’s evidenced by what we’ve done so far to — you know, all the categories that I mentioned, but really to protect access to reproductive healthcare in this country. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Kelly.
 
Q    Can the federal government help to define some of the circumstances that women have found themselves in when medical questions about is it the life of the mother at risk — where state law may not spell it out very clearly or clearly enough, is there a role for the federal government there? 
 
And since some of these instances do result in ordinary citizens having to get involved in litigation, is there something that the administration can do to support them in pursuing those remedies?
 
MS. KLEIN:  Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, to — to state the obvious: We are seeing a lot of chaos — legal chaos and medical chaos — because of the overturning of Roe vs. Wade and the state abortion bans that have been passed across the country. 

You know, it just bears mentioning that there are 21 states with abortion bans right now.  That means that 27 million women, one — of reproductive age — one in three are living in states with those bans. 
 
There are federal tools.  So, the one that, you know, we are talking about today that we are going to build off of — EMTALA, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act — you know, the administration has long said — long held the view that that law requires that when somebody walks into an emergency room requiring emergency care to stabilize their medical condition, that treatment, even if it includes abortion, is required under federal law.
 
So, I think, you know, that’s one of the things that we’re trying to make sure that, as I said, patients know what their rights are, know how they can file a complaint — but even before you get to that, that providers know what is required of them under that federal law.  And — and that’s what we will be doing more of.
 
Q    So, you think you can add clarity where there is confusion at this point?
 
MS. KLEIN:  Yeah, I mean, again, you know, to return to where we started, ultimately, the only way to — to ensure that, you know, women in every state across the country have the right that they lost when Roe was overturned is to pass a piece of federal legislation restoring Roe.  But I do think this is a step — an important step in that direction.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.
 
Q    To your point about federal legislation, is the President willing to compromise with lawmakers who think there should be some restrictions on reproductive rights in order to get a bill through?  Or is his approach more all or nothing at this point?
 
MS. KLEIN:  I — I think what the President has said — and he will continue to say that he believes that Roe was rightly decided and that we need a bill that restores the protections that were in Roe. 
 
And, you know, by the way, the majority — the vast majority of American people agree that Roe was ri- — rightly decided, and that’s exactly what we need to do.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Danny.
 
Q    Thanks.  You mentioned the 21 states that have a ban at the moment.  Do you have any number or any estimate of how many women have been forced to travel out of state s- — since the — you know, since the decision?
 
MS. KLEIN:  I don’t have numbers on that.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Courtney, in the back.
 
MS. KLEIN:  I — I will say one thing, which is that the Department of Justice filed a statement of interest in two cases in Alabama, where the right to travel is at issue, where the Alabama Attorney General has threatened to prosecute women and those who help those women cross state lines.  But that’s not a — that’s not a number for sure.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Courtney.
 
Q    Thank you.  You’ve been talking about abortions and medical emergencies.  On the Fifth Circuit’s decision on that, it’s unusual to see a court agree to review agency guidance, let alone rule on whether it can be implemented.  How does that court’s decision affect your strategy going forward as you try and navigate this post-Roe landscape?
 
MS. KLEIN:  Yeah, as you probably know, in addition to, you know, making clear our longstanding position that that law and the guidance that followed it reflects the position that EMTALA does cover emergencies — when somebody walks into an emergency room needing medical care and that’s — abortion is the care that is required, that that is covered by EMTALA — of course, that — we are also — the Department of Justice is also litigating that, defending that in court, and that stands before the Supreme Court at the moment in a different case.
 
Q    And on traveling, are you doing anything to support providers in states that are seeing an increase in patients from neighboring states with more restrictive laws — for example, Illinois?
 
MS. KLEIN:  I think the best answer to that question is that we’ve been really working with those state leaders in states like Illinois, New York, where they’re seeing an influx of patients.  But, really, that’s more about, you know, connecting states to each other, which has been one of the things we’ve done in our state convenings, so that they can learn from each other and help each other.  There’s less of a federal role there.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  Last question.
 
Q    Can I ask one more thing, Karine?  Thank you. 
 
Does today’s announcement that the administration is going to publish training materials for providers in medical emergencies — does that mean you’re going to pr- — advise that same information to hospitals in Texas and Idaho, which I know are the st- — states involved in those cases that the Justice Department is in?
 
MS. KLEIN:  That information will be available to any hospital and healthcare provider who needs to access it.
 
Q    Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Last question in the back.  Go ahead, Evan.
 
Q    I just wanted to ask about medication abortion and the Supreme Court weighing restrictions on the mailing of mifepristone.  Do you see — or rather, does the Biden administration see this as sort of the next big frontier of this abortion fight?  And then, you know, what are the stakes of that case, and is there any recourse that the White House would have?
 
MS. KLEIN:  I do think that that’s a really important frontier.  You know, they’ve already made it clear that, in some sense, they don’t think they need to pass a national abortion ban because there is a national abortion ban if they were to be able to limit the mailing, the dispensing of mifepristone. 
 
So, you know, I can’t speak to the litigation.  But, of course, you know, again, there’s a case in the Supreme Court, Alliance Defending Freedom vs. FDA, where exactly what’s at stake is the — is whether limits can be put on the FDA who has made a judgment to — to — initially, a judgment to approve and then further judgments to regulate using their scientific, evidence-based judgment that this is a safe medication that should be available.  It’s, by the way, 53 or so percent of abortions in this country. 

So, we will continue to — to defend that and make clear that, you know, that is a safe and — and legal drug. 
 
You know, one of the reasons I think that case has attracted a lot of attention is because it is obviously squarely about medication abortion, but, you know, you have pharmaceutical companies and executives, you have medical associations, you even have conservative legal scholars re- –weighing in on the danger of that case, because it could have implications for any drug that the FDA, you know, long ago approved and has regulated several times since.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Thank you so much, Jen. 
 
MS. KLEIN:  Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I know you have to go to the Oval Office.
 
Q    Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   Thank you.  Thank you so much.
 
Okay.  Thanks, Jen. 
 
Couple things before we continue.  So, just a scheduling update.  So, on Thursday, January 25th, the President will travel to Superior, Wisconsin, to discuss how his Bidenomics and Investing in America agenda are rebuilding our infrastructure, lowering costs, spurring a small-business boom, and creating good-paying jobs. 
 
The — President Biden remains focused on investing in America and opposing congressional Republican efforts to shower massive giveaways on the wealthy and big corporations, cut Medicare, cut Medicaid and Social Security, and block us from lowering costs for American families.
 
And before we continue with the briefing, I wanted to say one last thing to my dear friend, Emilie, the Deputy of — the Deputy Press Secretary, as she is going to head out to maternity leave today.  And, Emilie, we are so happy for you and Steven on your — on your road to parenthood.  And I think you are such an amazing human.  You’re going to be an amazing mom and just have so much joy.  I know everyone here feels that and everyone, certainly, on our team.  And I’m going to miss you terribly.
 
You’re going to — you’re going to be gone for, like, five months — five months too long.  But I’m going to miss you terribly, and I hope you, you know, spend that time — I know you’ll spend that time being very, very busy.  But, also, time with your — your little one. 
 
And so, excited for you.  I have something for you.
 
MS. SIMONS:  Aww.  Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  Give me one second.  Give that to you.  Well, actually, you open — you open that.
 
MS. SIMONS:  Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   I want you to open it.  I want you to show everybody.
 
MS. SIMONS:  Okay.  (Laughter.)
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   Show my gift to everyone.  (Laughter.)  It’s a little gift for Emilie. 
 
Q    Aww —

MS. SIMONS:  “Future President.”
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  “Future President.”  (Laughter.) 
 
Q    Very nice. 
 
MS. SIMONS:  So sweet of you. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Please — please come in the back — to the back if you don’t get a — if you get a second today to say goodbye to Emilie and wish her — wish her luck. 
 
All right.
 
MS. SIMONS:  Thank you, Karine. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   All right.  We love you, Emilie.
 
And with that, we have Admiral John Kirby here to give us an update on the Middle East.
 
Admiral, podium. 
 
Q    Follow that, sir.

MR. KIRBY:  Karine is bringing you up, and I’m bringing you down.  (Laughter.)  Just a couple of things, I promise, and then we’ll get right to it.
 
Today, the United States is announcing additional sanctions designed to protect our — not only our financial system but our national security.  First, the United States, today, sanctioned Iraqi airline Fly Baghdad and its CEO for supporting the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, otherwise known as the IRGC, and, as well, supporting Iran- — Iran-aligned militia groups in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.
 
Additionally, the United States is designating three leaders and supporters of Kata’ib Hizballah, one of the IRGC’s Iran-aligned ami- — militias in Iraq, and one business that facilitates and launders funds for Kata’ib Hizballah.
 
Kata’ib Hizballah, I think as you all know, has been responsible for a series of drone and missile attacks against U.S. personnel in Iraq and Syria. 
 
Now, second, we imposed a fifth round of sanctions on Hamas.  This is the fifth round since the October 7th attacks.
 
And alongside the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom are also placing sanctions on key Hamas officials and facilitators.
 
We’ll obviously continue to use all the tools at our disposal to target Hamas, its financiers, and its financial transfer mechanisms that funnel funds in support of their terrorist activities.
 
In a — in a related way, I can also let you know that the President just recently hung up the phone talking to Prime Minister Sunak of the United Kingdom.  Clearly, they talked about what’s going on in the — in the Red Sea and the need for a continued international multilateral approach to disrupting and degrading Houthi capabilities. 
 
They also had a chance to talk about, obviously, what’s going on in Gaza with a — stressing the need to continue to bring down the number of civilian casualties and to increase the flow of humanitarian assistance into Gaza. 
 
And, of course, they also talked about Ukraine and the urgent need that Ukraine is facing right now for additional supplemental funding and support for their ability to defend themselves in the — on the field of battle.
 
And then, lastly, I’d be remiss — speaking about the field of battle — if I did not also point you to the President’s statement today, acknowledging and mourning the death of two Navy SEALs who were killed while conducting an interdiction operation in the — in the Gulf of Aden — trying to interdict munitions and weapons that we believe were heading from Iran to — to the Houthis in Yemen.  It’s a — underscores how dangerous the mission can be and the dangers that these — these brave warriors are willing to face every day.
 
And I think, as we all go about our day, we ought to just take a moment to remember that a couple of families are — just got the worst news possible.  And it’s important that they know that the President and the First Lady will stay solidly behind them and their families, make sure that they get all the support they need.  And I know that the same sentiment has been expressed to them from the Defense Department and from the Navy Department. 
 
With that, I’ll take questions.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Trevor.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  John, I just wanted to go back to the President’s comments from last week about there being a number of types of two-state solutions and referencing the idea that a number of — of U.N. members don’t have their own military.  Is it — is it the President’s current view that a Palestinian state that’s demilitarized is the most viable outcome there?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I won’t get ahead of — of where the — where we are in the process of trying to achieve a two-state solution, Trevor. 
 
It’s the President’s view that a two-state solution is the best path forward for people of Gaza, for the Palestinian people, as well as the Israeli people. 
 
And as he said in those comments, there’s a lot that can go into creating what that construct looks like.  And, you know, when we say “two-state solution,” what does it actually mean?  And there’s many different interpretations.  There’s lots of different ways you can get at that ultimate solution.  And the President, as he has always done, kept an open mind about trying to pursue that. 
 
Now, he’s also under no illusions at how difficult it’s going to be to get there, particularly with this conflict going on in Gaza. 
 
So, we’re going to keep the discussions going with our Israeli counterparts.  We’re going to keep talking about it with Mahmoud Abbas.  We’re going to keep talking about it with our counterparts in the region in the hopes that more progress can be made. 
 
One significant milestone to help us get there is prot- — is try to pursue normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia, which we still believe is possible.  We were working on it very hard before the 7th of October; we’re still working on it hard.  And we’ve got, you know, positive feedback from — from the partners in the region, including Saudi Arabia, about pursuing that.  That could open up additional opportunities to try to get at a reasonable two-state construct. 
 
Q    Is the reporting accurate that the President has flo- — floated that idea in his last call with Bibi Netanyahu and that it’s something that he’s —
 
MR. KIRBY:  Floated what idea?
 
Q    — sympathetic to?
 
MR. KIRBY:  What idea? 
 
Q    A demilitarized Palestinian state.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I won’t get into the — the specifics of the discussions that the President is having with the Prime Minister.  I think he was very clear with all of you about how he views the ultimate path to a two-state solution and the need for some flexibility in how you describe what that looks like. 
 
But, again, it’s going to require leadership on all sides in the region as well.  And it’s going to require leadership there to also be willing to look at it the same way that the President is.
 
Q    Just one more thing.  By my count, there is at least two different Israeli operations today that are taking place in Gaza, in hospitals.  What is the current U.S. guidance to Israel about operations within hospitals where civilians are seeking care?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We don’t want to see hospitals as warzones.  We don’t want to see hospitals as battle- — battlefields.  They should be as protected as possible. 
 
That said, we know that Hamas deliberately uses places like hospitals to store weapons, house their fighters, even, to some degree, for command and control.  And so, that places a special need on the Israeli Defense Forces but also a special burden on how they approach any fighting in or around hospitals. 
 
They have a right to defend themselves.  They have a right to go after these leaders.  They have a right to take away the ability for Hamas to — to store and — and resource themselves, even if that is in hospitals. 
 
But, again, I would say the same thing that we’ve said before on this issue, that we — we expect them to do so in accordance with international law and to protect innocent people in hospitals — medical staff and patients as well — as much as possible. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Seung Min.
 
Q    And just a quick follow on that question.  Has the — have the Israelis briefed the U.S. on their plans to protect those civ- — civilians?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m not aware of specific military briefings about that. 
 
Q    And does the U- —
 
MR. KIRBY:  But we’ve been very clear about our expectations. 
 
Q    And does the U.S. agree with a prominent Israeli War Cabinet member who said recently that the remaining hostages can only be released through a ceasefire?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We believe — well, I mean, look, we’ve seen the way — the way we got those hundred hostages out was through a one — a week-long humanitarian pause, stopping the — a temporary stoppage in the — in the fighting, because, obviously, at the very root of it, you can’t — you can’t enact safe passage for hostages out of a danger zone if people are shooting at each other.  So, you need a — you need people to lay down their arms at least long enough to affect a hostage transfer. 
 
And that one week got a hundred people out, and the fact that there was no fighting helped enable that.  So, clearly, we still support pauses in the fighting to get hostages out. 
 
We don’t support a general ceasefire, which is usually put in place in the expectation that you’re going to end a conflict, that it’s going to lead to specific negotiations.  That’s — that’s no — no change to our policy there. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Weijia
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Thank you, Kirby.  So, on Friday, the President did make his view clear about a two-state solution, but he also suggested that Netanyahu was open to that view.  So, did Netanyahu express to the President that, or why did the President think that?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I — I — they had a — they had a very constructive conversation.  And I think I just need to leave it at that.  Pri- — the Prime Minister should speak to his comments, and I’m sure he has and he will.  All I can tell you is where the President’s head is: still believes in a two-state solution. 
 
And as you heard him say himself, he believes that there — that there’s a way to it.  He’s optimistic that we can get there and that it could — you know, obviously, any two-state solution is going to require some compromises. 
 
Q    On Friday, when we asked you about it, you said, obviously we see things differently than Netanyahu, based on his public remarks.  But the President interpreted those public remarks differently.  He said, no, Netanyahu didn’t say that he was opposed to a two-state solution.  So, based on what Netanyahu has said publicly, how do you interpret whether he’s open or not to a two-state solution?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I would point you back to what the President said: They had a good conversation, including about the importance of a two-state solution.  That doesn’t mean that we agree on every component of what that can look like.  That’s why leadership is important here.  That’s why the President is not going to let go of this, and it’s why we need leadership in the region on moving forward.
 
But, look, this is — if this was easy, I mean, my goodness, we — we’d have a — we’ve had a two-state solution for years now.  It’s not easy.  It’s hard.  It’s really hard.  And it requires a compromise.  It’s going to require negotiation.  It’s going to require sacrifices, again, on both sides. 
 
The President understands that.  He’s not Pollyannaish about that.  And that’s why he’s staying — he’s staying true to it.
 
Q    Thank you. 
 
Q    Two things, if I can also ask about this.  Over the weekend, we did see Netanyahu make rather explicit, again, his opposition to a two-state solution.  Do you or does the administration not take that opposition at face value when Netanyahu is saying he does think this is irreconcilable with a Palestinian state?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We can and have, and I’m sure we’ll have very frank discussions with Prime Minister Netanyahu and his Cabinet about the future of — of the Palestinian people and what Gaza looks like post-conflict.  And, as I said earlier, that doesn’t mean we’re going to agree with everything.
 
I’ll let the Prime Minister speak to his comments.
 
Q    I guess I’m just struggling to understand.  It seems like the President supports a policy or this White House does, and then the Israeli Prime Minister is coming out in direct opposition to that policy.  And I don’t understand (inaudible) —
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, is the suggestion that we should then change our minds —
 
Q    I don’t understand how the —
 
MR. KIRBY:  — and we should not —
 
Q    No, no, no —
 
MR. KIRBY:  — advocate for it anymore?
 
Q    — it’s just, how does the President think that he gets there?  That’s what I don’t understand.  Or is he thinking that he gets there without Netanyahu?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, only the — the Israeli people determine who their elected officials are going to be, not the United States.  That’s one. 
 
Two, the President still believes — and he’s, again, not Pollyannaish.  He knows this is going to be hard stuff.  And it has been — it has proven extraordinary elusive — ext- — to date.  But he believes that it’s in the best interest of our Israeli friends to have an independent Palestinian state. 
 
Now, how that looks, what that looks like, whether they have a military or not, that — those are discussions that — that need to be had in the region and with leaders on both sides.  But he still believes in the power and the promise of it, and he has for — for many, many years.
 
So, we’re going to keep at this.  We’re going to keep these discussions going. 
 
It’s also important to remember that Israel is in the middle of a hard-fought fight here with — with Hamas, and we’ve got to make sure that they can continue to defend themselves.
 
Q    Can I ask you one unrelated question as well?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Sure.
 
Q    On Friday, you were asked about a Palestinian American teenager —
 
MR. KIRBY:  Yeah.
 
Q    — who was killed in the West Bank.  I think you were trying to get some additional information. 
 
MR. KIRBY:  Yeah.
 
Q    Do you have additional information?  I’m just curious how you all are interpreting that situation and if the administration has been in touch at all with his family.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I — I don’t know about family communications.  I’ll come back to you on that one.  That’s a good question. 
 
But we have been able to get some more information about this.  Cert- — certainly a tragic killing by all accounts that — that we’ve been able to glean so far. 
 
Our deepest condolences go to the family.  I think he was 17 years old — just a teenager.  So, our thoughts and prayers are certainly with the family.  And we call on Israel to conduct a full, thorough, transparent investigation into his killing.  And, of course, we have every expectation that those — that those responsible for it will be held properly accountable. 
 
This kid is 17 years old.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead —
 
MR. KIRBY:  Talk about another family that is going through some enormous grief right now.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, sir.
 
Q    After last week’s meeting on Ukraine here at the White House, the Speaker of the House implied that President Biden did not particulate — articulate a clear strategy for Ukraine.  So, does the White House have one?  And what, quoting Speaker Johnson, is the “endgame” for Ukraine?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Look, I — I can’t — I can’t speak to what the — the Speaker has heard or read or understood from the countless discussions that we’ve had with members of Congress about Ukraine and what we’re trying to do here.  It’s — it’s been pretty transparent and pretty clear: We want Ukraine to win this war, as the President has said.  We want a whole, prosperous, sovereign Ukraine.  We want Ukraine’s borders — internationally established borders — to be fully recognized by everybody, and that includes Mr. Putin.  And we want to be able to continue to give Ukraine the support that it needs so that it can — so that it can achieve those outcomes.
 
