Feed aggregator

Jill and I are mourning the tragic deaths of two of America’s finest—Navy SEALs who were lost at sea while executing a mission off the coast of East Africa last week.  Over ten days, the United States military conducted an extensive search and rescue mission. Recovery efforts are still continuing as we grieve this profound loss for our country. These SEALs represented the very best of our country, pledging their lives to protect their fellow Americans.  Our hearts go out to the family members, loved ones, friends, and shipmates who are grieving for these two brave Americans. Our entire country stands with you. We will never fail to honor their service, their legacy, and their sacrifice. 

###

The post Statement from President Joe Biden on the Deaths of Two U.S. Navy SEALs appeared first on The White House.

Jill and I are mourning the tragic deaths of two of America’s finest—Navy SEALs who were lost at sea while executing a mission off the coast of East Africa last week.  Over ten days, the United States military conducted an extensive search and rescue mission. Recovery efforts are still continuing as we grieve this profound loss for our country. These SEALs represented the very best of our country, pledging their lives to protect their fellow Americans.  Our hearts go out to the family members, loved ones, friends, and shipmates who are grieving for these two brave Americans. Our entire country stands with you. We will never fail to honor their service, their legacy, and their sacrifice. 

###

The post Statement from President Joe Biden on the Deaths of Two U.S. Navy SEALs appeared first on The White House.

Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions to Help Strengthen Access to Contraception, Protect Access to Medication Abortion, and Ensure Patients Receive Emergency Medical Care

Today, on what would have been the 51st anniversary of Roe v. Wade, women’s health and lives hang in the balance due to extreme state abortion bans. These dangerous state laws have caused chaos and confusion, as women are being turned away from emergency rooms, forced to travel hundreds of miles, or required to go to court to seek permission for the health care they need. In the face of the continued threats to reproductive freedom, President Biden will convene the fourth meeting of the Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare Access, where agencies will announce new actions to protect access to reproductive health care. The Task Force will also hear directly from physicians who are on the frontlines of the fallout from the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Also today, the Vice President is launching her nationwide Fight for Reproductive Freedoms tour to continue fighting back against extreme attacks throughout America.

During the Task Force meeting, members will report on ongoing implementation of the President’s three Executive Orders and a Presidential Memorandum on access to reproductive health care and announce new steps to:

• Strengthen Contraception Access and Affordability for Women with Private Health Insurance. The Administration is committed to ensuring that women have access to contraception—an essential component of reproductive health care that has only become more important in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade—and reducing barriers that women face in accessing contraception prescribed by their provider. The Departments of the Treasury, Labor, and Health and Human Services (HHS) are issuing new guidance to clarify standards and support expanded coverage of a broader range of FDA-approved contraceptives at no cost under the Affordable Care Act. This action builds on the progress already made by the Affordable Care Act to expand access to affordable contraception for millions of women nationwide.
  
  In addition, the Office of Personnel Management will strengthen access to contraception for federal workers, retirees, and family members by issuing guidance to insurers participating in the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program that incorporates the Departments’ guidance. OPM will also newly require insurers that participate in the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program to take additional steps to educate enrollees about their contraception benefits.
  
• Reinforce Obligations to Cover Affordable Contraception. The Secretary of HHS is issuing a letter to private health insurers, state Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Programs, and Medicare plans about their obligations to cover contraception for those they serve. The letter targets a wide range of payers to advance compliance with existing standards and underscore the Administration’s commitment to ensuring that women across the country can access affordable contraception. The letter also highlights recent HHS action to expand coverage and improve payment for contraceptives for Medicare beneficiaries, improving access for women with disabilities.
  
• Educate Patients and Health Care Providers on Their Rights and Obligations for Emergency Medical Care. The Administration is committed to helping ensure all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy loss and other pregnancy-related emergencies, have access to emergency medical care required under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). The Administration has long taken the position that the required emergency care can, in some circumstances, include abortion care. The Department of Justice (DOJ) is defending that interpretation of the law before the Supreme Court, which is expected to rule by June. 
  
  To increase awareness of EMTALA and improve the procedures for ensuring that patients facing all types of medical emergencies receive the care to which they are entitled, HHS is announcing today a comprehensive plan to educate all patients about their rights and to help ensure hospitals meet their obligations under federal law. This effort will include the launch of new accessible and understandable resources about rights and protections for patients under EMTALA and the process for submitting a complaint. HHS will also disseminate training materials for health care providers and establish a dedicated team of experts who will increase the Department’s capacity to support hospitals and providers across the country in complying with federal requirements—to help ensure that every patient receives the emergency medical care required under federal law.
  