And we’ve been nothing but clear about that.  I mean — and with every package that’s gone out to Ukraine, there has been a consultation with Congress.  There’s been a conversation.  We’ve been very clear about this. 
 
And we have talked to the Ukrainians throughout this last two years — it’s hard to believe we’re coming up on two years — meeting their needs along the way.  We want to continue to do that.
 
Q    What do you make of Speaker Johnson’s comments –repeated comments —
 
MR. KIRBY:  The —
 
Q    — that there’s no strategy?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The Speaker can own his comments, and he should — he should be the one answering questions. 
 
I can tell you, we have been nothing but clear and consistent with members of Congress since the beginning of the war about what we are doing to help Ukraine succeed on the battlefield and what we’re going to need to continue to do.
 
I mean, we can get caught up in all this — the comments out here on the microphones, but the next couple of months are going to be critical for Ukraine.  I mean, if you think that the fighting is just going to stop because the snow is falling, think again.  The Russians continue to fire drones and missiles at Ukraine.  And the — and while the battlefront hasn’t moved a lot on either side, there’s still a lot of active fighting going on there.
 
And Ukrainian commanders, I believe, can be forgiven right now for having to make some pretty difficult decisions about what weapons they’re going to expend, what shells they’re going to fire, what missiles they’re going to use, because they don’t know when the next shipment is going to come.  And that’s a horrible place — that’s a horrible place to put the Ukrainian military in as the Russians certainly aren’t suffering under that — that same uncertainty, as they reach out to North Korea for ballistic missiles — and, by the way, continue to fire them — and drones from Iran and — and producing on their own. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Sabrina.
 
Q    Thank you.  My colleagues at the Wall Street Journal reported on a proposal by Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia — Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Qatar for a post-war Gaza that would create a pathway toward a Palestinian state in exchange for a Saudi recognition of Israel.  Is the U.S. aware of this proposal?  Does the administration support it?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I am not going to — obviously, not going to try to negotiate here from the podium.  So, certainly seen that reporting.  All I can tell you is that we — as — even on the call with Prime Minister Sunak today, we continue to be in touch with our counterparts, our allies and partners, about trying to get those hostages out, trying to get the appropriate humanitarian pause in place so that we can do that and get additional aid in, as well as making sure that — that Israel has what it needs to defend itself. 
 
But I — I won’t — I won’t get into specific negotiations one way or another.
 
Q    And is there anything else that you can tell us about Brett McGurk’s visit to the region, both in terms of the focus of his discussions and how, you know, the first day of talks has gone?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, I don’t have any readout from his first day of talks.  He just got in the region.  I’m sure we’ll have more to say about it as he — as he moves through this trip.  As you know, he comes in and out of the region all the time.  And I suspect that in all his discussions he’ll be talking to a range of partners and counterparts on a range of issues to include, of course, the fighting in Gaza and our desire to — to get those hostages out. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Kelly O.  We have to wrap it up soon because we have to gather soon. 
 
Q    Does the U.S. have any concern that the positions of the Israeli government on two-state solution or the pace or intensity of the war have more to do with Benjamin Netanyahu’s domestic position in term- — as opposed to the long-term goals that the U.S. and allies would have that there is a focus on his own needs versus what might be — what the U.S. believes is the right course?
 
MR. KIRBY:  In all our discussions, Kelly, with the War Cabinet, we’re — we’re not having them from a perspective of their domestic politics.  And — and I recognize the validity of the question, but we’re not — we’re not focused on what their domestic political issues are.  That would be — that wouldn’t be a sound place for us to have discussions with them about the war in Gaza.  That’s really for them to speak to that — whatever pressures they might feel or might not feel from a domestic perspective. 
 
What we want to make sure is that they know they’re going to continue to get our support but that we also want to see reduction in civilian casualties, more humanitarian assistance going in, and, obviously, as I said earlier, get those hostages out. 
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Admiral, just a quick one on China.  Over the weekend, the Chinese ambassador to the Netherlands was commenting on ASML’s ban of further chip equipment to China.  And he said it stretched — “The U.S. has stretched its idea of security far too far, even the matters that have nothing to do with military risks” and that the U.S. is “putting pressure on their allies to do the same.”  I was wondering if you had any response to that.
 
MR. KIRBY:  No, we talked about this coming out of the — the G20.  I mean, there is — it’s not just about the United States.  Other countries share our concerns about certain export licenses of certain technology that can have a national security implication.  And we made it very clear: We’re trying to de-risk, not decouple. 
 
And our decisions in terms of — of these export licenses is really designed specifically to make sure that we can continue to protect U.S. national security.  That’s what we’re focused on. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead —
 
MR. KIRBY:  And these — and these companies obviously have to make their own decisions. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Jon.
 
Q    Thanks a lot, Karine.  John, it seems as if the administration and Prime Minister Netanyahu are on the same page as it relates to the hostages, and that is that you can’t talk about having a cessation of hostilities in Gaza without a release of the hostages.  Would you agree with that idea?
 
MR. KIRBY:  You — you — we believe that it’s important for — in order to be able to get hostages out safely, you’ve got to have a pause in the fighting. 
 
Q    And where do things stand as it relates to that?  We’re almost approaching February.  The hostages were initially taken October the 7th of last year.  Are there efforts underway? 
 
There’s various reporting, for instance, about efforts in Cairo, Egypt.  Can you confirm those efforts?
 
MR. KIRBY:  What I can confirm for you is that there are ongoing, serious, sober discussions with our partners and — and our counterparts to try to get another hostage deal in place.  I wish I could stand here, Jon, and tell you that, you know, I can announce it today or we’re going to do it tomorrow.  I can’t do that. 
 
But I can assure you that this is not something we’ve — we’ve forgotten about.  It’s not something we haven’t worked on every single day.  And as I said earlier, you know, Brett is in the region, and I have no doubt that this will be a key part of his agenda while he’s over there. 
 
Q    Thanks, Admiral.  There have been roughly 150 attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria.  Is the U.S. response working?  Is the U.S. doing enough to protect its troops?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We’ll continue to do what we have to do to protect our troops and our facilities.  We are certainly mindful of the — of the danger.  And — and in these attacks over the weekend, now, a small number, but a number nonetheless, of — of U.S. troops were being evaluated for traumatic brain injury.  That’s a — that’s a wound, and we take that seriously.
 
Q    And the Houthis, they aren’t stopping their attacks.  So, when the U.S. retaliates, how can that not be seen as escalatory?  And how does this all end?
 
MR. KIRBY:  If you’re trying to — look, if — if you’re — if you’re going to scrap with somebody, and you can find a way to tie one or both of their hands behind their back, that’s not deescalating — or that’s not escalating, that’s deescalating.  That’s taking ability away from the other party to — to inflict harm. 
 
And the strikes that we have conducted ashore in Yemen have degraded Houthi capabilities.  As I’ve said earlier, it doesn’t mean that they don’t still have offensive capability available to them.  Clearly, they do, because they continue to — to use it. 
 
And as the President said, as long as they continue to make that choice, we have a choice too.  We have a choice to keep defending our ships and our sailors and merchant traffic.  And we have a choice, when we have the information available to us, to preempt their ability to conduct those attacks.  And we’ll continue to do that. 
 
Q    And there was a pretty stark statement from a senior Israeli official to ABC News saying that Israel is closer than ever to a war with Hezbollah and possibly a full regional war.  Do you agree with that?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Everything the President has done since October 7th — everything — has really been designed to — to keep this conflict from escalating and — and widening.  And we’re going to — that’s — that’s going to be our focus. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Toluse.
 
Q    I wanted to get your response to a comment from the EU Foreign Policy Chief Josep Borrell.  He was meeting with other European Union foreign ministers in Brussels, and he said that the Israeli military operation is not working and that it is “seeding hate for generations” in Gaza.  I wanted to get your response on what the White House thinks of that.
 
MR. KIRBY:  The Israelis themselves have talked about the progress that they’ve made against Hamas leadership.  We believe that going after leadership is a useful approach when you’re — when you’re dealing with a terrorist network.  It worked for us with al Qaeda; it worked for us with ISIS. 
 
I’ll let them speak to their progress.  We’ve been very careful not to armchair quarterback this thing and throw in plays from the sideline.  But — but they have made some progress against the — the network.  They’ve made some progress against the network’s ability to resource itself and the infrastructure — particularly underground infrastructure — that they continue to use.  But as the Israelis have said themselves, that’s going to be a fight that’s going to take them some time. 
 
So — and as for the second part of that comment, I mean, look, every single — every single life lost — innocent life lost is a tragedy and should be mourned.  And we have been very clear with our Israeli counterparts about the need to be more precise, more deliberate, more cautious.  There have been too many civilians killed in this conflict.  And we — the right number — the right number is zero.  And we recognize that there could be long-term effects from that.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  M.J.  And then you have the last question.
 
Q    Thank you, John.  Prime Minister Netanyahu rejected Hamas’s conditions to end the war in exchange for releasing all of the hostages.  Does President Biden support that decision? 
 
MR. KIRBY:  The decision by?
 
Q    Prime Minister Netanyahu.
 
MR. KIRBY:  Again, I’d let the Prime Minister speak to his — his comments.  We want to see all of the hostages home.  And we want to see Israel not have to face a threat next door like the fa- — like the one that they faced on the 7th of October.
 
Q    I’m just asking if the President supports this decision to reject a proposal that would have freed all of the hostages, including, of course, the six remaining Americans? 
 
MR. KIRBY:  I can’t val- — I can’t validate that proposal itself.  I’m not in a position to confirm that proposal.  What I —
 
Q    Well, the Prime Minister has talked about it publicly.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I understand that.  I’m not in a position to confirm that. 
 
What I can tell you is that the President supports Israel being able to defend itself.  He supports getting all those hostages out.  He supports, in order to do that, an additional humanitarian pause of some length that will allow those hostages to go to freedom safely and more aid to get in. 
 
And, again, you need a pause in the fighting to be able to do that.  We don’t support, still today, some sort of general ceasefire.
 
Q    And just on the — going back to the phone call between the President and the Prime Minister on Friday.  We reported that the Prime Minister, in that phone call, had privately indicated that he was not ruling out the possibility of any Palestinian state in any form.  Obviously, you’re aware of what he has said in public over the last few days.  My colleagues have referenced those statements.  I guess I’m just wondering, as far as you’re aware, is there any daylight between what the Prime Minister says in private versus in public on this matter.
 
MR. KIRBY:  That’s a question for the Prime Minister and his office.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Last question.
 
Q    So, if the U.S. aid is delayed further for Ukraine, is there a danger — does the President worry that other European states might withdraw their support? 
 
MR. KIRBY:  I would say that the President is mindful that other nations are watching what we do.  Obviously, Mr. Putin is watching what we do.  And other nations not involved in this conflict are watching what we do — I’m sure.  I’m sure China is watching it too — President Xi. 
 
But our allies and our partners, yeah, they’re watching closely what we end up doing here, because American leadership has been critical in supporting Ukraine.  We have literally led the way, not only in the contributions but in the coordination of contributions of other nations to get stuff into Ukraine. 
 
And so, yeah, I think it’s entirely possible we — we should expect that some of our allies and partners might have to make different decisions if — if they see American leadership falter here or the United States pull back from supporting Ukraine.  And that would have potentially disastrous consequences for Ukraine.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you, Admiral.
 
MR. KIRBY:  Yeah —
 
Q    Has the President had any conversations with any of these European states?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, he just talked Prime Minister Sunak today, and one of the topics was Ukraine.  So, yes, absolutely.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thanks.  Thanks, Admiral.
 
Q    Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you so much, Admiral.
 
All right.  We don’t have too much time.  So, rapid fire, I guess. 
 
Go ahead, Seung Min.
 
Q    Okay.  First of all, does the White House see this week as sort of a make-or-break week when it comes to the border deal coming together and advancing in the Senate? 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, we think this week is — obviously, you heard from the President on Friday — right? — right before he — right before he addressed — or when he was addressing the mayors.  So, this is — I think the way to look at it is this is an urgent moment, an urgent time to get things done at the border, to make sure we move his national security supplemental forward. 
 
And it’s not — obviously not just the border security.  You just heard the Admiral talk about Ukraine.  You just heard the Admiral talk about Israel.  All of these requests in that supplemental is urgent, is important.  That’s why supplementals are for when you have an emergency request. 
 
So, the border is important.  We think that — we’ve had said before, and I think you also heard a little bit from the President on Friday, that we think it’s going in the right direction.  We are very grateful and than- — and very thankful to the senators — to the senators, both Republicans and Democrats, who have been doing this for several weeks, several months now trying to get to a bipartisan agreement on the border. 
 
And we want to see that happen.  It is time.  They have to act.  And we need to move quickly.
 
Q    And there is a robocall circulating in New Hampshire that uses what appears to be fake audio of President Biden’s voice.  And acknowledging that’s obviously a campaign issue and that the campaign itself has spoken to it, can you nonetheless talk about the concerns that the White House has about the President’s likeness being used in this false manner?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, as you just stated, because I always have to say that at the — at the top: It’s a robocall for an upcoming election, 2024, obviously.  So, I just want to be careful in that comment. 
 
But that call was indeed fake and not recorded by the President.  I can confirm that. 
 
And so, I just want to be really careful since it doesn’t — it is a primary election.  It is a campaign.  Don’t want to speak too much about that. 
 
And, look, more broadly, as we talk about deep fakes, the President has been clear that there are risks associated with deep fakes.  Fake images and misinformation can be exacerbated by emerging technologies.  And that’s why this President has directed the Department of Commerce through — through the AI Safety Institute at NIST to help develop clear watermarking and content — content standards.  So, that’s important. 
 
But, again, to the — your — your question on — on this robocall, that was not the President.  That was fake, and it was certainly not recor- — recorded by this President. 
 
Go ahead.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.  On Friday, President Biden said that he does not believe the border is secure, which is different from what Secretary Mayorkas has testified multiple times on the Hill.  Why do they have two different views of the security of the border?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, look, the President has been really clear, right?  He has been clear that we need to move on the border.  The border needs — he needs resources to deal with the situation at the border.  That’s why they’re having these conversation at the Senate — on the Senate level.  And that’s why he’s asking for mor- — more resources. 
 
And he wants to see additional resources but also changes to policy to address what we’ve been seeing at the border.  So, him asking for it, him saying that we need to deal with the bor- — border security — as Mayorkas, as we all here have been doing at the White House — I think shows that, yeah, we have — there’s an issue at the border, we need to deal with it, and we have to act now.  There’s an urgent need to act now. 
 
We want to find a bipartisan agreement to deal with that.  And so, we feel that meaningful change and additional resources are critical at this time. 
 
Q    But it’s Mayorkas who is tasked —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.
 
Q    — with, you know, making sure those resources are applied.  If he is saying something different than the President about whether it’s secure or not, I guess I just have a hard time understanding why there is a disconnect here. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah, I — look, the President has repeatedly said that the sys- — the immigration system is broken.  He has said that on day one — from day one when he put forward his first piece of legislation.  His first big policy was to deal on the border.  And it’s been three years.  We haven’t seen any action.  We’re glad to see that there’s conversation at the Senate. 
 
But he has said — he has said it is broken.  The immigration system is broken.  Border security, we need more resources.  He’s been very, very clear — very clear at — at — about that. 
 
And I think those are the actions that he’s taken over the last three years.  Those — when you look at this bipartisan agreement, obviously — those conversation, when it leads to the border security, has been about that.  How can we see significant, meaningful — meaningful policy changes and also funding — adding funding to that to deal with what’s happening at the border?
 
So, look, it’s broken.  The system is broken.  The President has said this.  That’s why we have — that’s why, on the first day — again, I’m just repeating myself here over and over again — he put forward a comprehensive immigration policy to Congress to deal with that broken system that we — that has been around for decades. 
 
Q    I just had a very quick follow-up on the — the robocall.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.
 
Q    You know, understanding that that may raise some — some federal issues as well, is there going to be any kind of federal response in terms of national security, election integrity, law enforcement policy, anything like that?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I don’t have anything else to share beyond, you know, confirming that it was indeed a fake.  It was not recorded by this President.  Want to be also really, really careful because it’s an ongoing — obviously, an election year that we’re in, 2024, so I don’t want to get too far into it. 
 
But I also just laid out why we have to be mindful.  Right?  There are going to be deep fakes.  That’s why the President has taken this very seriously over the last couple of years here in the administration. 
 
So, I don’t have anything to preview or to lay out on any response from the federal level.  But I can certainly confirm that that was not the President.  It is not the President’s voice.  He did not re- — record that message. 
 
Okay.  Go ahead.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  It’s been a while.  Hi.
 
Q    It has.  Hello.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Where you been?
 
Q    Just preparing for this moment.  (Laughter.)
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I think I’m going to disappoint you really badly if you’ve been preparing all this time for this moment.  It’s not going be that exciting, I’m pretty sure.  (Laughter.) 
 
Q    Well, let’s see. 
 
Karine, why do you think it is that more and more people polled feel like, over time, President Biden is getting less and less mentally sharp?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Which poll is this?
 
Q    ABC has President Biden’s rating for health since May down five points and for mental sharpness down four points.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  You know, I have to say that’s a little confusing for me, because if you look at what this President has done the last three years, historical pieces of legislation — right? — and when it comes to a bipartisan infrastructure deal, many presidents before, like your favorite president, had said that (inaudible) —
 
Q    Who’s my favorite president? 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  (Laughs.)  Why don’t you — why don’t we let the American people guess.  But had said —
 
Q    No, no, no, no, no, no, no.  
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, no, no, no, no.  Let me finish.  Let me finish.  Let me finish.  You asked me a question.  I’m going to —
 
Q    I don’t understand what you’re —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, no, no, no.  Let me —
 
Q    — what you’re getting at.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Let me finish.  Let me finish.  Let me finish, and you’ll — you’ll guess who I’m talking about.  Who used to say, “Infrastructure Week.”  Infrastructure Week, which was a punchline, became a joke.  And now we are seeing Infrastructure Decade because of this President. 
 
There’s the CHIPS and Science Act.  Right?  There is the Infla- — Inflation Reduction Act. 
 
These are legislation that is going to have a difference for generations to come.  Right?  And so, this is something that this President has done.  That’s pretty sharp for this President to have been able to do that. 
 
Let’s look at the economy.  The economy — now unemployment is under 4 percent.  Fourteen million jobs created.  The economy is in a better place than when it was when he walked in.  That’s just a fact.  That’s just the data. 
 
And we’re seeing consumer sentiment is going up.  And we saw just in December how — how people spent more, and we hadn’t seen that in some time. 
 
So, I think you needed a president like President Biden to get that type of stuff done.  Someone who’s had Senate experience, someone who was the VP — Vice President under –under President Bi- — Obama, obviously, and someone who has been a pretty effective president over the last three years. 
 
Q    Okay.  Following up on immigration.  Authorities in Fairfax County, Virginia, ignored an ICE detainer.  They released an illegal immigrant from Honduras who is charged with sexually assaulting a Virginia minor and production of sexual abuse material.  Doesn’t that go to show that as record numbers of people appear at the border, you guys have no idea what kind of people are coming into this country?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Let me just say, first of all, this is why the President is having negotiations with the Senate — senators, Republicans and Democrats — right? — for the past couple of weeks to deal with what’s going on with the border security — right? — as it re- — as it relates to border security. 
 
This is why the President, on day one, put forward a comprehensive immigration plan that — that, more than three years now, Congress didn’t do anything about. 
 
But he’s appreciative that we’re having these conversation in the Senate. 
 
We’ve de- — we’ve deployed additional troops and federal agents to the border who have, by the way, returned more than 482,000 individuals since May.  That’s the — that’s what we’ve been able to do. 
 
We’ve led the largest expansion of lawful pathways, and — that we haven’t seen in some time.  The President continues to have diplomatic conversation with Mexico, who have actually taken — taken actions to deal with the situation. 
 
There’s more work to do.  There’s more work to do.  We understand that.  We have said that.  You’ve heard that from the President on Friday.  We understand that there’s more work to do.  We need more resources.  We need more funding, which is why we’re having these negotiations in — on the Hill. 

But Republicans in the Senate is working with us; Republicans in the House are trying to get in the way.  So, it’s up to them.  Are they going to help?  Are they going to actually deal with an issue or continue to move forward on a political stunt?
 
Q    And as President Biden tries to make the national conversation more about reproductive rights, abortion, how many weeks into a pregnancy does he think abortion should still be legal? 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, you’ve asked me this question before.  I have been very clear.  The President has been very clear.  We want to see the protections in Roe — we want to see Roe become the law of the land.  That’s what the President wants to see.  That’s what the President believes in. 
 
And let me be very clear here: It’s not some sort of shift that the President is making.  Majority of Americans want to see their protections protected by their — by — by this — by — by the — by the folks who are here in Washington, D.C., in Congress, by this President and the Vice President.  That’s — the President is standing with majority of Americans.
 
We saw that in the 2023 midterm elections, and we saw that in 2022 — not midterm election, but the 2023 election and 2022 midterm elections. 
 
They’ve been very clear.  We need to stand for freedoms, for — make sure women have the right to make their own decision — personal decisions on their body, on their healthcare.  That’s where a majority of Americans are. 
 
Guess what?  Republican officials, they’re not there.  They’re not with majority of Americans.  So, the President is going to continue to stand with the majority of Americans on this.
 
Go ahead, Brian.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  The President on Friday said that he wants to see massive changes at the border.  What kind of policy changes is he discussing and open to?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I am not going to negotiate from here.  I’m going to be very careful, very mindful.  We want to see meaningful change — meaningful change — so that we can actually deal with a broken system.  The immigration system is obviously broken, and we want to make sure that we have resources to deal with what we’re seeing at the border.
 
And so, that’s what they’re talking about in the Senate with both Republicans and Democrats.  I’m not going to negotiate from here.  I’m going to let them have those conversations.  I think that’s important that they have the space to do that. 
 
But the President wants to deliver meaningful change.  And he is also very grateful to — to those legislators continuing to have those conversations.  We think it’s headed in the right direction, but not going to get into specifics as to what those policy changes would look like.
 
Go ahead, right behind you.  Go ahead.
 
Q    Thank you.  Biden admitted Friday that the border isn’t secure.  Does he have any plans to visit the southern border before the election?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  The President was in — visited the border recently.
 
Q    In January of 2023?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, yeah, that was — that was a year ago.  He’s been there.
 
Q    In December of 2023, there were 300,000 migrant encounters, which is the highest month ever on record.  How bad does the border crisis have to be for Biden to take a trip back?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, just to reiterate what I just said seconds ago, the President has been to the border.  He has visited the border.  He saw for himself.  He spoke to law enforcement.  He saw exactly what goes on at the border.  The President understands what’s going on at the border, which is why he included in his national security supplemental — right? — which is, again, a request that is — when you feel like there’s an emergency, you make that supplemental request, which is what the President did.
 
It included border security.  It included, obviously, Ukraine and Israel.  And it is incredibly important, which is why he continues to push for it.  And you’re seeing those conversations happening in the Senate in a bipartisan way — a bipartisan agreement, and the President is very thankful to that.
 
And so, I’m going to leave that there.  He’s taking this very seriously. 
 
Remember, day one — day one, he put forward an immigration — a comprehensive immigration legislation.
 
Go ahead, Earle.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.  You made clear that the — that call in New Hampshire was a fake with the President’s voice, and that was discouraging people from coming out to vote.  Does that mean that he would encourage people to go out and vote in New Hampshire, even though he’s not on the ballot (inaudible)?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I am not going to speak to an ongoing — an ongoing election.  I can’t — I can’t from here.  I’m a federal employee.  I cannot speak to this.
 
Q    Even if he doesn’t (inaudible) or he doesn’t want to (inaudible) —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I cannot — I can’t — you — I would refer you to the campaign.  I cannot speak to that from here.
 
Q    And then a quick follow-up from, I think, Friday.  I know that the President, through his Chief of Staff, apologized to Asa Hutchinson, who is a defeated candidate.  It — does that — I know that he wanted — he didn’t agree with those words in the DNC statement, but does he fear that the DNC has taken its eye off the ball as far as trying to win over disaffected Republicans with that?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m going to be very careful, because you are speaking — you’re — you are asking me, essentially, about an upcoming election, an election year that we’re in.  So, I’m not going to speak to the DNC.  I would refer you to the DNC themselves.
 
But I — I reiterated that the statement that came out from the DNC, that I can speak on behalf of the President, that what he — what was said and what was in that statement did not reflect this President. 
 
I just don’t have anything else to share beyond that.
 
Go ahead, Toluse.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Governor Whitmer was on “Face the Nation” on Sunday, and she talked about the abortion issue.  And she said that it would be good for the President to talk more about it.  And she also said that he should use more “blunt language.”  What’s your reaction to that?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, in a — in a few minutes, you’re going to hear directly from this President.  He’s going to be meeting with his task force.  It is the fourth time he’ll be meeting with this task force.  The President has made it very clear that women across the country should be making these personal — deeply personal decisions about their own bodies, and not politicians. 
 
He’ll continue to stand for that.  He’ll continue to stand with overwhelming — overwhelmingly majority of Americans.  And — and, you know, he believes and agrees that — that reproductive freedom is a fundamental right.  It is a fundamental right. 
 
Within — I believe, if my timing is right, within the hour after the decision was made by the Supreme Court to overturn Roe, you heard from the President.  He — he spoke passionately about it.  He spoke forcefully about what had just happened, freedoms being taken away. 
 
And at the top, I talked about how 21 states now have — have bans on abortion or some sort of restriction — restrictive ban on abortion or restrictive — restricting rights on that.  And that affects 27 million women — 27 million women.
 
So, you’re going to hear from the President in very — like I said, in a few short minutes, you’ll hear from him, and he’ll speak directly to this.  And he’s been very, very clear, he’s going to stand with the majority of Americans on this.
 
Q    On another issue, the President is going to South Carolina on Saturday.  He’s going to spend the night.  Do you have any more information about what he’s going to be doing —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We’ll have —
 
Q    — especially on Sunday?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I believe the campaign will have more to share on his trip to South Carolina.  I don’t have anything at this time.
 
All right.  Okay.  All right.  Go ahead.
 
Q    Karine, you said to Peter that the President wants to see Roe restored.  It’s still not clear to me, though, if he supports the late-term abortion restrictions that were included in Roe.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — well, if it’s in Roe, then that’s what he wants to see.  I’m just not going to get into it.  It’s — whatever is in Roe, what Roe was when it was a constitutional law, that’s what the President wants to see restored.  He’s been very clear about that.
 
Q    He also said he wants to be a president for all Americans.  But how, in this situation, with this issue, does he best represent the pro-life Americans who want to see more unborn babies saved?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What I will say is a majority of Americans — a majority of Americans wants to see their rights protected, wants to see women have their rights protected, wants to be able to — wants — want women to be able to make those deeply, deeply personal decisions on their bodies on their own, and not politicians.  That’s what the majority of Americans want to see.
 
And so, the President is going to stand with the majority of Americans on this issue.
 
Q    And do those unborn babies have any rights, then?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not going to get into that specific — I’m not going to get into that question.  I’ve been very, very clear about this — where a majority of Americans stand, and that’s what matters. 
 
But the President wants to see Roe become the law of the land, and that’s what he’s going to continue to ask Congress to do.
 
Thanks, everybody.  We’ll see you tomorrow.
 
2:08 P.M. EST
 

The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, Gender Policy Council Director Jennifer Klein, and NSC Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby appeared first on The White House.

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room 

1:04 P.M. EST 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Trevor — (laughter) — what did you do?

Q    (Inaudible.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What’s going on?  You causing problems?

Q    We’re ready.  We’re ready.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Are you sure?

Q    Yes.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  You know, I can — I’m happy to just stand here and wait.

Q    You guys are early.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We’re — we’re —
 
Q    On time.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   — we’re not — we’re on time.  1:02.  I don’t even know if it’s 1:02.  I think that time is a little either fast or slow.

Okay.  Good afternoon, everybody.  Where is the rest of the class? 
 
Q    Good afternoon.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh, my gosh.  Okay, well, good afternoon.  Happy Monday.  Today marks what would have been the 51st anniversary of Roe v. Wade, a ruling from the Supreme Court that recognized a woman’s constitutional right to make deeply personal healthcare decisions free from the interference of politicians.  But then the Supreme Court ruled to take that constitutional right away.

The aftermath has been devastating.  Women’s health and lives now hang in the balance.

Today, 21 states have abortion bans in effect, 27 million women of reproductive age live in states with bans.  That’s more than one in three women.  Over 380 state bills restricting access to abortion care were introduced just last year.  And on Capitol Hill, congressional Republicans have proposed three national abortion bans.

The stories of women being denied care are gut-wrenching.  In Texas, a woman was forced to go to court to ask permission to receive the care her doctor recommended before she ultimately fled Texas to receive the care she desperately needed. 

And she’s not alone.  We’ve seen one harrowing story after another of women who are experiencing a miscarriage and are turned away from emergency rooms, then, later — later, nearly dying — nearly dying because of that.

This should never happen in America.  Never.  But here’s the reality: The overturning of Roe v. Wade has led to the chaos and confusion we’re seeing play out — out across the country.  And it’s exactly why President Biden will continue to fight back and urge Congress to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade back into federal law.

The health and lives of women are on the line here.  So, in about an hour, you will hear directly from the President on this, who will convene a meeting with the Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare, while Vice President Harris today kicks off her reproductive freedoms tour in Wisconsin.

And with that, as you can see to my right, I am grateful to welcome Jen Klein, the Director of the White House Gender Policy Council, back in the briefing room.  And she will talk about our actions that we’re taking today.
Jen.

MS. KLEIN:  Thank you, Karine.  As Karine said and as has — as President Biden has made clear since the day of the Court’s decision to overturn Roe, Congress must pass a federal law restoring the protections of Roe.  And, in the meantime, the Biden-Harris administration will continue to fight to protect access to reproductive healthcare.

Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade, the administration has taken action to help ensure that women receive the care they need in an emergency, to protect access to safe and effective medication abortion, to defend the right to travel for medical care, to expand access to contraception — affordable contraception, to strengthen privacy protections for patients and doctors, to support access to reproductive healthcare for service members and veterans, and to partner with state leaders, who really are on the front lines of protecting reproductive freedom.

To coordinate this work across the federal government, the President established a Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare Access, which I chair alongside HHS Secretary Becerra.  And today, as you heard, as we mark what should have been the 51st anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, President Biden will convene the fourth meeting of that task force with agency leaders.

The task force will hear directly from two physicians who are on the frontlines of the fallout from the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, and who will — who will share their on-the-ground experiences of how state abortion bans have wreaked havoc on their patients and interfered with their ability to practice medicine.
The President will then receive updates from his task force on the efforts to protect access to reproductive healthcare and the continued threats to emergency care and FDA-approved medication abortion.

Task force members will also report on new policy actions the administration is taking to strengthen access to reproductive care.

While the President is convening his Cabinet, the Vice President is in Wisconsin, a state where Republican elected officials want to enforce an extreme abortion ban from 1849 — that’s before women had the right to vote — that includes no exceptions, including in cases of rape or incest.

As you heard from Karine, she’ll kick off her Fight for Reproductive Freedoms tour, and she’ll be hearing and listening to women and healthcare providers about the devastating impact of state abortion bans.

And with that, I am happy to take some questions.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right, go ahead, M.J.

Q    I’m just wondering how much more new action the White House believes they can take between now and November on this front.  Or do you mostly expect that the actions and announcements that are to come will be, you know, expansions on actions we’ve already seen since the Supreme Court took action?

MS. KLEIN:  Yeah, I mean, as the President has been quite clear since Roe was overturned, the ultimate solution is to pass federal national legislation to restore the protections in Roe.  And we will continue to work to hope that Congress will pass that legislation so the President can sign it. 
 
He has also been clear, literally since day one, of — when the decision came down in Dobbs that we will do everything we can.  So, that’s why he’s issued three executive orders and one presidential memorandum.  The executive orders are on strengthening access to abortion and contraception, on protecting patient privacy, on protecting patient safety and security, on protecting access to emergency care, and defending the right to travel. 
 
And we will take actions in all of those areas.  We have already, and we will continue to. 
 
So, to your question, is there anything left to do?  I think the answer is yes.  And today, when the President convenes his task force, you will see actions in a few more areas.  They do build on the executive orders that he has already released. 
 
So, just to outline what — a little bit more about those — what those policy actions today will be — you know, first, on contraception, there will be new guidance to support expanded coverage of a broader range of contraceptives at no cost under the ACA.  The Secretary of Health and Human Services will also issue a letter to private insurers, state Medicaid programs, and Medicare to reinforce their obligations to cover affordable contraception.
 
On emergency care, the — there — they will be — HHS will be announcing a comprehensive plan to educate patients about their rights under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, known as EMTALA, and the process for filing a complaint; and also disseminate training materials for healthcare providers, convene those providers to ensure that they know how to comply with EMTALA, and also establish an expert team at HHS to help hospitals and healthcare providers comply with those legal obligations under EMTALA. 
 
And last piece is we will take additional steps to implement the presidential memorandum on medication abortion to protect the safety and security of patients, providers, and pharmacies who need, prescribe, or dispense medication abortion. 
 
Q    And could you just talk to us a little bit about how the White House is viewing ballot initiatives heading into November — the importance of them, what the landscape is?
 
MS. KLEIN:  Yeah, I think the ba- — the series of ballot initiatives — most recently in Ohio, but also in Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Montana, Vermont, California — really show how salient this issue is and how every time Americans are given the opportunity to make their voices heard, they make their voices heard very loudly and clearly in favor of reproductive freedom.  And there are more ballot initiatives coming, and we will do everything we can to support state leaders, as I said, on the ground, who are on — really on the front lines. 
 
Q    Thank you. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Selina.
 
Q    Thank you.  Can you talk a little bit about the significance of this rally in Virginia tomorrow and just how much more time you think the President is going to spend on the issue of abortion between now and November?
 
MS. KLEIN:  I can’t speak to the rally tomorrow directly because that’s a campaign event.  So, it’s a political event. 
 
What I can say is that the President has been prioritizing and delivering on reproductive freedom for his entire administration, starting with creating the Gender Policy Council and asking me, actually before Dobbs, to help lead the administration’s whole-of-government approach to Texas S.B. 8, and then, of course, once Dobbs came down, to mobilize the entire administration’s efforts, and he will continue to do that. 
 
And, of course, the Vice President, who has been a leader on this issue, will continue to be that leader.  She’s, as you just heard, in Wisconsin right now.  She will, of course, be part of the — of the rally tomorrow with all four of the principals participating.  And she will be around the country — she’s met with legislative leaders, state and local officials around the country.  And they will both continue to draw the sharp contrast between what this administration stands for and what Republican elected officials stand for for the months to come.
 
Q    Just bouncing off of M.J., though, do you feel that the White House is reaching the limits of what it can do when it comes to abortion rights without congressional action?
 
MS. KLEIN:  Again, I think, you know, the President was — was quite clear.  He literally said it, you know, within an hour of the Dobbs decision coming down: that the only way to restore the rights that were lost — the fundamental constitutional right that was lost that was protected for nearly 50 years under Roe vs. Wade is to have federal legislation.
 
And that’s why he is — his entire administration is laser-focused on that.  And he has made it entirely clear that when Congress sends him that legislation, he will sign it immediately. 
 
I don’t think that means that there is nothing we can do.  I think there’s quite a lot we can do.  And I think that’s evidenced by what we’ve done so far to — you know, all the categories that I mentioned, but really to protect access to reproductive healthcare in this country. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Kelly.
 
Q    Can the federal government help to define some of the circumstances that women have found themselves in when medical questions about is it the life of the mother at risk — where state law may not spell it out very clearly or clearly enough, is there a role for the federal government there? 
 
And since some of these instances do result in ordinary citizens having to get involved in litigation, is there something that the administration can do to support them in pursuing those remedies?
 
MS. KLEIN:  Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, to — to state the obvious: We are seeing a lot of chaos — legal chaos and medical chaos — because of the overturning of Roe vs. Wade and the state abortion bans that have been passed across the country. 

You know, it just bears mentioning that there are 21 states with abortion bans right now.  That means that 27 million women, one — of reproductive age — one in three are living in states with those bans. 
 
There are federal tools.  So, the one that, you know, we are talking about today that we are going to build off of — EMTALA, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act — you know, the administration has long said — long held the view that that law requires that when somebody walks into an emergency room requiring emergency care to stabilize their medical condition, that treatment, even if it includes abortion, is required under federal law.
 
So, I think, you know, that’s one of the things that we’re trying to make sure that, as I said, patients know what their rights are, know how they can file a complaint — but even before you get to that, that providers know what is required of them under that federal law.  And — and that’s what we will be doing more of.
 
Q    So, you think you can add clarity where there is confusion at this point?
 
MS. KLEIN:  Yeah, I mean, again, you know, to return to where we started, ultimately, the only way to — to ensure that, you know, women in every state across the country have the right that they lost when Roe was overturned is to pass a piece of federal legislation restoring Roe.  But I do think this is a step — an important step in that direction.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.
 
Q    To your point about federal legislation, is the President willing to compromise with lawmakers who think there should be some restrictions on reproductive rights in order to get a bill through?  Or is his approach more all or nothing at this point?
 
MS. KLEIN:  I — I think what the President has said — and he will continue to say that he believes that Roe was rightly decided and that we need a bill that restores the protections that were in Roe. 
 
And, you know, by the way, the majority — the vast majority of American people agree that Roe was ri- — rightly decided, and that’s exactly what we need to do.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Danny.
 
Q    Thanks.  You mentioned the 21 states that have a ban at the moment.  Do you have any number or any estimate of how many women have been forced to travel out of state s- — since the — you know, since the decision?
 
MS. KLEIN:  I don’t have numbers on that.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Courtney, in the back.
 
MS. KLEIN:  I — I will say one thing, which is that the Department of Justice filed a statement of interest in two cases in Alabama, where the right to travel is at issue, where the Alabama Attorney General has threatened to prosecute women and those who help those women cross state lines.  But that’s not a — that’s not a number for sure.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Courtney.
 
Q    Thank you.  You’ve been talking about abortions and medical emergencies.  On the Fifth Circuit’s decision on that, it’s unusual to see a court agree to review agency guidance, let alone rule on whether it can be implemented.  How does that court’s decision affect your strategy going forward as you try and navigate this post-Roe landscape?
 
MS. KLEIN:  Yeah, as you probably know, in addition to, you know, making clear our longstanding position that that law and the guidance that followed it reflects the position that EMTALA does cover emergencies — when somebody walks into an emergency room needing medical care and that’s — abortion is the care that is required, that that is covered by EMTALA — of course, that — we are also — the Department of Justice is also litigating that, defending that in court, and that stands before the Supreme Court at the moment in a different case.
 
Q    And on traveling, are you doing anything to support providers in states that are seeing an increase in patients from neighboring states with more restrictive laws — for example, Illinois?
 
MS. KLEIN:  I think the best answer to that question is that we’ve been really working with those state leaders in states like Illinois, New York, where they’re seeing an influx of patients.  But, really, that’s more about, you know, connecting states to each other, which has been one of the things we’ve done in our state convenings, so that they can learn from each other and help each other.  There’s less of a federal role there.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  Last question.
 
Q    Can I ask one more thing, Karine?  Thank you. 
 
Does today’s announcement that the administration is going to publish training materials for providers in medical emergencies — does that mean you’re going to pr- — advise that same information to hospitals in Texas and Idaho, which I know are the st- — states involved in those cases that the Justice Department is in?
 