• Protect Access to Safe and Legal Medication Abortion. One year ago today, President Biden issued a Presidential Memorandum directing further efforts to support patients, providers, and pharmacies who wish to legally access, prescribe, or provide medication abortion—including by taking steps to safeguard their safety and security. Today, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Homeland Security will report on their implementation of this Presidential Memorandum, including the resources they have disseminated to health care providers, including pharmacies, to support safe access to legal medication abortion.

Today’s announcements build on the Administration’s strong record of taking action since the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. These ongoing efforts to defend reproductive rights include:

Protecting Access to Abortion, including Medication Abortion

• Defend FDA Approval of Medication Abortion in Court.  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and DOJ are defending access to mifepristone—a safe and effective drug used in medication abortion that FDA first approved more than twenty years ago—and FDA’s independent, expert judgment in court, including in a lawsuit before the Supreme Court that attempts to curtail access nationwide. The Administration will continue to stand by FDA’s decades-old approval and regulation of the medication and by FDA’s ability to review, approve, and regulate a wide range of prescription medications. Efforts to impose outdated restrictions on mifepristone would limit access to reproductive health care in every state in the country.
  
• Protect Access to Safe and Legal Medication Abortion.  On what would have been the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, President Biden issued a Presidential Memorandum directing agencies to consider further efforts to protect access to medication abortion. This Presidential Memorandum was issued in the face of attacks by state officials to prevent women from accessing mifepristone and discourage pharmacies from becoming certified to dispense the medication. These attacks followed independent, evidence-based action taken by FDA to allow mifepristone to continue to be prescribed by telehealth and sent by mail as well as to enable interested pharmacies to become certified.
  
• Partner with State Leaders on the Frontlines of Abortion Access.  The White House continues to partner with leaders on the frontlines of protecting access to abortion—both those fighting extreme state legislation and those advancing proactive policies to protect access to reproductive health care, including for patients who are forced to travel out of state for care. The Vice President has led these efforts, traveling to 20 states and meeting with more than 250 state legislators, health care providers, and advocates in the past year. Today, she is kicking off her nationwide Fight for Reproductive Freedoms tour in Wisconsin.
  
• Ensure Access to Emergency Medical Care.  Republican elected officials in states across the country have put women’s lives at risk by banning abortion even when her doctor determines that an abortion is necessary to prevent serious health consequences. The Administration is committed to ensuring all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy loss and other pregnancy-related emergencies, have access to the full rights and protections for emergency medical care afforded under federal law—including abortion care when that is the stabilizing treatment required. HHS issued guidance and Secretary Becerra sent letters to providers affirming the Administration’s view that EMTALA preempts conflicting state law restricting access to abortion in emergency situations. The Department of Justice has taken action defend and enforce these protections in court, including in a case currently before the Supreme Court.
  
• Provide Access to Reproductive Health Care for Veterans.  The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) issued an interim final rule to allow VA to provide abortion counseling and, in certain circumstances, abortion care to veterans and VA beneficiaries. VA provides abortion services when the health or life of the patient would be endangered if the pregnancy were carried to term or when the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest. When working within the scope of their federal employment, VA employees may provide abortion services as authorized by federal law regardless of state restrictions. DOJ will support and provide representation to any VA providers whom states attempt to prosecute for violations of state abortion laws where those providers were appropriately carrying out their duties under VA’s interim final rule. 
  
• Support Access to Care for Service Members.  The Department of Defense (DoD) has taken action to ensure that Service members and their families can access reproductive health care and that DoD health care providers can operate effectively. DoD has released policies to support Service members and their families’ ability to travel for lawful non-covered reproductive health care and to bolster Service members’ privacy and afford them the time and space needed to make personal health care decisions.
  
• Defend Reproductive Rights in Court. DOJ created a Reproductive Rights Task Force, which monitors and evaluates state and local actions that threaten to infringe on federal protections relating to the provision or pursuit of reproductive health care, impair women’s ability to seek abortion care where it is legal, impair individuals’ ability to inform and counsel each other about the care that is available in other states, ban mifepristone based on disagreement with FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy, or impose criminal or civil liability on federal employees who provide legal reproductive health services in a manner authorized by federal law.