MS. KLEIN:  That information will be available to any hospital and healthcare provider who needs to access it.
 
Q    Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Last question in the back.  Go ahead, Evan.
 
Q    I just wanted to ask about medication abortion and the Supreme Court weighing restrictions on the mailing of mifepristone.  Do you see — or rather, does the Biden administration see this as sort of the next big frontier of this abortion fight?  And then, you know, what are the stakes of that case, and is there any recourse that the White House would have?
 
MS. KLEIN:  I do think that that’s a really important frontier.  You know, they’ve already made it clear that, in some sense, they don’t think they need to pass a national abortion ban because there is a national abortion ban if they were to be able to limit the mailing, the dispensing of mifepristone. 
 
So, you know, I can’t speak to the litigation.  But, of course, you know, again, there’s a case in the Supreme Court, Alliance Defending Freedom vs. FDA, where exactly what’s at stake is the — is whether limits can be put on the FDA who has made a judgment to — to — initially, a judgment to approve and then further judgments to regulate using their scientific, evidence-based judgment that this is a safe medication that should be available.  It’s, by the way, 53 or so percent of abortions in this country. 

So, we will continue to — to defend that and make clear that, you know, that is a safe and — and legal drug. 
 
You know, one of the reasons I think that case has attracted a lot of attention is because it is obviously squarely about medication abortion, but, you know, you have pharmaceutical companies and executives, you have medical associations, you even have conservative legal scholars re- –weighing in on the danger of that case, because it could have implications for any drug that the FDA, you know, long ago approved and has regulated several times since.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Thank you so much, Jen. 
 
MS. KLEIN:  Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I know you have to go to the Oval Office.
 
Q    Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   Thank you.  Thank you so much.
 
Okay.  Thanks, Jen. 
 
Couple things before we continue.  So, just a scheduling update.  So, on Thursday, January 25th, the President will travel to Superior, Wisconsin, to discuss how his Bidenomics and Investing in America agenda are rebuilding our infrastructure, lowering costs, spurring a small-business boom, and creating good-paying jobs. 
 
The — President Biden remains focused on investing in America and opposing congressional Republican efforts to shower massive giveaways on the wealthy and big corporations, cut Medicare, cut Medicaid and Social Security, and block us from lowering costs for American families.
 
And before we continue with the briefing, I wanted to say one last thing to my dear friend, Emilie, the Deputy of — the Deputy Press Secretary, as she is going to head out to maternity leave today.  And, Emilie, we are so happy for you and Steven on your — on your road to parenthood.  And I think you are such an amazing human.  You’re going to be an amazing mom and just have so much joy.  I know everyone here feels that and everyone, certainly, on our team.  And I’m going to miss you terribly.
 
You’re going to — you’re going to be gone for, like, five months — five months too long.  But I’m going to miss you terribly, and I hope you, you know, spend that time — I know you’ll spend that time being very, very busy.  But, also, time with your — your little one. 
 
And so, excited for you.  I have something for you.
 
MS. SIMONS:  Aww.  Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  Give me one second.  Give that to you.  Well, actually, you open — you open that.
 
MS. SIMONS:  Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   I want you to open it.  I want you to show everybody.
 
MS. SIMONS:  Okay.  (Laughter.)
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   Show my gift to everyone.  (Laughter.)  It’s a little gift for Emilie. 
 
Q    Aww —

MS. SIMONS:  “Future President.”
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  “Future President.”  (Laughter.) 
 
Q    Very nice. 
 
MS. SIMONS:  So sweet of you. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Please — please come in the back — to the back if you don’t get a — if you get a second today to say goodbye to Emilie and wish her — wish her luck. 
 
All right.
 
MS. SIMONS:  Thank you, Karine. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   All right.  We love you, Emilie.
 
And with that, we have Admiral John Kirby here to give us an update on the Middle East.
 
Admiral, podium. 
 
Q    Follow that, sir.

MR. KIRBY:  Karine is bringing you up, and I’m bringing you down.  (Laughter.)  Just a couple of things, I promise, and then we’ll get right to it.
 
Today, the United States is announcing additional sanctions designed to protect our — not only our financial system but our national security.  First, the United States, today, sanctioned Iraqi airline Fly Baghdad and its CEO for supporting the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, otherwise known as the IRGC, and, as well, supporting Iran- — Iran-aligned militia groups in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.
 
Additionally, the United States is designating three leaders and supporters of Kata’ib Hizballah, one of the IRGC’s Iran-aligned ami- — militias in Iraq, and one business that facilitates and launders funds for Kata’ib Hizballah.
 
Kata’ib Hizballah, I think as you all know, has been responsible for a series of drone and missile attacks against U.S. personnel in Iraq and Syria. 
 
Now, second, we imposed a fifth round of sanctions on Hamas.  This is the fifth round since the October 7th attacks.
 
And alongside the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom are also placing sanctions on key Hamas officials and facilitators.
 
We’ll obviously continue to use all the tools at our disposal to target Hamas, its financiers, and its financial transfer mechanisms that funnel funds in support of their terrorist activities.
 
In a — in a related way, I can also let you know that the President just recently hung up the phone talking to Prime Minister Sunak of the United Kingdom.  Clearly, they talked about what’s going on in the — in the Red Sea and the need for a continued international multilateral approach to disrupting and degrading Houthi capabilities. 
 
They also had a chance to talk about, obviously, what’s going on in Gaza with a — stressing the need to continue to bring down the number of civilian casualties and to increase the flow of humanitarian assistance into Gaza. 
 
And, of course, they also talked about Ukraine and the urgent need that Ukraine is facing right now for additional supplemental funding and support for their ability to defend themselves in the — on the field of battle.
 
And then, lastly, I’d be remiss — speaking about the field of battle — if I did not also point you to the President’s statement today, acknowledging and mourning the death of two Navy SEALs who were killed while conducting an interdiction operation in the — in the Gulf of Aden — trying to interdict munitions and weapons that we believe were heading from Iran to — to the Houthis in Yemen.  It’s a — underscores how dangerous the mission can be and the dangers that these — these brave warriors are willing to face every day.
 
And I think, as we all go about our day, we ought to just take a moment to remember that a couple of families are — just got the worst news possible.  And it’s important that they know that the President and the First Lady will stay solidly behind them and their families, make sure that they get all the support they need.  And I know that the same sentiment has been expressed to them from the Defense Department and from the Navy Department. 
 
With that, I’ll take questions.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Trevor.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  John, I just wanted to go back to the President’s comments from last week about there being a number of types of two-state solutions and referencing the idea that a number of — of U.N. members don’t have their own military.  Is it — is it the President’s current view that a Palestinian state that’s demilitarized is the most viable outcome there?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I won’t get ahead of — of where the — where we are in the process of trying to achieve a two-state solution, Trevor. 
 
It’s the President’s view that a two-state solution is the best path forward for people of Gaza, for the Palestinian people, as well as the Israeli people. 
 
And as he said in those comments, there’s a lot that can go into creating what that construct looks like.  And, you know, when we say “two-state solution,” what does it actually mean?  And there’s many different interpretations.  There’s lots of different ways you can get at that ultimate solution.  And the President, as he has always done, kept an open mind about trying to pursue that. 
 
Now, he’s also under no illusions at how difficult it’s going to be to get there, particularly with this conflict going on in Gaza. 
 
So, we’re going to keep the discussions going with our Israeli counterparts.  We’re going to keep talking about it with Mahmoud Abbas.  We’re going to keep talking about it with our counterparts in the region in the hopes that more progress can be made. 
 
One significant milestone to help us get there is prot- — is try to pursue normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia, which we still believe is possible.  We were working on it very hard before the 7th of October; we’re still working on it hard.  And we’ve got, you know, positive feedback from — from the partners in the region, including Saudi Arabia, about pursuing that.  That could open up additional opportunities to try to get at a reasonable two-state construct. 
 
Q    Is the reporting accurate that the President has flo- — floated that idea in his last call with Bibi Netanyahu and that it’s something that he’s —
 
MR. KIRBY:  Floated what idea?
 
Q    — sympathetic to?
 
MR. KIRBY:  What idea? 
 
Q    A demilitarized Palestinian state.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I won’t get into the — the specifics of the discussions that the President is having with the Prime Minister.  I think he was very clear with all of you about how he views the ultimate path to a two-state solution and the need for some flexibility in how you describe what that looks like. 
 
But, again, it’s going to require leadership on all sides in the region as well.  And it’s going to require leadership there to also be willing to look at it the same way that the President is.
 
Q    Just one more thing.  By my count, there is at least two different Israeli operations today that are taking place in Gaza, in hospitals.  What is the current U.S. guidance to Israel about operations within hospitals where civilians are seeking care?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We don’t want to see hospitals as warzones.  We don’t want to see hospitals as battle- — battlefields.  They should be as protected as possible. 
 
That said, we know that Hamas deliberately uses places like hospitals to store weapons, house their fighters, even, to some degree, for command and control.  And so, that places a special need on the Israeli Defense Forces but also a special burden on how they approach any fighting in or around hospitals. 
 
They have a right to defend themselves.  They have a right to go after these leaders.  They have a right to take away the ability for Hamas to — to store and — and resource themselves, even if that is in hospitals. 
 
But, again, I would say the same thing that we’ve said before on this issue, that we — we expect them to do so in accordance with international law and to protect innocent people in hospitals — medical staff and patients as well — as much as possible. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Seung Min.
 
Q    And just a quick follow on that question.  Has the — have the Israelis briefed the U.S. on their plans to protect those civ- — civilians?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m not aware of specific military briefings about that. 
 
Q    And does the U- —
 
MR. KIRBY:  But we’ve been very clear about our expectations. 
 
Q    And does the U.S. agree with a prominent Israeli War Cabinet member who said recently that the remaining hostages can only be released through a ceasefire?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We believe — well, I mean, look, we’ve seen the way — the way we got those hundred hostages out was through a one — a week-long humanitarian pause, stopping the — a temporary stoppage in the — in the fighting, because, obviously, at the very root of it, you can’t — you can’t enact safe passage for hostages out of a danger zone if people are shooting at each other.  So, you need a — you need people to lay down their arms at least long enough to affect a hostage transfer. 
 
And that one week got a hundred people out, and the fact that there was no fighting helped enable that.  So, clearly, we still support pauses in the fighting to get hostages out. 
 
We don’t support a general ceasefire, which is usually put in place in the expectation that you’re going to end a conflict, that it’s going to lead to specific negotiations.  That’s — that’s no — no change to our policy there. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Weijia
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Thank you, Kirby.  So, on Friday, the President did make his view clear about a two-state solution, but he also suggested that Netanyahu was open to that view.  So, did Netanyahu express to the President that, or why did the President think that?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I — I — they had a — they had a very constructive conversation.  And I think I just need to leave it at that.  Pri- — the Prime Minister should speak to his comments, and I’m sure he has and he will.  All I can tell you is where the President’s head is: still believes in a two-state solution. 
 
And as you heard him say himself, he believes that there — that there’s a way to it.  He’s optimistic that we can get there and that it could — you know, obviously, any two-state solution is going to require some compromises. 
 
Q    On Friday, when we asked you about it, you said, obviously we see things differently than Netanyahu, based on his public remarks.  But the President interpreted those public remarks differently.  He said, no, Netanyahu didn’t say that he was opposed to a two-state solution.  So, based on what Netanyahu has said publicly, how do you interpret whether he’s open or not to a two-state solution?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I would point you back to what the President said: They had a good conversation, including about the importance of a two-state solution.  That doesn’t mean that we agree on every component of what that can look like.  That’s why leadership is important here.  That’s why the President is not going to let go of this, and it’s why we need leadership in the region on moving forward.
 
But, look, this is — if this was easy, I mean, my goodness, we — we’d have a — we’ve had a two-state solution for years now.  It’s not easy.  It’s hard.  It’s really hard.  And it requires a compromise.  It’s going to require negotiation.  It’s going to require sacrifices, again, on both sides. 
 
The President understands that.  He’s not Pollyannaish about that.  And that’s why he’s staying — he’s staying true to it.
 
Q    Thank you. 
 
Q    Two things, if I can also ask about this.  Over the weekend, we did see Netanyahu make rather explicit, again, his opposition to a two-state solution.  Do you or does the administration not take that opposition at face value when Netanyahu is saying he does think this is irreconcilable with a Palestinian state?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We can and have, and I’m sure we’ll have very frank discussions with Prime Minister Netanyahu and his Cabinet about the future of — of the Palestinian people and what Gaza looks like post-conflict.  And, as I said earlier, that doesn’t mean we’re going to agree with everything.
 
I’ll let the Prime Minister speak to his comments.
 
Q    I guess I’m just struggling to understand.  It seems like the President supports a policy or this White House does, and then the Israeli Prime Minister is coming out in direct opposition to that policy.  And I don’t understand (inaudible) —
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, is the suggestion that we should then change our minds —
 
Q    I don’t understand how the —
 
MR. KIRBY:  — and we should not —
 
Q    No, no, no —
 
MR. KIRBY:  — advocate for it anymore?
 
Q    — it’s just, how does the President think that he gets there?  That’s what I don’t understand.  Or is he thinking that he gets there without Netanyahu?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, only the — the Israeli people determine who their elected officials are going to be, not the United States.  That’s one. 
 
Two, the President still believes — and he’s, again, not Pollyannaish.  He knows this is going to be hard stuff.  And it has been — it has proven extraordinary elusive — ext- — to date.  But he believes that it’s in the best interest of our Israeli friends to have an independent Palestinian state. 
 
Now, how that looks, what that looks like, whether they have a military or not, that — those are discussions that — that need to be had in the region and with leaders on both sides.  But he still believes in the power and the promise of it, and he has for — for many, many years.
 
So, we’re going to keep at this.  We’re going to keep these discussions going. 
 
It’s also important to remember that Israel is in the middle of a hard-fought fight here with — with Hamas, and we’ve got to make sure that they can continue to defend themselves.
 
Q    Can I ask you one unrelated question as well?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Sure.
 
Q    On Friday, you were asked about a Palestinian American teenager —
 
MR. KIRBY:  Yeah.
 
Q    — who was killed in the West Bank.  I think you were trying to get some additional information. 
 
MR. KIRBY:  Yeah.
 
Q    Do you have additional information?  I’m just curious how you all are interpreting that situation and if the administration has been in touch at all with his family.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I — I don’t know about family communications.  I’ll come back to you on that one.  That’s a good question. 
 
But we have been able to get some more information about this.  Cert- — certainly a tragic killing by all accounts that — that we’ve been able to glean so far. 
 
Our deepest condolences go to the family.  I think he was 17 years old — just a teenager.  So, our thoughts and prayers are certainly with the family.  And we call on Israel to conduct a full, thorough, transparent investigation into his killing.  And, of course, we have every expectation that those — that those responsible for it will be held properly accountable. 
 
This kid is 17 years old.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead —
 
MR. KIRBY:  Talk about another family that is going through some enormous grief right now.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, sir.
 
Q    After last week’s meeting on Ukraine here at the White House, the Speaker of the House implied that President Biden did not particulate — articulate a clear strategy for Ukraine.  So, does the White House have one?  And what, quoting Speaker Johnson, is the “endgame” for Ukraine?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Look, I — I can’t — I can’t speak to what the — the Speaker has heard or read or understood from the countless discussions that we’ve had with members of Congress about Ukraine and what we’re trying to do here.  It’s — it’s been pretty transparent and pretty clear: We want Ukraine to win this war, as the President has said.  We want a whole, prosperous, sovereign Ukraine.  We want Ukraine’s borders — internationally established borders — to be fully recognized by everybody, and that includes Mr. Putin.  And we want to be able to continue to give Ukraine the support that it needs so that it can — so that it can achieve those outcomes.
 
And we’ve been nothing but clear about that.  I mean — and with every package that’s gone out to Ukraine, there has been a consultation with Congress.  There’s been a conversation.  We’ve been very clear about this. 
 
And we have talked to the Ukrainians throughout this last two years — it’s hard to believe we’re coming up on two years — meeting their needs along the way.  We want to continue to do that.
 
Q    What do you make of Speaker Johnson’s comments –repeated comments —
 
MR. KIRBY:  The —
 
Q    — that there’s no strategy?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The Speaker can own his comments, and he should — he should be the one answering questions. 
 
I can tell you, we have been nothing but clear and consistent with members of Congress since the beginning of the war about what we are doing to help Ukraine succeed on the battlefield and what we’re going to need to continue to do.
 
I mean, we can get caught up in all this — the comments out here on the microphones, but the next couple of months are going to be critical for Ukraine.  I mean, if you think that the fighting is just going to stop because the snow is falling, think again.  The Russians continue to fire drones and missiles at Ukraine.  And the — and while the battlefront hasn’t moved a lot on either side, there’s still a lot of active fighting going on there.
 
And Ukrainian commanders, I believe, can be forgiven right now for having to make some pretty difficult decisions about what weapons they’re going to expend, what shells they’re going to fire, what missiles they’re going to use, because they don’t know when the next shipment is going to come.  And that’s a horrible place — that’s a horrible place to put the Ukrainian military in as the Russians certainly aren’t suffering under that — that same uncertainty, as they reach out to North Korea for ballistic missiles — and, by the way, continue to fire them — and drones from Iran and — and producing on their own. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Sabrina.
 
Q    Thank you.  My colleagues at the Wall Street Journal reported on a proposal by Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia — Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Qatar for a post-war Gaza that would create a pathway toward a Palestinian state in exchange for a Saudi recognition of Israel.  Is the U.S. aware of this proposal?  Does the administration support it?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I am not going to — obviously, not going to try to negotiate here from the podium.  So, certainly seen that reporting.  All I can tell you is that we — as — even on the call with Prime Minister Sunak today, we continue to be in touch with our counterparts, our allies and partners, about trying to get those hostages out, trying to get the appropriate humanitarian pause in place so that we can do that and get additional aid in, as well as making sure that — that Israel has what it needs to defend itself. 
 
But I — I won’t — I won’t get into specific negotiations one way or another.
 
Q    And is there anything else that you can tell us about Brett McGurk’s visit to the region, both in terms of the focus of his discussions and how, you know, the first day of talks has gone?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, I don’t have any readout from his first day of talks.  He just got in the region.  I’m sure we’ll have more to say about it as he — as he moves through this trip.  As you know, he comes in and out of the region all the time.  And I suspect that in all his discussions he’ll be talking to a range of partners and counterparts on a range of issues to include, of course, the fighting in Gaza and our desire to — to get those hostages out. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Kelly O.  We have to wrap it up soon because we have to gather soon. 
 
Q    Does the U.S. have any concern that the positions of the Israeli government on two-state solution or the pace or intensity of the war have more to do with Benjamin Netanyahu’s domestic position in term- — as opposed to the long-term goals that the U.S. and allies would have that there is a focus on his own needs versus what might be — what the U.S. believes is the right course?
 
MR. KIRBY:  In all our discussions, Kelly, with the War Cabinet, we’re — we’re not having them from a perspective of their domestic politics.  And — and I recognize the validity of the question, but we’re not — we’re not focused on what their domestic political issues are.  That would be — that wouldn’t be a sound place for us to have discussions with them about the war in Gaza.  That’s really for them to speak to that — whatever pressures they might feel or might not feel from a domestic perspective. 
 
What we want to make sure is that they know they’re going to continue to get our support but that we also want to see reduction in civilian casualties, more humanitarian assistance going in, and, obviously, as I said earlier, get those hostages out. 
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Admiral, just a quick one on China.  Over the weekend, the Chinese ambassador to the Netherlands was commenting on ASML’s ban of further chip equipment to China.  And he said it stretched — “The U.S. has stretched its idea of security far too far, even the matters that have nothing to do with military risks” and that the U.S. is “putting pressure on their allies to do the same.”  I was wondering if you had any response to that.
 
MR. KIRBY:  No, we talked about this coming out of the — the G20.  I mean, there is — it’s not just about the United States.  Other countries share our concerns about certain export licenses of certain technology that can have a national security implication.  And we made it very clear: We’re trying to de-risk, not decouple. 
 
And our decisions in terms of — of these export licenses is really designed specifically to make sure that we can continue to protect U.S. national security.  That’s what we’re focused on. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead —
 
MR. KIRBY:  And these — and these companies obviously have to make their own decisions. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Jon.
 
Q    Thanks a lot, Karine.  John, it seems as if the administration and Prime Minister Netanyahu are on the same page as it relates to the hostages, and that is that you can’t talk about having a cessation of hostilities in Gaza without a release of the hostages.  Would you agree with that idea?
 
MR. KIRBY:  You — you — we believe that it’s important for — in order to be able to get hostages out safely, you’ve got to have a pause in the fighting. 
 
Q    And where do things stand as it relates to that?  We’re almost approaching February.  The hostages were initially taken October the 7th of last year.  Are there efforts underway? 
 
There’s various reporting, for instance, about efforts in Cairo, Egypt.  Can you confirm those efforts?
 
MR. KIRBY:  What I can confirm for you is that there are ongoing, serious, sober discussions with our partners and — and our counterparts to try to get another hostage deal in place.  I wish I could stand here, Jon, and tell you that, you know, I can announce it today or we’re going to do it tomorrow.  I can’t do that. 
 
But I can assure you that this is not something we’ve — we’ve forgotten about.  It’s not something we haven’t worked on every single day.  And as I said earlier, you know, Brett is in the region, and I have no doubt that this will be a key part of his agenda while he’s over there. 
 
Q    Thanks, Admiral.  There have been roughly 150 attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq and Syria.  Is the U.S. response working?  Is the U.S. doing enough to protect its troops?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We’ll continue to do what we have to do to protect our troops and our facilities.  We are certainly mindful of the — of the danger.  And — and in these attacks over the weekend, now, a small number, but a number nonetheless, of — of U.S. troops were being evaluated for traumatic brain injury.  That’s a — that’s a wound, and we take that seriously.
 
Q    And the Houthis, they aren’t stopping their attacks.  So, when the U.S. retaliates, how can that not be seen as escalatory?  And how does this all end?
 
MR. KIRBY:  If you’re trying to — look, if — if you’re — if you’re going to scrap with somebody, and you can find a way to tie one or both of their hands behind their back, that’s not deescalating — or that’s not escalating, that’s deescalating.  That’s taking ability away from the other party to — to inflict harm. 
 
And the strikes that we have conducted ashore in Yemen have degraded Houthi capabilities.  As I’ve said earlier, it doesn’t mean that they don’t still have offensive capability available to them.  Clearly, they do, because they continue to — to use it. 
 
And as the President said, as long as they continue to make that choice, we have a choice too.  We have a choice to keep defending our ships and our sailors and merchant traffic.  And we have a choice, when we have the information available to us, to preempt their ability to conduct those attacks.  And we’ll continue to do that. 
 
Q    And there was a pretty stark statement from a senior Israeli official to ABC News saying that Israel is closer than ever to a war with Hezbollah and possibly a full regional war.  Do you agree with that?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Everything the President has done since October 7th — everything — has really been designed to — to keep this conflict from escalating and — and widening.  And we’re going to — that’s — that’s going to be our focus. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Toluse.
 
Q    I wanted to get your response to a comment from the EU Foreign Policy Chief Josep Borrell.  He was meeting with other European Union foreign ministers in Brussels, and he said that the Israeli military operation is not working and that it is “seeding hate for generations” in Gaza.  I wanted to get your response on what the White House thinks of that.
 
MR. KIRBY:  The Israelis themselves have talked about the progress that they’ve made against Hamas leadership.  We believe that going after leadership is a useful approach when you’re — when you’re dealing with a terrorist network.  It worked for us with al Qaeda; it worked for us with ISIS. 
 
I’ll let them speak to their progress.  We’ve been very careful not to armchair quarterback this thing and throw in plays from the sideline.  But — but they have made some progress against the — the network.  They’ve made some progress against the network’s ability to resource itself and the infrastructure — particularly underground infrastructure — that they continue to use.  But as the Israelis have said themselves, that’s going to be a fight that’s going to take them some time. 
 
So — and as for the second part of that comment, I mean, look, every single — every single life lost — innocent life lost is a tragedy and should be mourned.  And we have been very clear with our Israeli counterparts about the need to be more precise, more deliberate, more cautious.  There have been too many civilians killed in this conflict.  And we — the right number — the right number is zero.  And we recognize that there could be long-term effects from that.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  M.J.  And then you have the last question.
 
Q    Thank you, John.  Prime Minister Netanyahu rejected Hamas’s conditions to end the war in exchange for releasing all of the hostages.  Does President Biden support that decision? 
 
MR. KIRBY:  The decision by?
 
Q    Prime Minister Netanyahu.
 
MR. KIRBY:  Again, I’d let the Prime Minister speak to his — his comments.  We want to see all of the hostages home.  And we want to see Israel not have to face a threat next door like the fa- — like the one that they faced on the 7th of October.
 
Q    I’m just asking if the President supports this decision to reject a proposal that would have freed all of the hostages, including, of course, the six remaining Americans? 
 
MR. KIRBY:  I can’t val- — I can’t validate that proposal itself.  I’m not in a position to confirm that proposal.  What I —
 
Q    Well, the Prime Minister has talked about it publicly.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I understand that.  I’m not in a position to confirm that. 
 
What I can tell you is that the President supports Israel being able to defend itself.  He supports getting all those hostages out.  He supports, in order to do that, an additional humanitarian pause of some length that will allow those hostages to go to freedom safely and more aid to get in. 
 
And, again, you need a pause in the fighting to be able to do that.  We don’t support, still today, some sort of general ceasefire.
 
Q    And just on the — going back to the phone call between the President and the Prime Minister on Friday.  We reported that the Prime Minister, in that phone call, had privately indicated that he was not ruling out the possibility of any Palestinian state in any form.  Obviously, you’re aware of what he has said in public over the last few days.  My colleagues have referenced those statements.  I guess I’m just wondering, as far as you’re aware, is there any daylight between what the Prime Minister says in private versus in public on this matter.
 
MR. KIRBY:  That’s a question for the Prime Minister and his office.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Last question.
 
Q    So, if the U.S. aid is delayed further for Ukraine, is there a danger — does the President worry that other European states might withdraw their support? 
 
MR. KIRBY:  I would say that the President is mindful that other nations are watching what we do.  Obviously, Mr. Putin is watching what we do.  And other nations not involved in this conflict are watching what we do — I’m sure.  I’m sure China is watching it too — President Xi. 
 
But our allies and our partners, yeah, they’re watching closely what we end up doing here, because American leadership has been critical in supporting Ukraine.  We have literally led the way, not only in the contributions but in the coordination of contributions of other nations to get stuff into Ukraine. 
 
And so, yeah, I think it’s entirely possible we — we should expect that some of our allies and partners might have to make different decisions if — if they see American leadership falter here or the United States pull back from supporting Ukraine.  And that would have potentially disastrous consequences for Ukraine.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you, Admiral.
 
MR. KIRBY:  Yeah —
 
Q    Has the President had any conversations with any of these European states?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, he just talked Prime Minister Sunak today, and one of the topics was Ukraine.  So, yes, absolutely.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thanks.  Thanks, Admiral.
 
Q    Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you so much, Admiral.
 
All right.  We don’t have too much time.  So, rapid fire, I guess. 
 
Go ahead, Seung Min.
 
Q    Okay.  First of all, does the White House see this week as sort of a make-or-break week when it comes to the border deal coming together and advancing in the Senate? 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, we think this week is — obviously, you heard from the President on Friday — right? — right before he — right before he addressed — or when he was addressing the mayors.  So, this is — I think the way to look at it is this is an urgent moment, an urgent time to get things done at the border, to make sure we move his national security supplemental forward. 
 
And it’s not — obviously not just the border security.  You just heard the Admiral talk about Ukraine.  You just heard the Admiral talk about Israel.  All of these requests in that supplemental is urgent, is important.  That’s why supplementals are for when you have an emergency request. 
 
So, the border is important.  We think that — we’ve had said before, and I think you also heard a little bit from the President on Friday, that we think it’s going in the right direction.  We are very grateful and than- — and very thankful to the senators — to the senators, both Republicans and Democrats, who have been doing this for several weeks, several months now trying to get to a bipartisan agreement on the border. 
 
And we want to see that happen.  It is time.  They have to act.  And we need to move quickly.
 
Q    And there is a robocall circulating in New Hampshire that uses what appears to be fake audio of President Biden’s voice.  And acknowledging that’s obviously a campaign issue and that the campaign itself has spoken to it, can you nonetheless talk about the concerns that the White House has about the President’s likeness being used in this false manner?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, as you just stated, because I always have to say that at the — at the top: It’s a robocall for an upcoming election, 2024, obviously.  So, I just want to be careful in that comment. 
 
But that call was indeed fake and not recorded by the President.  I can confirm that. 
 
And so, I just want to be really careful since it doesn’t — it is a primary election.  It is a campaign.  Don’t want to speak too much about that. 
 
And, look, more broadly, as we talk about deep fakes, the President has been clear that there are risks associated with deep fakes.  Fake images and misinformation can be exacerbated by emerging technologies.  And that’s why this President has directed the Department of Commerce through — through the AI Safety Institute at NIST to help develop clear watermarking and content — content standards.  So, that’s important. 
 
But, again, to the — your — your question on — on this robocall, that was not the President.  That was fake, and it was certainly not recor- — recorded by this President. 
 
Go ahead.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.  On Friday, President Biden said that he does not believe the border is secure, which is different from what Secretary Mayorkas has testified multiple times on the Hill.  Why do they have two different views of the security of the border?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, look, the President has been really clear, right?  He has been clear that we need to move on the border.  The border needs — he needs resources to deal with the situation at the border.  That’s why they’re having these conversation at the Senate — on the Senate level.  And that’s why he’s asking for mor- — more resources. 
 
And he wants to see additional resources but also changes to policy to address what we’ve been seeing at the border.  So, him asking for it, him saying that we need to deal with the bor- — border security — as Mayorkas, as we all here have been doing at the White House — I think shows that, yeah, we have — there’s an issue at the border, we need to deal with it, and we have to act now.  There’s an urgent need to act now. 
 
We want to find a bipartisan agreement to deal with that.  And so, we feel that meaningful change and additional resources are critical at this time. 
 
Q    But it’s Mayorkas who is tasked —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.
 
Q    — with, you know, making sure those resources are applied.  If he is saying something different than the President about whether it’s secure or not, I guess I just have a hard time understanding why there is a disconnect here. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah, I — look, the President has repeatedly said that the sys- — the immigration system is broken.  He has said that on day one — from day one when he put forward his first piece of legislation.  His first big policy was to deal on the border.  And it’s been three years.  We haven’t seen any action.  We’re glad to see that there’s conversation at the Senate. 
 
But he has said — he has said it is broken.  The immigration system is broken.  Border security, we need more resources.  He’s been very, very clear — very clear at — at — about that. 
 
And I think those are the actions that he’s taken over the last three years.  Those — when you look at this bipartisan agreement, obviously — those conversation, when it leads to the border security, has been about that.  How can we see significant, meaningful — meaningful policy changes and also funding — adding funding to that to deal with what’s happening at the border?
 
So, look, it’s broken.  The system is broken.  The President has said this.  That’s why we have — that’s why, on the first day — again, I’m just repeating myself here over and over again — he put forward a comprehensive immigration policy to Congress to deal with that broken system that we — that has been around for decades. 
 
Q    I just had a very quick follow-up on the — the robocall.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.
 
Q    You know, understanding that that may raise some — some federal issues as well, is there going to be any kind of federal response in terms of national security, election integrity, law enforcement policy, anything like that?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I don’t have anything else to share beyond, you know, confirming that it was indeed a fake.  It was not recorded by this President.  Want to be also really, really careful because it’s an ongoing — obviously, an election year that we’re in, 2024, so I don’t want to get too far into it. 
 
But I also just laid out why we have to be mindful.  Right?  There are going to be deep fakes.  That’s why the President has taken this very seriously over the last couple of years here in the administration. 
 
So, I don’t have anything to preview or to lay out on any response from the federal level.  But I can certainly confirm that that was not the President.  It is not the President’s voice.  He did not re- — record that message. 
 
Okay.  Go ahead.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  It’s been a while.  Hi.
 
Q    It has.  Hello.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Where you been?
 
Q    Just preparing for this moment.  (Laughter.)
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I think I’m going to disappoint you really badly if you’ve been preparing all this time for this moment.  It’s not going be that exciting, I’m pretty sure.  (Laughter.) 
 
Q    Well, let’s see. 
 
Karine, why do you think it is that more and more people polled feel like, over time, President Biden is getting less and less mentally sharp?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Which poll is this?
 
Q    ABC has President Biden’s rating for health since May down five points and for mental sharpness down four points.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  You know, I have to say that’s a little confusing for me, because if you look at what this President has done the last three years, historical pieces of legislation — right? — and when it comes to a bipartisan infrastructure deal, many presidents before, like your favorite president, had said that (inaudible) —
 
Q    Who’s my favorite president? 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  (Laughs.)  Why don’t you — why don’t we let the American people guess.  But had said —
 
Q    No, no, no, no, no, no, no.  
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, no, no, no, no.  Let me finish.  Let me finish.  Let me finish.  You asked me a question.  I’m going to —
 
Q    I don’t understand what you’re —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, no, no, no.  Let me —
 
Q    — what you’re getting at.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Let me finish.  Let me finish.  Let me finish, and you’ll — you’ll guess who I’m talking about.  Who used to say, “Infrastructure Week.”  Infrastructure Week, which was a punchline, became a joke.  And now we are seeing Infrastructure Decade because of this President. 
 
There’s the CHIPS and Science Act.  Right?  There is the Infla- — Inflation Reduction Act. 
 
These are legislation that is going to have a difference for generations to come.  Right?  And so, this is something that this President has done.  That’s pretty sharp for this President to have been able to do that. 
 
Let’s look at the economy.  The economy — now unemployment is under 4 percent.  Fourteen million jobs created.  The economy is in a better place than when it was when he walked in.  That’s just a fact.  That’s just the data. 
 
And we’re seeing consumer sentiment is going up.  And we saw just in December how — how people spent more, and we hadn’t seen that in some time. 
 
So, I think you needed a president like President Biden to get that type of stuff done.  Someone who’s had Senate experience, someone who was the VP — Vice President under –under President Bi- — Obama, obviously, and someone who has been a pretty effective president over the last three years. 
 
Q    Okay.  Following up on immigration.  Authorities in Fairfax County, Virginia, ignored an ICE detainer.  They released an illegal immigrant from Honduras who is charged with sexually assaulting a Virginia minor and production of sexual abuse material.  Doesn’t that go to show that as record numbers of people appear at the border, you guys have no idea what kind of people are coming into this country?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Let me just say, first of all, this is why the President is having negotiations with the Senate — senators, Republicans and Democrats — right? — for the past couple of weeks to deal with what’s going on with the border security — right? — as it re- — as it relates to border security. 
 
This is why the President, on day one, put forward a comprehensive immigration plan that — that, more than three years now, Congress didn’t do anything about. 
 
But he’s appreciative that we’re having these conversation in the Senate. 
 
We’ve de- — we’ve deployed additional troops and federal agents to the border who have, by the way, returned more than 482,000 individuals since May.  That’s the — that’s what we’ve been able to do. 
 
We’ve led the largest expansion of lawful pathways, and — that we haven’t seen in some time.  The President continues to have diplomatic conversation with Mexico, who have actually taken — taken actions to deal with the situation. 
 
There’s more work to do.  There’s more work to do.  We understand that.  We have said that.  You’ve heard that from the President on Friday.  We understand that there’s more work to do.  We need more resources.  We need more funding, which is why we’re having these negotiations in — on the Hill. 

But Republicans in the Senate is working with us; Republicans in the House are trying to get in the way.  So, it’s up to them.  Are they going to help?  Are they going to actually deal with an issue or continue to move forward on a political stunt?
 
Q    And as President Biden tries to make the national conversation more about reproductive rights, abortion, how many weeks into a pregnancy does he think abortion should still be legal? 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, you’ve asked me this question before.  I have been very clear.  The President has been very clear.  We want to see the protections in Roe — we want to see Roe become the law of the land.  That’s what the President wants to see.  That’s what the President believes in. 
 
And let me be very clear here: It’s not some sort of shift that the President is making.  Majority of Americans want to see their protections protected by their — by — by this — by — by the — by the folks who are here in Washington, D.C., in Congress, by this President and the Vice President.  That’s — the President is standing with majority of Americans.
 
We saw that in the 2023 midterm elections, and we saw that in 2022 — not midterm election, but the 2023 election and 2022 midterm elections. 
 
They’ve been very clear.  We need to stand for freedoms, for — make sure women have the right to make their own decision — personal decisions on their body, on their healthcare.  That’s where a majority of Americans are. 
 
Guess what?  Republican officials, they’re not there.  They’re not with majority of Americans.  So, the President is going to continue to stand with the majority of Americans on this.
 
Go ahead, Brian.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  The President on Friday said that he wants to see massive changes at the border.  What kind of policy changes is he discussing and open to?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I am not going to negotiate from here.  I’m going to be very careful, very mindful.  We want to see meaningful change — meaningful change — so that we can actually deal with a broken system.  The immigration system is obviously broken, and we want to make sure that we have resources to deal with what we’re seeing at the border.
 
And so, that’s what they’re talking about in the Senate with both Republicans and Democrats.  I’m not going to negotiate from here.  I’m going to let them have those conversations.  I think that’s important that they have the space to do that. 
 
But the President wants to deliver meaningful change.  And he is also very grateful to — to those legislators continuing to have those conversations.  We think it’s headed in the right direction, but not going to get into specifics as to what those policy changes would look like.
 
Go ahead, right behind you.  Go ahead.
 
Q    Thank you.  Biden admitted Friday that the border isn’t secure.  Does he have any plans to visit the southern border before the election?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  The President was in — visited the border recently.
 
Q    In January of 2023?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, yeah, that was — that was a year ago.  He’s been there.
 
Q    In December of 2023, there were 300,000 migrant encounters, which is the highest month ever on record.  How bad does the border crisis have to be for Biden to take a trip back?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, just to reiterate what I just said seconds ago, the President has been to the border.  He has visited the border.  He saw for himself.  He spoke to law enforcement.  He saw exactly what goes on at the border.  The President understands what’s going on at the border, which is why he included in his national security supplemental — right? — which is, again, a request that is — when you feel like there’s an emergency, you make that supplemental request, which is what the President did.
 
It included border security.  It included, obviously, Ukraine and Israel.  And it is incredibly important, which is why he continues to push for it.  And you’re seeing those conversations happening in the Senate in a bipartisan way — a bipartisan agreement, and the President is very thankful to that.
 
And so, I’m going to leave that there.  He’s taking this very seriously. 
 
Remember, day one — day one, he put forward an immigration — a comprehensive immigration legislation.
 
Go ahead, Earle.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.  You made clear that the — that call in New Hampshire was a fake with the President’s voice, and that was discouraging people from coming out to vote.  Does that mean that he would encourage people to go out and vote in New Hampshire, even though he’s not on the ballot (inaudible)?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I am not going to speak to an ongoing — an ongoing election.  I can’t — I can’t from here.  I’m a federal employee.  I cannot speak to this.
 
Q    Even if he doesn’t (inaudible) or he doesn’t want to (inaudible) —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I cannot — I can’t — you — I would refer you to the campaign.  I cannot speak to that from here.
 