Supporting Women’s Ability to Travel for Medical Care

• Defend the Right to Travel.  On the day of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, President Biden reaffirmed the Attorney General’s statement that women must remain free to travel safely to another state to seek the care they need. In November 2023, DOJ filed a statement of interest in two lawsuits challenging the Alabama Attorney General’s threat to prosecute people who provide assistance to women seeking lawful out-of-state abortions. DOJ explained that the threatened Alabama prosecutions infringe the constitutional right to travel and made clear that states may not punish third parties for assisting women in exercising that right. DOJ continues to monitor states’ efforts to restrict the constitutional right to travel across state lines to receive lawful health care.
  
• Support Patients Traveling Out of State for Medical Care.  HHS issued a letter to U.S. governors inviting them to apply for Section 1115 waivers to expand access to care under the Medicaid program for women traveling from a state where reproductive rights are under attack and women may be denied medical care. HHS continues to encourage state leaders to consider and develop new waiver proposals that would support access to reproductive health care services.

Safeguarding Access to Contraception

• Strengthen Access to Affordable, High-Quality Contraception.  Ahead of the one-year anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the President issued an Executive Order directing agencies to consider actions to improve access and affordability for women with private health insurance; promote increased access to over-the-counter contraception; support access to affordable contraception through Medicaid and Medicare; ensure Service members, veterans, and Federal employees are able to access contraception; bolster contraception access across Federal health programs; and support access for college students and employees. These are just some of the recent actions taken by the Biden-Harris Administration to implement this Executive Order:
  • Following FDA’s approval of the first daily oral contraceptive in the United States without a prescription, the Departments of the Treasury, Labor, and HHS issued a Request for Information to solicit public input on how to best ensure coverage and access to over-the-counter preventive services, including contraception, at no cost and without a prescription from a health care provider.
  • Vice President Harris and the Department of Education convened representatives from 68 college and university leaders in 32 states to hear promising strategies from leaders of postsecondary institutions for protecting and expanding access to contraception for their students and on campus.
  • The Gender Policy Council, Domestic Policy Council, and leaders from the Departments of the Treasury, Labor, and HHS convened private sector leaders to stress the need to continue to build on the significant progress already made under the Affordable Care Act in expanding access to contraception and call on participants to take robust additional actions to improve access.
  • The Health Resources and Services Administration proposed new data measures for federally funded health centers that, once finalized, will help ensure that patients are screened for contraception needs. Screening and data measures will help enhance the overall delivery of voluntary family planning and related services, which is a required primary health care service under federal law.
  • The Office of Personnel Management launched a public education campaign to highlight contraception benefits available to federal employees and their family members.
  • HHS is continuing its public-private partnership to expand access to contraception with Upstream, a national nonprofit organization that provides health centers with free patient-centered, evidence-based training and technical assistance to eliminate provider-level barriers to offering the full range of contraceptive options. To date, HHS has connected Upstream to nearly 100 health care clinics, resulting in partnerships that will help Upstream accelerate their national expansion to reach 5 million women of reproductive age every year.

• Clarify Protections for Women with Private Health Insurance. Under the Affordable Care Act, most private health plans must provide coverage for contraception and family planning counseling with no out-of-pocket costs. The Departments of the Treasury, Labor, and HHS convened a meeting with health insurers and employee benefit plans. These agencies called on the industry to meet their obligations to cover contraception as required under the law. Following this conversation, these agencies issued guidance to clarify protections for contraceptive coverage under the Affordable Care Act.
  
• Expand Access Under the Affordable Care Act.  The Departments of the Treasury, Labor, and HHS proposed a rule to strengthen access to contraception under the Affordable Care Act so all women with private health coverage who need and want contraception can obtain it without cost sharing. Millions of women have already benefited from this coverage, which has helped them save billions of dollars on contraception.
  
• Support Title X Clinics.  Last year, HHS provided $263 million to over 4,000 Title X clinics across the country to provide a wide range of voluntary, client-centered family planning and related preventive services. The Title X Family Planning Program remains a critical part of the nation’s safety net, providing free or low-cost services for 2.6 million clients in 2022.
  
• Promote Access to Contraception for Service Members and Their Families and Certain Dependents of Veterans.  To improve access to contraception at military hospitals and clinics, DoD expanded walk-in contraceptive care services for active-duty Service members and other Military Health System beneficiaries, and eliminated TRICARE copays for certain contraceptive services. And VA proposed a rule to eliminate out-of-pocket costs for certain types of contraception through the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Promoting Safety and Security of Patients, Providers, and Clinics

• Promote Safety and Security of Patients, Providers and Clinics. DOJ continues to robustly enforce the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, which protects the right to access and provide reproductive health services.