Q    And then a quick follow-up from, I think, Friday.  I know that the President, through his Chief of Staff, apologized to Asa Hutchinson, who is a defeated candidate.  It — does that — I know that he wanted — he didn’t agree with those words in the DNC statement, but does he fear that the DNC has taken its eye off the ball as far as trying to win over disaffected Republicans with that?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m going to be very careful, because you are speaking — you’re — you are asking me, essentially, about an upcoming election, an election year that we’re in.  So, I’m not going to speak to the DNC.  I would refer you to the DNC themselves.
 
But I — I reiterated that the statement that came out from the DNC, that I can speak on behalf of the President, that what he — what was said and what was in that statement did not reflect this President. 
 
I just don’t have anything else to share beyond that.
 
Go ahead, Toluse.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Governor Whitmer was on “Face the Nation” on Sunday, and she talked about the abortion issue.  And she said that it would be good for the President to talk more about it.  And she also said that he should use more “blunt language.”  What’s your reaction to that?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, in a — in a few minutes, you’re going to hear directly from this President.  He’s going to be meeting with his task force.  It is the fourth time he’ll be meeting with this task force.  The President has made it very clear that women across the country should be making these personal — deeply personal decisions about their own bodies, and not politicians. 
 
He’ll continue to stand for that.  He’ll continue to stand with overwhelming — overwhelmingly majority of Americans.  And — and, you know, he believes and agrees that — that reproductive freedom is a fundamental right.  It is a fundamental right. 
 
Within — I believe, if my timing is right, within the hour after the decision was made by the Supreme Court to overturn Roe, you heard from the President.  He — he spoke passionately about it.  He spoke forcefully about what had just happened, freedoms being taken away. 
 
And at the top, I talked about how 21 states now have — have bans on abortion or some sort of restriction — restrictive ban on abortion or restrictive — restricting rights on that.  And that affects 27 million women — 27 million women.
 
So, you’re going to hear from the President in very — like I said, in a few short minutes, you’ll hear from him, and he’ll speak directly to this.  And he’s been very, very clear, he’s going to stand with the majority of Americans on this.
 
Q    On another issue, the President is going to South Carolina on Saturday.  He’s going to spend the night.  Do you have any more information about what he’s going to be doing —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We’ll have —
 
Q    — especially on Sunday?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I believe the campaign will have more to share on his trip to South Carolina.  I don’t have anything at this time.
 
All right.  Okay.  All right.  Go ahead.
 
Q    Karine, you said to Peter that the President wants to see Roe restored.  It’s still not clear to me, though, if he supports the late-term abortion restrictions that were included in Roe.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — well, if it’s in Roe, then that’s what he wants to see.  I’m just not going to get into it.  It’s — whatever is in Roe, what Roe was when it was a constitutional law, that’s what the President wants to see restored.  He’s been very clear about that.
 
Q    He also said he wants to be a president for all Americans.  But how, in this situation, with this issue, does he best represent the pro-life Americans who want to see more unborn babies saved?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What I will say is a majority of Americans — a majority of Americans wants to see their rights protected, wants to see women have their rights protected, wants to be able to — wants — want women to be able to make those deeply, deeply personal decisions on their bodies on their own, and not politicians.  That’s what the majority of Americans want to see.
 
And so, the President is going to stand with the majority of Americans on this issue.
 
Q    And do those unborn babies have any rights, then?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not going to get into that specific — I’m not going to get into that question.  I’ve been very, very clear about this — where a majority of Americans stand, and that’s what matters. 
 
But the President wants to see Roe become the law of the land, and that’s what he’s going to continue to ask Congress to do.
 
Thanks, everybody.  We’ll see you tomorrow.
 
2:08 P.M. EST
 

The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, Gender Policy Council Director Jennifer Klein, and NSC Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby appeared first on The White House.

IUPAT District Council 7
Big Bend, Wisconsin

12:51 P.M. CST

AUDIENCE:  MVP!  MVP!  MVP!

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  (Laughter.)  Thank you, all.  (Applause.)

Oh, it’s good to be back in Wisconsin.  Good afternoon, everyone.  Good afternoon. 

Can we please give it up for Dr. Domeyer-Klenske for just all she has done — (applause) — and her incredible courage?  I had the joy of spending some time with her backstage.  You really are fantastic.

And, of course, it is good to be with my dear friend Tammy Baldwin.  She was here earlier today, but she had to go back to Washington for some important votes.  So —

AUDIENCE:  MVP!  MVP!  MVP!

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  And on the subject of Tammy Baldwin, I — I want to just mention Tammy because she had to go back to Washington for some important votes.  She was here earlier.  But I will say, Wisconsin, that you have in her an extraordinary leader.  I had the privilege of spending time with her when I was in the Senate.  Tammy is always fighting for the people of Wisconsin.  And so, can we please applaud her for what she does?  (Applause.)  Thank you.

And moving on, I want to say that, you know, when we look at where we are as a country, we do no- — need those elected leaders.  Among the leaders who are here — for example, Congresswoman Gwen Moore is here, another member of Congress — (applause) — and all of the state and local leaders who are here, I want to thank you all for the work that you do to uphold one of our nation’s highest ideals: the ideal of freedom.

Freedom, I believe, is fundamental to the promise of America — freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom of assembly, the freedom to vote.  In America, freedom is not to be given.  It is not to be bestowed.  It is ours by right — (applause) — by right.

And that includes the freedom to make decisions about one’s own body — (applause) — not the government telling you what to do. 

Fifty-one years ago today, in the case of Roe v. Wade, the United States Supreme Court recognized the fundamental constitutional right to reproductive freedom.  And for nearly half a century, Americans relied on the freedoms protected by Roe.  However, 19 months ago, the highest court in our land, the court of Thurgood and RBG, took a constitutional right from the people of America, from the women of America. 

And now on the 51st anniversary of Roe, we speak of it in the past tense.  In the last 19 months, in states across our nation, extremists have proposed and passed laws that criminalize doctors and punish women; laws that threaten doctors and nurses with prison time, even for life, simply for providing healthcare; laws that, in some states, make no exception, even for rape and incest.

Now, many of you know, I started my career as a prosecutor specializing in crimes against women and children.  What you may not know is one of the reasons why.  So, when I was in high school, I learned that one of my best friends was being molested by her stepfather.  And so, I said to her, “You’ve got to come stay with us.”  I called my mother, and my mother said, “Of course she should,” and she did.

So, the idea that someone who survives a crime that is violence to their body, a violation to their body, and then would not have the authority to decide what happens to their body next, that’s immoral.  It’s immoral.  (Applause.)

And let us all agree, one does not have to abandon their faith or deeply held beliefs to agree the government should not be telling her what to do with her body.  (Applause.)  If she chooses, she will consult her pastor, her priest, her rabbi, her imam, but not the government telling her what to do. 

This is, in fact, a healthcare crisis.  And there is nothing about this that is hypothetical.  Today, in America, one in three women of reproductive age live in a state with an abortion ban — one in three.

And let us understand what that really means for people across our nation.  Let us understand the horrific reality that women are facing every single day since Roe was overturned.  I have met women who have had miscarriages in toilets because they were refused care.  I met a woman who went to the emergency room during a miscarriage and was turned away because the doctors were afraid they’d be thrown in jail for giving care.  And it was only when she developed sepsis that they gave her the care she needed. 

We know that the majority of women who have abortions are mothers.  If they live in a state with an abortion ban and they need to travel to receive care, God help her if she does not have paid leave or affordable childcare.  God help them if they don’t have the savings to buy a bus, a train, or a plane ticket or to bo- — book a hotel room. 

And while these extremists say they are motivated by the health and well-being of women and children, in reality, they ignore the crisis of maternal mortality.  (Applause.)  The top 10 states with the highest rates of maternal mortality all have abortion bans.  The hypocrisy abounds. 

And let us be clear about what they’re up to.  These extremists want to roll back the clock to a time before women were treated as full citizens — Wisconsin to the 1800s.  Just look at what happened here in this beautiful state of Wisconsin. 

After Roe was dismantled, extremists evoked a law from 1849 to stop abortion in this state — 1849 — before women could vote, before women could hold elected office, before many women could even own property. 

In a state whose motto is “Forward” — (applause) — these extremists are trying to take us backwards.  But we’re not having that.  We’re not having that.  (Applause.)

And just look at what the fallout has been: the reproductive care clinics across the state that had to close, the women that hospitals had to turn away — women like Meagan.

So, Meagan learned she was pregnant early last year.  A few months later, she and her husband, Jon, went to their doctor for a routine ultrasound, and it revealed devastating news for them.  The fetus had a severe genetic disorder, and Meagan’s pregnancy threatened her life.  But because of that 1849 law, Meagan’s doctor could not provide a lifesaving abortion unless he found two other physicians to sign off. 

He called doctor after doctor here in Wisconsin, but none were willing to risk going to prison.  Ultimately, Meagan had to go to Minnesota to receive care.  She had to leave the state where she calls home to save her life. 

Thankfully, late last year, a judge declared that this 1849 law did not apply to abortion, and some clinics in Wisconsin have since reopened.  But that does not undo — (applause) — that does not undo or heal the incredible pain that women like Meagan have endured. 

Meagan and her husband, Jon, are here with us today.  And in front of all the friends, let us applaud them for their courage, and I thank them for the time that I had with them today.  Can we please applaud them?  (Applause.) 

And I — I mention them because I think it’s very important to understand the courage it takes to share those kinds of stories.  And the reality of what is happening in real time across our country is that, for every story we hear, there are so many that we do not hear about. 

Today, an untold number of women are silently suffering — women who are being subjected to profound judgment; women who are being made to feel as though they did something wrong, as though they should be embarrassed, being made to feel as though they are alone. 

And to those women, I say: We see you, and we are listening, and we see your incredible strength.  And we are here with you.  (Applause.)

And so, as we face this crisis, as we are clear-eyed about the harm, let us also understand who is responsible, shall we?   The former President —

AUDIENCE:  Booo —

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  — hand-picked three Supreme Court Justices because he intended for them to overturn Roe. He intended for them to take your freedoms. And it is a decision he brags about.

A couple of weeks ago, he said that, for years, quote, “They were trying to get Roe v. Wade terminated.”  But he said, quote, “I did it.  And I’m proud to have done it.”  

AUDIENCE:  Booo —

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible.)

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Proud?  Proud? 

Proud that women across our nation are suffering?  Proud that women have been robbed of a fundamental freedom?  Proud that doctors could be thrown in prison for caring for their patients?  That young women today have fewer rights than their mothers and grandmothers? 

How dare he.  (Applause.) 

And the extremists are not done.  This afternoon, in the Wisconsin Legislature, extremists will hold a hearing on a new bill that would ban abortion in this state with no exception for rape and incest. 

And in the United States Congress, extremists are trying to pass a national abortion ban to outlaw abortion in every single state.  

But what they need to know is that if Congress passes a national abortion ban, President Joe Biden will veto it.  (Applause.)  Yes, he will.

Because here’s the deal about all of us: We trust women.  (Applause.)  We trust women to make decisions about their own bodies.  We trust women to know what is in their own best interest.  And women trust us to fight to protect their most fundamental freedoms.  (Applause.)

And it is going to take all of us.  It is going to take all of us. 

Joe Biden and I are fighting in court to protect women’s access to medication and emergency care.  We strengthened the patient privacy protections so that medical records stay between a woman and her doctor.  And we are protecting the right of women to travel for abortion care.  

But the bottom line is: To truly protect reproductive freedoms, we must restore the protections of Roe. 

Because, you see, what the United States Supreme Court took, Congress can put back in place.  (Applause.)

So, we need a majority of leaders in Congress who simply agree — here’s the thing — simply agree that the government should not be making those personal decisions for folks. 

And when Congress passes a law that puts back the protections of Roe, Joe Biden will sign it.  (Applause.)  

So, I’ll close with this.  It’s going to take all of us to get us to that place — everybody here.

And momentum is on our side.  (Applause.)  We are winning.  

Since Roe was overturned, every time reproductive freedom has been on the ballot, the people of America have voted for freedom.  From Kansas to California to Kentucky; in Michigan, Montana, Vermont, and Ohio; the people of America have voted for freedom.   And not by a little — by overwhelming margins.  (Applause.) 

Proving, also, this is not a partisan issue.  Tens of millions of Americans in red states and blue, including here in Wisconsin, marched to the polls in defense of fundamental freedoms. 

So, I say: The voice of the people has been heard, and it will be heard. 

And then I finally ask: Today, Wisconsin, are you ready to make your voices heard?  (Applause.) 

Do we trust women?  (Applause.)

Do we believe in reproductive freedom?  (Applause.)

Do we believe in the promise of America?  (Applause.)

And are we ready to fight for it?  (Applause.)  

And when we fight, we win. 

God bless you.  And God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)

END                  1:10 P.M. CST

The post Remarks by Vice President Harris to Kick Off Nationwide “Fight for Reproductive Freedoms” Tour | Big Bend, WI appeared first on The White House.

IUPAT District Council 7
Big Bend, Wisconsin

12:51 P.M. CST

AUDIENCE:  MVP!  MVP!  MVP!

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  (Laughter.)  Thank you, all.  (Applause.)

Oh, it’s good to be back in Wisconsin.  Good afternoon, everyone.  Good afternoon. 

Can we please give it up for Dr. Domeyer-Klenske for just all she has done — (applause) — and her incredible courage?  I had the joy of spending some time with her backstage.  You really are fantastic.

And, of course, it is good to be with my dear friend Tammy Baldwin.  She was here earlier today, but she had to go back to Washington for some important votes.  So —

AUDIENCE:  MVP!  MVP!  MVP!

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  And on the subject of Tammy Baldwin, I — I want to just mention Tammy because she had to go back to Washington for some important votes.  She was here earlier.  But I will say, Wisconsin, that you have in her an extraordinary leader.  I had the privilege of spending time with her when I was in the Senate.  Tammy is always fighting for the people of Wisconsin.  And so, can we please applaud her for what she does?  (Applause.)  Thank you.

And moving on, I want to say that, you know, when we look at where we are as a country, we do no- — need those elected leaders.  Among the leaders who are here — for example, Congresswoman Gwen Moore is here, another member of Congress — (applause) — and all of the state and local leaders who are here, I want to thank you all for the work that you do to uphold one of our nation’s highest ideals: the ideal of freedom.

Freedom, I believe, is fundamental to the promise of America — freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom of assembly, the freedom to vote.  In America, freedom is not to be given.  It is not to be bestowed.  It is ours by right — (applause) — by right.

And that includes the freedom to make decisions about one’s own body — (applause) — not the government telling you what to do. 

Fifty-one years ago today, in the case of Roe v. Wade, the United States Supreme Court recognized the fundamental constitutional right to reproductive freedom.  And for nearly half a century, Americans relied on the freedoms protected by Roe.  However, 19 months ago, the highest court in our land, the court of Thurgood and RBG, took a constitutional right from the people of America, from the women of America. 

And now on the 51st anniversary of Roe, we speak of it in the past tense.  In the last 19 months, in states across our nation, extremists have proposed and passed laws that criminalize doctors and punish women; laws that threaten doctors and nurses with prison time, even for life, simply for providing healthcare; laws that, in some states, make no exception, even for rape and incest.

Now, many of you know, I started my career as a prosecutor specializing in crimes against women and children.  What you may not know is one of the reasons why.  So, when I was in high school, I learned that one of my best friends was being molested by her stepfather.  And so, I said to her, “You’ve got to come stay with us.”  I called my mother, and my mother said, “Of course she should,” and she did.

So, the idea that someone who survives a crime that is violence to their body, a violation to their body, and then would not have the authority to decide what happens to their body next, that’s immoral.  It’s immoral.  (Applause.)

And let us all agree, one does not have to abandon their faith or deeply held beliefs to agree the government should not be telling her what to do with her body.  (Applause.)  If she chooses, she will consult her pastor, her priest, her rabbi, her imam, but not the government telling her what to do. 

This is, in fact, a healthcare crisis.  And there is nothing about this that is hypothetical.  Today, in America, one in three women of reproductive age live in a state with an abortion ban — one in three.

And let us understand what that really means for people across our nation.  Let us understand the horrific reality that women are facing every single day since Roe was overturned.  I have met women who have had miscarriages in toilets because they were refused care.  I met a woman who went to the emergency room during a miscarriage and was turned away because the doctors were afraid they’d be thrown in jail for giving care.  And it was only when she developed sepsis that they gave her the care she needed. 

We know that the majority of women who have abortions are mothers.  If they live in a state with an abortion ban and they need to travel to receive care, God help her if she does not have paid leave or affordable childcare.  God help them if they don’t have the savings to buy a bus, a train, or a plane ticket or to bo- — book a hotel room. 

And while these extremists say they are motivated by the health and well-being of women and children, in reality, they ignore the crisis of maternal mortality.  (Applause.)  The top 10 states with the highest rates of maternal mortality all have abortion bans.  The hypocrisy abounds. 

And let us be clear about what they’re up to.  These extremists want to roll back the clock to a time before women were treated as full citizens — Wisconsin to the 1800s.  Just look at what happened here in this beautiful state of Wisconsin. 

After Roe was dismantled, extremists evoked a law from 1849 to stop abortion in this state — 1849 — before women could vote, before women could hold elected office, before many women could even own property. 

In a state whose motto is “Forward” — (applause) — these extremists are trying to take us backwards.  But we’re not having that.  We’re not having that.  (Applause.)

And just look at what the fallout has been: the reproductive care clinics across the state that had to close, the women that hospitals had to turn away — women like Meagan.

So, Meagan learned she was pregnant early last year.  A few months later, she and her husband, Jon, went to their doctor for a routine ultrasound, and it revealed devastating news for them.  The fetus had a severe genetic disorder, and Meagan’s pregnancy threatened her life.  But because of that 1849 law, Meagan’s doctor could not provide a lifesaving abortion unless he found two other physicians to sign off. 

He called doctor after doctor here in Wisconsin, but none were willing to risk going to prison.  Ultimately, Meagan had to go to Minnesota to receive care.  She had to leave the state where she calls home to save her life. 

Thankfully, late last year, a judge declared that this 1849 law did not apply to abortion, and some clinics in Wisconsin have since reopened.  But that does not undo — (applause) — that does not undo or heal the incredible pain that women like Meagan have endured. 

Meagan and her husband, Jon, are here with us today.  And in front of all the friends, let us applaud them for their courage, and I thank them for the time that I had with them today.  Can we please applaud them?  (Applause.) 

And I — I mention them because I think it’s very important to understand the courage it takes to share those kinds of stories.  And the reality of what is happening in real time across our country is that, for every story we hear, there are so many that we do not hear about. 

Today, an untold number of women are silently suffering — women who are being subjected to profound judgment; women who are being made to feel as though they did something wrong, as though they should be embarrassed, being made to feel as though they are alone. 

And to those women, I say: We see you, and we are listening, and we see your incredible strength.  And we are here with you.  (Applause.)

And so, as we face this crisis, as we are clear-eyed about the harm, let us also understand who is responsible, shall we?   The former President —

AUDIENCE:  Booo —

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  — hand-picked three Supreme Court Justices because he intended for them to overturn Roe. He intended for them to take your freedoms. And it is a decision he brags about.

A couple of weeks ago, he said that, for years, quote, “They were trying to get Roe v. Wade terminated.”  But he said, quote, “I did it.  And I’m proud to have done it.”  

AUDIENCE:  Booo —

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible.)

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Proud?  Proud? 

Proud that women across our nation are suffering?  Proud that women have been robbed of a fundamental freedom?  Proud that doctors could be thrown in prison for caring for their patients?  That young women today have fewer rights than their mothers and grandmothers? 

How dare he.  (Applause.) 

And the extremists are not done.  This afternoon, in the Wisconsin Legislature, extremists will hold a hearing on a new bill that would ban abortion in this state with no exception for rape and incest. 

And in the United States Congress, extremists are trying to pass a national abortion ban to outlaw abortion in every single state.  

But what they need to know is that if Congress passes a national abortion ban, President Joe Biden will veto it.  (Applause.)  Yes, he will.

Because here’s the deal about all of us: We trust women.  (Applause.)  We trust women to make decisions about their own bodies.  We trust women to know what is in their own best interest.  And women trust us to fight to protect their most fundamental freedoms.  (Applause.)

And it is going to take all of us.  It is going to take all of us. 

Joe Biden and I are fighting in court to protect women’s access to medication and emergency care.  We strengthened the patient privacy protections so that medical records stay between a woman and her doctor.  And we are protecting the right of women to travel for abortion care.  

But the bottom line is: To truly protect reproductive freedoms, we must restore the protections of Roe. 

Because, you see, what the United States Supreme Court took, Congress can put back in place.  (Applause.)

So, we need a majority of leaders in Congress who simply agree — here’s the thing — simply agree that the government should not be making those personal decisions for folks. 

And when Congress passes a law that puts back the protections of Roe, Joe Biden will sign it.  (Applause.)  

So, I’ll close with this.  It’s going to take all of us to get us to that place — everybody here.

And momentum is on our side.  (Applause.)  We are winning.  

Since Roe was overturned, every time reproductive freedom has been on the ballot, the people of America have voted for freedom.  From Kansas to California to Kentucky; in Michigan, Montana, Vermont, and Ohio; the people of America have voted for freedom.   And not by a little — by overwhelming margins.  (Applause.) 

Proving, also, this is not a partisan issue.  Tens of millions of Americans in red states and blue, including here in Wisconsin, marched to the polls in defense of fundamental freedoms. 

So, I say: The voice of the people has been heard, and it will be heard. 

And then I finally ask: Today, Wisconsin, are you ready to make your voices heard?  (Applause.) 

Do we trust women?  (Applause.)

Do we believe in reproductive freedom?  (Applause.)

Do we believe in the promise of America?  (Applause.)

And are we ready to fight for it?  (Applause.)  

And when we fight, we win. 

God bless you.  And God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)

END                  1:10 P.M. CST

The post Remarks by Vice President Harris to Kick Off Nationwide “Fight for Reproductive Freedoms” Tour | Big Bend, WI appeared first on The White House.

President Biden’s Special Advisor for the Americas Christopher Dodd and Commander of the United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) General Laura Richardson met today with President of Ecuador Daniel Noboa and will meet with other senior Ecuadorian government officials tomorrow to showcase U.S. support for the country in the wake of a surge in violence.  The discussions are focused on ongoing commitment to democratic values and the rule of law, and ways to deepen bilateral cooperation, including with respect to security, counter drug cooperation, migration, and economic development.

This week, the United States is facilitating the delivery of over 20,000 bullet proof vests and more than $1 million worth of critical security and emergency response equipment, including ambulances and defense logistic support vehicles.  The United States also announced that, in the coming days, the FBI will increase its personnel in-country to support the Ecuadorian National Police and Attorney General’s Office.  In addition, the Department of Homeland Security is deploying personnel to support the ongoing training of the police and prosecutors; offering additional support in digital forensics and other analysis critical to targeting gang members, drug trafficking networks, and corrupt officials; and providing key training and technical assistance with respect to protection of executive officials. USAID also is augmenting support for its municipal security programs, including support for crisis communications.  Meanwhile, the United States, Ecuador, and other regional partners continue to advance the goals under the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity initiative launched by President Biden in June 2022 to help provide greater economic opportunity to Ecuadorians, which is crucial to addressing the underlying drivers of insecurity, criminality, and migration.

The post Readout of President Biden’s Special Advisor for the Americas and SOUTHCOM Commander’s Trip to Ecuador appeared first on The White House.

President Biden’s Special Advisor for the Americas Christopher Dodd and Commander of the United States Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) General Laura Richardson met today with President of Ecuador Daniel Noboa and will meet with other senior Ecuadorian government officials tomorrow to showcase U.S. support for the country in the wake of a surge in violence.  The discussions are focused on ongoing commitment to democratic values and the rule of law, and ways to deepen bilateral cooperation, including with respect to security, counter drug cooperation, migration, and economic development.

This week, the United States is facilitating the delivery of over 20,000 bullet proof vests and more than $1 million worth of critical security and emergency response equipment, including ambulances and defense logistic support vehicles.  The United States also announced that, in the coming days, the FBI will increase its personnel in-country to support the Ecuadorian National Police and Attorney General’s Office.  In addition, the Department of Homeland Security is deploying personnel to support the ongoing training of the police and prosecutors; offering additional support in digital forensics and other analysis critical to targeting gang members, drug trafficking networks, and corrupt officials; and providing key training and technical assistance with respect to protection of executive officials. USAID also is augmenting support for its municipal security programs, including support for crisis communications.  Meanwhile, the United States, Ecuador, and other regional partners continue to advance the goals under the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity initiative launched by President Biden in June 2022 to help provide greater economic opportunity to Ecuadorians, which is crucial to addressing the underlying drivers of insecurity, criminality, and migration.

The post Readout of President Biden’s Special Advisor for the Americas and SOUTHCOM Commander’s Trip to Ecuador appeared first on The White House.

State Dining Room

2:44 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Well, good afternoon, folks.

Doctor, thank you for sharing your story. And I’m sure there’s others like it many doctors across America have had to contemplate.

Fifty-one years ago today, in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court recognized a woman’s constitutional right to choose — constitutional right to choose — the right to make a deeply personal decision with her doctor, free from the interference of politicians.

I believe Roe v. Wade was right. I’m not supporting — we didn’t — they didn’t support abortion on demand. It was Roe v. Wade. Roe v. Wade was the decision. And a majority of Americans agree.

But then, a year and a half ago, this — this Supreme Court — this Supreme Court made an extreme decision, overturning Roe with their Dobbs decision, to rip away a constitutional right from the American people, which had never been done before — a fundamental right ripped away — important to so many Americans, a right that is vital to a country founded on the idea of freedom.

I said on the — on that day that Roe was overturned, the health and lives of women in this nation would now be at risk. And that has unfortunately proven to be true. They have been at risk. It made them at risk — put them at risk.

Today, in 2024 in America, women are turned away from emergency rooms, forced to travel hundreds of miles to get basic healthcare in another state that may have a different rule, forced to go to court to plead for help.

Thanks to [Think of] the mothers of two in Texas — a mother of two in Texas, who was pregnant with her third child. From her doctor, she received the news no one wants to hear: The life of the child and her own life were at risk if she continued her pregnancy. But instead of being able to receive care from her doctor, she was blocked by the State of Texas Attorney General and the State Supreme Court.

Think about that. As she and her family were going through the frightening, heartbreaking ordeal, she had to fight extreme politicians in the court. They turned a deeply private and painful matter into a public matter.

She ultimately had to leave the state to get the help she needed to protect herself and her ability to have more children in the future.

The cruelty is astounding — an affront to a woman’s dignity, being told by extreme politicians to wait, to get sicker and sicker to the point where her life may be in danger before you can get the care you need.

That cruel reality is the result of extreme Republicans who, for years, have made it their mission to end the Roe v. Wade decision.

Since Roe was overturned, in 21 states, abortion bans are now in effect, many with no exception for rape or incest.

We have doctors — we have doctors with us today who are on the frontlines of this crisis. And they can attest to the consequences that these extreme laws are having on doctors and on their ability to care for their patients.

Some doctors are feeling their — fleeing their home states because of laws that would send them to prison for providing evidence-based healthcare.

In states like Texas, doctors can get a life sentence — a life sentence for providing the care they were trained to provide. It’s outrageous. It’s simply outrageous.

And, frankly, this is just the beginning.

My congressional Republican friends are going to even further — further extremes to undermine a woman’s rights to threaten — and threatening the lives of women.

Three different Republican members in the United States Congress have proposed three different additional national bans to criminalize healthcare in every state. Let me tell you what they are.

One is a zero-week ban with absolutely no exceptions — a zero-week with absolutely no exceptions. The second is a six-week ban. The penalty for violating it is jail. The third is a 15-week ban. The penalty is a five-year prison sentence.

That means even if you live in a state where the extremist Republicans are not running the show, your right to choose, your right to privacy would still be at risk if this law was passed — any of these were passed nationally.

And the extreme right is trying to limit all women in America from getting a safe and effective medication, approved by the Federal Drug Administration over 20 years ago based on the FDA’s independent expert judgment. They’re trying to block women from getting this medication even in states where abortion is legal.

And on top of all of that, if you live in a state where you cannot get this care you need and you make a plan to travel to a state where you can get the medicine [medical care], Republicans official [Republican officials] are trying to stop that as well.

And get this, in Alabama — as my mother would say, “God love them” — the Attorney General is threatening to prosecute people who help family members travel to another state — who help family members travel to another state.

Folks, this is what it looks like when the right to privacy is under attack. These extreme laws have no place — no place in the United States of America.

You know, the American people know these laws are wrong. The vast majority of Americans believe the right to choose is fundamental.

Since the Court overturned Roe v. Wade, every single time abortion has been on the ballot — and, by the way, a lot of people don’t really understand. The Court said that it’s up to the states to decide whether or not abortions are valid. So, it says that if the cou- — if the state comes along and wants to say, “No, no, it’s valid in my state — Roe v. Wade is valid in my state,” it’s allowed.

Well, guess what? Every single time that decision had been put before the people of a state — on the ballot in Ohio, Kansas, Michigan, Kentucky — voters have voted to protect reproductive rights. But we need these protections in every state, because your family [ability] to have access to healthcare should not depend on your ZIP code. It should not depend on your ZIP code.

As I’ve made clear, we have to do what the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs would allow, and that is: Congress must codify Roe v. Wade for all the states in America.

Stop playing politics with the women’s lives and freedom. Let doctors do their job.

Let me say it again: Pass laws restoring the protections of Roe v. Wade for women in every state. That’s what can be done under this co- — on the — even under the Dobbs decision. But under this Court, that is going to be constitutional if we pass it nationwide.

That’s what I’m working for. I’m working for that law. And when they send me that law, I’m going to sign it immediately and restore that right. Until then, my administration is going to keep working to protect women in the wake of the Supreme Court’s extreme decision.

That’s why I created a task force to ensure we are doing everything we can to support women.

I’ve signed executive orders and my administration has taken action to ensure that women get the care they need in medical emergencies, to protect a woman’s right to travel to get healthcare, to protect a woman’s right to receive healthcare free from discrimination, and to protect her privacy.

The idea that a woman should have to carry a fetus after she has been raped or a victim of incest is just — I think it’s just cruel. To me, it’s outrageous.

The idea that a woman who receives competent medical advice that the fetus she’s carrying wouldn’t live and will impact on her ability to have children in the future and still gets [can’t get] medical care — can’t get medical — it’s ridiculous.

I could go on, but I’m already taking too much time.

I want to thank the Vice President of the United States, Kamala Harris, for her leadership on this important issue as she travels the country in her fight for freedom.

I’d also like to thank the Gender Policy Advisor — my Gender Policy Advisor, Jen Klein. Jen — where’s Jen sitting? There you are, Jen. Thank you. And Secretary Becerra, who’s sitting right next to her, for their leadership on this task force.

And I want to thank all the members of my Cabinet here today, including the Attorney General for leading efforts and the — at the Department of Justice to protect reproductive rights in court, and Secretary McDonough for leading the important work being done at the VA.

I know that folks across America are worried about what they’re seeing happening to women all across America. I hear about it everywhere I go.

My message is: We’re fighting hard to reinstate your rights and the rights to protect women and families and doctors who care for those women.

And we need the American people to keep making their voices heard so congr- — so congressional Republicans finally get the message that these laws do not represent the United States of America.

Your voice will have a final say. This is not over.

With that, I’m going to sit down, and we’re going to get to work.

Thank you all for being here. And let’s get this done. It’s important.

Thank you. (Applause.)

2:54 P.M. EST

The post Remarks by President Biden Before Meeting With His Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare Access appeared first on The White House.

State Dining Room

2:44 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Well, good afternoon, folks.

Doctor, thank you for sharing your story. And I’m sure there’s others like it many doctors across America have had to contemplate.

Fifty-one years ago today, in Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court recognized a woman’s constitutional right to choose — constitutional right to choose — the right to make a deeply personal decision with her doctor, free from the interference of politicians.

I believe Roe v. Wade was right. I’m not supporting — we didn’t — they didn’t support abortion on demand. It was Roe v. Wade. Roe v. Wade was the decision. And a majority of Americans agree.

But then, a year and a half ago, this — this Supreme Court — this Supreme Court made an extreme decision, overturning Roe with their Dobbs decision, to rip away a constitutional right from the American people, which had never been done before — a fundamental right ripped away — important to so many Americans, a right that is vital to a country founded on the idea of freedom.

I said on the — on that day that Roe was overturned, the health and lives of women in this nation would now be at risk. And that has unfortunately proven to be true. They have been at risk. It made them at risk — put them at risk.

Today, in 2024 in America, women are turned away from emergency rooms, forced to travel hundreds of miles to get basic healthcare in another state that may have a different rule, forced to go to court to plead for help.

Thanks to [Think of] the mothers of two in Texas — a mother of two in Texas, who was pregnant with her third child. From her doctor, she received the news no one wants to hear: The life of the child and her own life were at risk if she continued her pregnancy. But instead of being able to receive care from her doctor, she was blocked by the State of Texas Attorney General and the State Supreme Court.

Think about that. As she and her family were going through the frightening, heartbreaking ordeal, she had to fight extreme politicians in the court. They turned a deeply private and painful matter into a public matter.

She ultimately had to leave the state to get the help she needed to protect herself and her ability to have more children in the future.

The cruelty is astounding — an affront to a woman’s dignity, being told by extreme politicians to wait, to get sicker and sicker to the point where her life may be in danger before you can get the care you need.

That cruel reality is the result of extreme Republicans who, for years, have made it their mission to end the Roe v. Wade decision.

Since Roe was overturned, in 21 states, abortion bans are now in effect, many with no exception for rape or incest.

We have doctors — we have doctors with us today who are on the frontlines of this crisis. And they can attest to the consequences that these extreme laws are having on doctors and on their ability to care for their patients.

Some doctors are feeling their — fleeing their home states because of laws that would send them to prison for providing evidence-based healthcare.

In states like Texas, doctors can get a life sentence — a life sentence for providing the care they were trained to provide. It’s outrageous. It’s simply outrageous.

And, frankly, this is just the beginning.

My congressional Republican friends are going to even further — further extremes to undermine a woman’s rights to threaten — and threatening the lives of women.

Three different Republican members in the United States Congress have proposed three different additional national bans to criminalize healthcare in every state. Let me tell you what they are.

One is a zero-week ban with absolutely no exceptions — a zero-week with absolutely no exceptions. The second is a six-week ban. The penalty for violating it is jail. The third is a 15-week ban. The penalty is a five-year prison sentence.

That means even if you live in a state where the extremist Republicans are not running the show, your right to choose, your right to privacy would still be at risk if this law was passed — any of these were passed nationally.

And the extreme right is trying to limit all women in America from getting a safe and effective medication, approved by the Federal Drug Administration over 20 years ago based on the FDA’s independent expert judgment. They’re trying to block women from getting this medication even in states where abortion is legal.

And on top of all of that, if you live in a state where you cannot get this care you need and you make a plan to travel to a state where you can get the medicine [medical care], Republicans official [Republican officials] are trying to stop that as well.

And get this, in Alabama — as my mother would say, “God love them” — the Attorney General is threatening to prosecute people who help family members travel to another state — who help family members travel to another state.

Folks, this is what it looks like when the right to privacy is under attack. These extreme laws have no place — no place in the United States of America.

You know, the American people know these laws are wrong. The vast majority of Americans believe the right to choose is fundamental.

Since the Court overturned Roe v. Wade, every single time abortion has been on the ballot — and, by the way, a lot of people don’t really understand. The Court said that it’s up to the states to decide whether or not abortions are valid. So, it says that if the cou- — if the state comes along and wants to say, “No, no, it’s valid in my state — Roe v. Wade is valid in my state,” it’s allowed.

Well, guess what? Every single time that decision had been put before the people of a state — on the ballot in Ohio, Kansas, Michigan, Kentucky — voters have voted to protect reproductive rights. But we need these protections in every state, because your family [ability] to have access to healthcare should not depend on your ZIP code. It should not depend on your ZIP code.

As I’ve made clear, we have to do what the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs would allow, and that is: Congress must codify Roe v. Wade for all the states in America.

Stop playing politics with the women’s lives and freedom. Let doctors do their job.

Let me say it again: Pass laws restoring the protections of Roe v. Wade for women in every state. That’s what can be done under this co- — on the — even under the Dobbs decision. But under this Court, that is going to be constitutional if we pass it nationwide.

That’s what I’m working for. I’m working for that law. And when they send me that law, I’m going to sign it immediately and restore that right. Until then, my administration is going to keep working to protect women in the wake of the Supreme Court’s extreme decision.

That’s why I created a task force to ensure we are doing everything we can to support women.

I’ve signed executive orders and my administration has taken action to ensure that women get the care they need in medical emergencies, to protect a woman’s right to travel to get healthcare, to protect a woman’s right to receive healthcare free from discrimination, and to protect her privacy.

The idea that a woman should have to carry a fetus after she has been raped or a victim of incest is just — I think it’s just cruel. To me, it’s outrageous.

The idea that a woman who receives competent medical advice that the fetus she’s carrying wouldn’t live and will impact on her ability to have children in the future and still gets [can’t get] medical care — can’t get medical — it’s ridiculous.

I could go on, but I’m already taking too much time.

I want to thank the Vice President of the United States, Kamala Harris, for her leadership on this important issue as she travels the country in her fight for freedom.

I’d also like to thank the Gender Policy Advisor — my Gender Policy Advisor, Jen Klein. Jen — where’s Jen sitting? There you are, Jen. Thank you. And Secretary Becerra, who’s sitting right next to her, for their leadership on this task force.

And I want to thank all the members of my Cabinet here today, including the Attorney General for leading efforts and the — at the Department of Justice to protect reproductive rights in court, and Secretary McDonough for leading the important work being done at the VA.

I know that folks across America are worried about what they’re seeing happening to women all across America. I hear about it everywhere I go.

My message is: We’re fighting hard to reinstate your rights and the rights to protect women and families and doctors who care for those women.

And we need the American people to keep making their voices heard so congr- — so congressional Republicans finally get the message that these laws do not represent the United States of America.

Your voice will have a final say. This is not over.

With that, I’m going to sit down, and we’re going to get to work.

Thank you all for being here. And let’s get this done. It’s important.

Thank you. (Applause.)

2:54 P.M. EST

The post Remarks by President Biden Before Meeting With His Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare Access appeared first on The White House.

President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. spoke this afternoon with Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of the United Kingdom.  The President and Prime Minister discussed ongoing Iranian-backed Houthi attacks against merchant and naval vessels transiting the Red Sea. They reiterated their commitment to freedom of navigation, international commerce, and defending mariners from illegal and unjustifiable attacks. The President and Prime Minister discussed the importance of increasing humanitarian aid and civilian protections for people in Gaza, and securing the release of hostages held by Hamas. The President and Prime Minister also reiterated their support for Ukraine as it defends itself against Russia’s continuing aggression.

The post Readout of President Joe Biden’s Call with Prime Minister Sunak of the United Kingdom appeared first on The White House.

President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. spoke this afternoon with Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of the United Kingdom.  The President and Prime Minister discussed ongoing Iranian-backed Houthi attacks against merchant and naval vessels transiting the Red Sea. They reiterated their commitment to freedom of navigation, international commerce, and defending mariners from illegal and unjustifiable attacks. The President and Prime Minister discussed the importance of increasing humanitarian aid and civilian protections for people in Gaza, and securing the release of hostages held by Hamas. The President and Prime Minister also reiterated their support for Ukraine as it defends itself against Russia’s continuing aggression.