Safeguarding Privacy and Sensitive Health Information

• Strengthen Reproductive Health Privacy under HIPAA.  HHS issued a proposed rule to strengthen privacy protections under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). As proposed, this rule would prevent an individual’s information from being disclosed to investigate, sue, or prosecute an individual, a health care provider, or a loved one simply because that person sought, obtained, provided, or facilitated legal reproductive health care, including abortion. By safeguarding sensitive information related to reproductive health care, the rule will strengthen patient-provider confidentiality and help health care providers give complete and accurate information to patients. Prior to the proposed rule, HHS issued guidance reaffirming HIPAA’s existing protections for the privacy of individuals’ protected health information.
  
• Take Action Against Illegal Use and Sharing of Sensitive Health Information.  The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has committed to enforcing the law against illegal use and sharing of highly sensitive data, including information related to reproductive health care. Consistent with this commitment, the FTC has taken several enforcement actions against companies for disclosing consumers’ personal health information, including highly sensitive reproductive health data, without permission.
  
• Help Consumers Protect Their Personal Data.  The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) launched a new guide for consumers on best practices for protecting their personal data, including geolocation data, on mobile phones. The guide follows a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued by FCC that would strengthen data breach rules to provide greater protections to personal data. Separately, HHS issued a how-to guide for consumers on steps they can take to better protect their data on personal cell phones or tablets and when using mobile health apps, like period trackers, which are generally not protected by HIPAA.
  
• Protect Students’ Health Information.  ED issued guidance to over 20,000 school officials to remind them of their obligations to protect student privacy under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). The guidance helps ensure that school officials—at federally funded school districts, colleges, and universities—know that, with certain exceptions, they must obtain written consent from eligible students or parents before disclosing personally identifiable information from students’ educational records, which may include student health information. The guidance encourages school officials to consider the importance of student privacy, including health privacy, with respect to disclosing student records. ED also issued a know-your-rights resource to help students understand their privacy rights for health records at school. 
  
• Safeguard Patients’ Electronic Health Information.  HHS issued guidance affirming that doctors and other medical providers can take steps to protect patients’ electronic health information, including their information related to reproductive health care. HHS makes clear that patients have the right to ask that their electronic health information generally not be disclosed by a physician, hospital, or other health care provider. The guidance also reminds health care providers that HIPAA’s privacy protections apply to patients’ electronic health information.

Reinforcing Nondiscrimination Protections under Federal Law

• Protect Students from Discrimination Based on Pregnancy.  The Department of Education (ED) released a resource for universities reiterating their responsibilities not to discriminate on the basis of pregnancy or pregnancy-related conditions, including termination of pregnancy. This guidance reminds schools of their existing and long-standing obligations under Title IX.
  
• Strengthen Nondiscrimination in Healthcare.  HHS issued a proposed rule to strengthen nondiscrimination in health care. The proposed rule would implement Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and affirms protections consistent with President Biden’s Executive Orders on nondiscrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Providing Access to Accurate Information and Legal Resources

• Ensure Easy Access to Reliable Information.  HHS launched and maintains ReproductiveRights.gov, which provides timely and accurate information on people’s right to access reproductive health care, including contraception, abortion services, and health insurance coverage, as well as how to file a patient privacy or nondiscrimination complaint. DOJ also launched justice.gov/reproductive-rights, a webpage that provides a centralized online resource on the Department’s ongoing work to protect access to reproductive health care services under federal law.
  
• Hosted a Convening of Lawyers in Defense of Reproductive Rights.  DOJ and the Office of White House Counsel convened more than 200 lawyers and advocates from private firms, bar associations, legal aid organizations, reproductive rights groups, and law schools across the country for a convening of pro-bono attorneys, as directed in the first Executive Order. Following this convening, reproductive rights organizations launched the Abortion Defense Network to offer abortion-related legal defense services, including legal advice and representation.

Promote Research and Data Collection

• Use Data to Track Impacts on Access to Care.  HHS convened leading experts to discuss the state of existing reproductive health research and what the data tells us about the impact of the overturning of Roe v. Wade, as well as the future of research on reproductive health care access. These convenings helped identify research gaps, opportunities for collaboration, and ways to bolster research efforts for both Federal agencies and external partners.

###

The post FACT SHEET: White House Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare Access Announces New Actions and Marks the 51st Anniversary of Roe v. Wade appeared first on The White House.