The post Readout of President Joe Biden’s Call with Prime Minister Sunak of the United Kingdom appeared first on The White House.

At The Brookings Institution
As Prepared for Delivery

Today I want to focus on an area this institution has been emphasizing for many years: place-based growth. When communities across the country thrive economically, so too does our overall economy. Economic growth takes root at the local level. From that basic reality comes an important insight: we are more effective at growing the economy when we lift communities up rather than leaving them behind.

Trickle-Down

Take the alternative that we can broadly shorthand as trickle-down economics. Trickle-down is what it says: it holds that getting the government out of the way by cutting public investment and cutting taxes for those at the top will generate wealth and income that trickles down.

That economic approach has been tried and tested – most recently in the previous administration – and the reality has not matched the rhetoric. Trickle-down has generated wealth and opportunity for some, but at the expense of widening inequality, deteriorating infrastructure, and fragile supply chains.

The economic evidence makes clear this led to growing regional inequality, with some areas seeing declining economic opportunity and lower labor force participation, especially for workers without college degrees1. Trickle-down meant too many communities across our country were left behind and left out.

Towns lost anchor employers. Businesses chased low taxes, low wages, and non-union labor, resulting in an exodus of unionized manufacturers from regions like the Midwest. Tax revenue dropped, resulting in an erosion of local public investment. And distressed communities often fell into a downward spiral of disinvestment.

These trends were exacerbated by the China Shock. According to some research, the wave of cheap, subsidized imports from China wiped out nearly one million manufacturing jobs concentrated in industrial communities in the Midwest and the South2.

Take Milwaukee’s 30th Street Industrial Street Corridor. During the Great Migration, Milwaukee’s Black population multiplied3. By 1970, more than 40% of these Black residents worked in blue-collar jobs – a rate higher than Detroit. Many jobs were accessible by transit or in walk-to-work neighborhoods, and many families joined America’s growing middle class.

But then manufacturers moved – to other regions or other countries – and Milwaukee lost nearly half of its manufacturing jobs. Redlining exacerbated the effects on Black workers and families4. And the 30th Street Corridor fell behind the rest of Milwaukee in employment and income.

These forces didn’t just hollow out communities, they hollowed out the middle class.

Bottom-Up Middle Out

This President came to office with a different approach to growing the economy – from the bottom-up rather than the top-down. Bottom-up, middle-out economics means investing in the communities that were left behind by trickle-down economics. It means investing in the workforce and infrastructure. It means providing incentives to encourage businesses to invest in areas that have been disinvested. It means supporting small businesses on Main Street that bring communities together.

Many economists now agree that place-based policies punch above their weight in distressed communities. They can build more resilient, productive, and innovative communities – and revitalize cities like Milwaukee, Wisconsin, or Allentown, Pennsylvania.

The President’s economic agenda combines targeted investments in industries such as infrastructure, clean energy, and semiconductors with well-supported economic and community development principles. This ensures that supply-side policies and public investment are reaching communities that were previously left behind and that economic growth is more broadly shared. This strategy is guided by 6 general principles.

Investing in Local Infrastructure

First, well-designed public investment in local communities is a force multiplier for private investment and growth. Communities often need a helping hand to turn around a downward spiral of disinvestment and declining local revenues. That is why the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) is designed to create strong economic foundations — connecting every home, school, and small business to high-speed internet, building resilience, and fixing the roads, bridges, airports, ports, and rail that are the connective tissue of commerce all across the country.

Earlier this month, the President visited small business owners in Allentown, Pennsylvania, once home to major iron and steel manufacturing. The Administration has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in rebuilding roads and renovating airports in the area, alongside strategic, federal economic development dollars and new private investments in manufacturing. For example, $22 million is going toward fixing the 90-year-old Cementon Bridge over the Lehigh River that has been in poor condition since 1999. Today, the Allentown area is experiencing an investment, employment, and small business boom.

Unlocking Private Investment

Second, there are special incentives to encourage private investment in communities that suffered from disinvestment. The President’s strategy is unlocking private capital and the economic potential of previously left-behind communities.

Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) tax credits set aside $4 billion in additional tax benefits for clean energy manufacturing investments in energy communities – places at risk of job displacement due to the energy transition – and low-income communities.

This approach is producing results: A Treasury analysis found that clean energy investments are growing fastest in energy communities. For instance, the Administration has helped drive more than $20 billion in federal support to the communities most affected by the energy transition, from Appalachia to the Four Corners.

Providing special incentives to encourage investments in hard hit communities is an intentional policy choice. Research suggests that public investments yield a greater return in the hardest hit communities for each dollar spent5, and this is especially true for improving employment outcomes6.

The IRA provides bonus tax credits to small-scale solar and wind projects in low-income communities, bringing clean energy and lowering costs to places where the private sector is less likely to invest on its own. Treasury found that close to 80 percent of IRA investments have gone to counties with median household incomes below the national average.

And, for the first time, local, state, and Tribal governments, as well as non-profits, can access clean energy tax credits as direct payments, unlocking new opportunities for local communities to invest in themselves.

Connecting Neighborhoods to Opportunity

Third, special programs are designed to connect left-behind communities to nearby areas of economic opportunity. In too many cases, communities have been cut off from job opportunities, public transit, and educational and training opportunities by the placement of major highways or other physical barriers.

The Department of Transportation’s Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program is a first-of-its-kind $1 billion program to reconnect communities that had been cut off from opportunity and burdened by past transportation infrastructure decisions. In Buffalo, New York, this program is allocating over $55 million to build a new cap and tunnel to cover the Kensington Expressway – something the community has sought since the 1980s. The expressway cut off east and west sides of roads that previously connected residents to community services, food options, and cultural facilities.

The Department of Commerce’s Recompete is a new grant program that will invest $200 million in connecting workers to good jobs targeting economically disadvantaged neighborhoods that are often disconnected from opportunities only miles away.

We recognize that distressed communities suffering from a downward spiral of disinvestment may not have the capacity to access these historic opportunities. That is why the Administration is finding ways to reach out to communities and help them reach back.

For instance, the Rural Partners Network is a whole-of-government initiative that sends federal staff to 25 rural communities across the country. Rural communities such as the Tri-County North Delta, bordering the Mississippi River, are getting help accessing federal resources through local federal offices or federal partnerships with the local chamber of commerce, higher-education institutions, philanthropies, and workforce development organizations.

Multiplying Innovation Clusters

Fourth, our programs help support science and innovation clusters all across the country, not just in a handful of major metro areas. Just five metro areas represented more than 90% of the nation’s innovation-sector growth from 2005 to 20177. Economists, including at Brookings, have outlined the need for innovation programs in other regions.

The CHIPS and Science Act Regional Technology and Innovation Hub Program allocates resources on a competitive basis to help innovation clusters around the country reach the next level. Just recently, the Department of Commerce designated 31 Tech Hubs – coalitions of universities, labor, companies and non-profits – across the country, focused on building globally competitive manufacturing and innovation ecosystems in industries like clean energy, semiconductors, and artificial intelligence.

The CHIPS and Science Act also established the NSF Regional Engines Program that will award up to 10 years of grant funding on a competitive basis. It will help advance American research and development, while supporting training opportunities for jobs coming to these innovation clusters across the country. This effort includes regions that have not fully participated in the technology boom of the past few decades.

Communities in the Lead

Fifth, many of these programs are designed to lift up the priorities of local communities as opposed to being a one-size-fits all, top-down approach. This Administration knows, based on decades of experience, that policies are only as good as the degree of community engagement and ownership on the ground.

From Recompete to Tech Hubs to NSF Engines, these efforts are competitive grant-based programs where local communities are encouraged to form coalitions of educational institutions, businesses, labor, Tribal organizations, and non-profits to develop proposals designed around the communities’ local economic vision, challenges, and special assets.

Stacking Federal Resources

Finally, we have learned that it is most effective to take a whole of government approach to working with localities by stacking investments. When these programs work well, they pull together federal support for workers, small businesses, and new industries so that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts in supporting an economic comeback.

Milwaukee is a good example of how different federal programs can work together to benefit the whole community. BIL funding is not only removing lead pipes and providing clean drinking water for Milwaukee’s child care centers and homes – it is also supporting local small businesses like Rashawn Spivey’s plumbing business. Milwaukee’s 30th Street Industrial Corridor also recently received a Recompete Program designation. This is on top of efforts to increase access to affordable housing and healthcare.

In a recent visit to Milwaukee, the President said that the goal is to make “sure Milwaukee is coming back – and all of Milwaukee [is] coming back.” Indeed, since the President took office, small business applications are up 70 percent, the share of Black people employed in Milwaukee in 2022 has reached the highest in more than a decade, and billions are being invested in manufacturing, environmental cleanup, infrastructure, and small businesses.

The Baltimore area is similarly benefitting from stacking federal initiatives. BIL is investing $4.7 billion in Amtrak’s Frederick Douglass Tunnel, which is expected to create 30,000 jobs. A new workforce hub has already generated commitments to train and place hundreds of Baltimore residents in apprenticeships. It will improve pathways to the middle class for non-college educated residents and create a skilled workforce to meet the growing demand from new and growing employers. The city has also been designated a Tech Hub, growing its AI and biotechnology sectors to lead in predictive healthcare.

Coming Back

Good economic policy starts with the basic insight that communities are where economic development happens – where people connect with jobs, develop their skills, start businesses, make their homes, and raise families.

President Biden came to office determined to invest in all of America, to leave no community behind. It is working. Communities that had been left behind are making a comeback. In recent visits, the President has talked with workers, small business owners, and residents in communities like Allentown and Milwaukee where new jobs and new small businesses are creating hope.

###

[1] Autor, Dorn, and Hanson (2016)
[2] Ibid.
[3] Bonds, Farmer-Hinton, and Epps (2009)
[4] Ibid.
[5] Austin, Glaeser, and Summers (2018)
[6] Bartik (2020)
[7] Atkinson, Muro, and Whiton (2019)

The post Remarks by National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard on Place-Based Growth: Helping Communities Making a Comeback appeared first on The White House.

At The Brookings Institution
As Prepared for Delivery

Today I want to focus on an area this institution has been emphasizing for many years: place-based growth. When communities across the country thrive economically, so too does our overall economy. Economic growth takes root at the local level. From that basic reality comes an important insight: we are more effective at growing the economy when we lift communities up rather than leaving them behind.

Trickle-Down

Take the alternative that we can broadly shorthand as trickle-down economics. Trickle-down is what it says: it holds that getting the government out of the way by cutting public investment and cutting taxes for those at the top will generate wealth and income that trickles down.

That economic approach has been tried and tested – most recently in the previous administration – and the reality has not matched the rhetoric. Trickle-down has generated wealth and opportunity for some, but at the expense of widening inequality, deteriorating infrastructure, and fragile supply chains.

The economic evidence makes clear this led to growing regional inequality, with some areas seeing declining economic opportunity and lower labor force participation, especially for workers without college degrees1. Trickle-down meant too many communities across our country were left behind and left out.

Towns lost anchor employers. Businesses chased low taxes, low wages, and non-union labor, resulting in an exodus of unionized manufacturers from regions like the Midwest. Tax revenue dropped, resulting in an erosion of local public investment. And distressed communities often fell into a downward spiral of disinvestment.

These trends were exacerbated by the China Shock. According to some research, the wave of cheap, subsidized imports from China wiped out nearly one million manufacturing jobs concentrated in industrial communities in the Midwest and the South2.

Take Milwaukee’s 30th Street Industrial Street Corridor. During the Great Migration, Milwaukee’s Black population multiplied3. By 1970, more than 40% of these Black residents worked in blue-collar jobs – a rate higher than Detroit. Many jobs were accessible by transit or in walk-to-work neighborhoods, and many families joined America’s growing middle class.

But then manufacturers moved – to other regions or other countries – and Milwaukee lost nearly half of its manufacturing jobs. Redlining exacerbated the effects on Black workers and families4. And the 30th Street Corridor fell behind the rest of Milwaukee in employment and income.

These forces didn’t just hollow out communities, they hollowed out the middle class.

Bottom-Up Middle Out

This President came to office with a different approach to growing the economy – from the bottom-up rather than the top-down. Bottom-up, middle-out economics means investing in the communities that were left behind by trickle-down economics. It means investing in the workforce and infrastructure. It means providing incentives to encourage businesses to invest in areas that have been disinvested. It means supporting small businesses on Main Street that bring communities together.

Many economists now agree that place-based policies punch above their weight in distressed communities. They can build more resilient, productive, and innovative communities – and revitalize cities like Milwaukee, Wisconsin, or Allentown, Pennsylvania.

The President’s economic agenda combines targeted investments in industries such as infrastructure, clean energy, and semiconductors with well-supported economic and community development principles. This ensures that supply-side policies and public investment are reaching communities that were previously left behind and that economic growth is more broadly shared. This strategy is guided by 6 general principles.

Investing in Local Infrastructure

First, well-designed public investment in local communities is a force multiplier for private investment and growth. Communities often need a helping hand to turn around a downward spiral of disinvestment and declining local revenues. That is why the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) is designed to create strong economic foundations — connecting every home, school, and small business to high-speed internet, building resilience, and fixing the roads, bridges, airports, ports, and rail that are the connective tissue of commerce all across the country.

Earlier this month, the President visited small business owners in Allentown, Pennsylvania, once home to major iron and steel manufacturing. The Administration has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in rebuilding roads and renovating airports in the area, alongside strategic, federal economic development dollars and new private investments in manufacturing. For example, $22 million is going toward fixing the 90-year-old Cementon Bridge over the Lehigh River that has been in poor condition since 1999. Today, the Allentown area is experiencing an investment, employment, and small business boom.

Unlocking Private Investment

Second, there are special incentives to encourage private investment in communities that suffered from disinvestment. The President’s strategy is unlocking private capital and the economic potential of previously left-behind communities.

Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) tax credits set aside $4 billion in additional tax benefits for clean energy manufacturing investments in energy communities – places at risk of job displacement due to the energy transition – and low-income communities.

This approach is producing results: A Treasury analysis found that clean energy investments are growing fastest in energy communities. For instance, the Administration has helped drive more than $20 billion in federal support to the communities most affected by the energy transition, from Appalachia to the Four Corners.

Providing special incentives to encourage investments in hard hit communities is an intentional policy choice. Research suggests that public investments yield a greater return in the hardest hit communities for each dollar spent5, and this is especially true for improving employment outcomes6.

The IRA provides bonus tax credits to small-scale solar and wind projects in low-income communities, bringing clean energy and lowering costs to places where the private sector is less likely to invest on its own. Treasury found that close to 80 percent of IRA investments have gone to counties with median household incomes below the national average.

And, for the first time, local, state, and Tribal governments, as well as non-profits, can access clean energy tax credits as direct payments, unlocking new opportunities for local communities to invest in themselves.

Connecting Neighborhoods to Opportunity

Third, special programs are designed to connect left-behind communities to nearby areas of economic opportunity. In too many cases, communities have been cut off from job opportunities, public transit, and educational and training opportunities by the placement of major highways or other physical barriers.

The Department of Transportation’s Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program is a first-of-its-kind $1 billion program to reconnect communities that had been cut off from opportunity and burdened by past transportation infrastructure decisions. In Buffalo, New York, this program is allocating over $55 million to build a new cap and tunnel to cover the Kensington Expressway – something the community has sought since the 1980s. The expressway cut off east and west sides of roads that previously connected residents to community services, food options, and cultural facilities.

The Department of Commerce’s Recompete is a new grant program that will invest $200 million in connecting workers to good jobs targeting economically disadvantaged neighborhoods that are often disconnected from opportunities only miles away.

We recognize that distressed communities suffering from a downward spiral of disinvestment may not have the capacity to access these historic opportunities. That is why the Administration is finding ways to reach out to communities and help them reach back.

For instance, the Rural Partners Network is a whole-of-government initiative that sends federal staff to 25 rural communities across the country. Rural communities such as the Tri-County North Delta, bordering the Mississippi River, are getting help accessing federal resources through local federal offices or federal partnerships with the local chamber of commerce, higher-education institutions, philanthropies, and workforce development organizations.

Multiplying Innovation Clusters

Fourth, our programs help support science and innovation clusters all across the country, not just in a handful of major metro areas. Just five metro areas represented more than 90% of the nation’s innovation-sector growth from 2005 to 20177. Economists, including at Brookings, have outlined the need for innovation programs in other regions.

The CHIPS and Science Act Regional Technology and Innovation Hub Program allocates resources on a competitive basis to help innovation clusters around the country reach the next level. Just recently, the Department of Commerce designated 31 Tech Hubs – coalitions of universities, labor, companies and non-profits – across the country, focused on building globally competitive manufacturing and innovation ecosystems in industries like clean energy, semiconductors, and artificial intelligence.

The CHIPS and Science Act also established the NSF Regional Engines Program that will award up to 10 years of grant funding on a competitive basis. It will help advance American research and development, while supporting training opportunities for jobs coming to these innovation clusters across the country. This effort includes regions that have not fully participated in the technology boom of the past few decades.

Communities in the Lead

Fifth, many of these programs are designed to lift up the priorities of local communities as opposed to being a one-size-fits all, top-down approach. This Administration knows, based on decades of experience, that policies are only as good as the degree of community engagement and ownership on the ground.

From Recompete to Tech Hubs to NSF Engines, these efforts are competitive grant-based programs where local communities are encouraged to form coalitions of educational institutions, businesses, labor, Tribal organizations, and non-profits to develop proposals designed around the communities’ local economic vision, challenges, and special assets.

Stacking Federal Resources

Finally, we have learned that it is most effective to take a whole of government approach to working with localities by stacking investments. When these programs work well, they pull together federal support for workers, small businesses, and new industries so that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts in supporting an economic comeback.

Milwaukee is a good example of how different federal programs can work together to benefit the whole community. BIL funding is not only removing lead pipes and providing clean drinking water for Milwaukee’s child care centers and homes – it is also supporting local small businesses like Rashawn Spivey’s plumbing business. Milwaukee’s 30th Street Industrial Corridor also recently received a Recompete Program designation. This is on top of efforts to increase access to affordable housing and healthcare.

In a recent visit to Milwaukee, the President said that the goal is to make “sure Milwaukee is coming back – and all of Milwaukee [is] coming back.” Indeed, since the President took office, small business applications are up 70 percent, the share of Black people employed in Milwaukee in 2022 has reached the highest in more than a decade, and billions are being invested in manufacturing, environmental cleanup, infrastructure, and small businesses.

The Baltimore area is similarly benefitting from stacking federal initiatives. BIL is investing $4.7 billion in Amtrak’s Frederick Douglass Tunnel, which is expected to create 30,000 jobs. A new workforce hub has already generated commitments to train and place hundreds of Baltimore residents in apprenticeships. It will improve pathways to the middle class for non-college educated residents and create a skilled workforce to meet the growing demand from new and growing employers. The city has also been designated a Tech Hub, growing its AI and biotechnology sectors to lead in predictive healthcare.

Coming Back

Good economic policy starts with the basic insight that communities are where economic development happens – where people connect with jobs, develop their skills, start businesses, make their homes, and raise families.

President Biden came to office determined to invest in all of America, to leave no community behind. It is working. Communities that had been left behind are making a comeback. In recent visits, the President has talked with workers, small business owners, and residents in communities like Allentown and Milwaukee where new jobs and new small businesses are creating hope.

###

[1] Autor, Dorn, and Hanson (2016)
[2] Ibid.
[3] Bonds, Farmer-Hinton, and Epps (2009)
[4] Ibid.
[5] Austin, Glaeser, and Summers (2018)
[6] Bartik (2020)
[7] Atkinson, Muro, and Whiton (2019)

The post Remarks by National Economic Advisor Lael Brainard on Place-Based Growth: Helping Communities Making a Comeback appeared first on The White House.