Fifty-one years ago today, the Supreme Court recognized a woman’s constitutional right to make deeply personal decisions with her doctor—free from the interference of politicians. Then, a year and a half ago, the Court made the extreme decision to overturn Roe and take away a constitutional right. As a result, tens of millions of women now live in states with extreme and dangerous abortion bans. Because of Republican elected officials, women’s health and lives are at risk. In states across the country, women are being turned away from emergency rooms, forced to go to court to seek permission for the medical attention they need, and made to travel hundreds of miles for health care.

Even as Americans—from Ohio to Kentucky to Michigan to Kansas to California—have resoundingly rejected attempts to limit reproductive freedom, Republican elected officials continue to push for a national ban and devastating new restrictions across the country. 

On this day and every day, Vice President Harris and I are fighting to protect women’s reproductive freedom against Republicans officials’ dangerous, extreme, and out-of-touch agenda. We stand with the vast majority of Americans who support a woman’s right to choose, and continue to call on Congress to restore the protections of Roe in federal law once and for all.

###

The post Statement from President Joe Biden on the 51st Anniversary of Roe v. Wade appeared first on The White House.

Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions to Help Strengthen Access to Contraception, Protect Access to Medication Abortion, and Ensure Patients Receive Emergency Medical Care

Today, on what would have been the 51st anniversary of Roe v. Wade, women’s health and lives hang in the balance due to extreme state abortion bans. These dangerous state laws have caused chaos and confusion, as women are being turned away from emergency rooms, forced to travel hundreds of miles, or required to go to court to seek permission for the health care they need. In the face of the continued threats to reproductive freedom, President Biden will convene the fourth meeting of the Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare Access, where agencies will announce new actions to protect access to reproductive health care. The Task Force will also hear directly from physicians who are on the frontlines of the fallout from the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Also today, the Vice President is launching her nationwide Fight for Reproductive Freedoms tour to continue fighting back against extreme attacks throughout America.

During the Task Force meeting, members will report on ongoing implementation of the President’s three Executive Orders and a Presidential Memorandum on access to reproductive health care and announce new steps to:

• Strengthen Contraception Access and Affordability for Women with Private Health Insurance. The Administration is committed to ensuring that women have access to contraception—an essential component of reproductive health care that has only become more important in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade—and reducing barriers that women face in accessing contraception prescribed by their provider. The Departments of the Treasury, Labor, and Health and Human Services (HHS) are issuing new guidance to clarify standards and support expanded coverage of a broader range of FDA-approved contraceptives at no cost under the Affordable Care Act. This action builds on the progress already made by the Affordable Care Act to expand access to affordable contraception for millions of women nationwide.
  
  In addition, the Office of Personnel Management will strengthen access to contraception for federal workers, retirees, and family members by issuing guidance to insurers participating in the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program that incorporates the Departments’ guidance. OPM will also newly require insurers that participate in the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program to take additional steps to educate enrollees about their contraception benefits.
  
• Reinforce Obligations to Cover Affordable Contraception. The Secretary of HHS is issuing a letter to private health insurers, state Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Programs, and Medicare plans about their obligations to cover contraception for those they serve. The letter targets a wide range of payers to advance compliance with existing standards and underscore the Administration’s commitment to ensuring that women across the country can access affordable contraception. The letter also highlights recent HHS action to expand coverage and improve payment for contraceptives for Medicare beneficiaries, improving access for women with disabilities.
  
• Educate Patients and Health Care Providers on Their Rights and Obligations for Emergency Medical Care. The Administration is committed to helping ensure all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy loss and other pregnancy-related emergencies, have access to emergency medical care required under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). The Administration has long taken the position that the required emergency care can, in some circumstances, include abortion care. The Department of Justice (DOJ) is defending that interpretation of the law before the Supreme Court, which is expected to rule by June. 
  
  To increase awareness of EMTALA and improve the procedures for ensuring that patients facing all types of medical emergencies receive the care to which they are entitled, HHS is announcing today a comprehensive plan to educate all patients about their rights and to help ensure hospitals meet their obligations under federal law. This effort will include the launch of new accessible and understandable resources about rights and protections for patients under EMTALA and the process for submitting a complaint. HHS will also disseminate training materials for health care providers and establish a dedicated team of experts who will increase the Department’s capacity to support hospitals and providers across the country in complying with federal requirements—to help ensure that every patient receives the emergency medical care required under federal law.
  
• Protect Access to Safe and Legal Medication Abortion. One year ago today, President Biden issued a Presidential Memorandum directing further efforts to support patients, providers, and pharmacies who wish to legally access, prescribe, or provide medication abortion—including by taking steps to safeguard their safety and security. Today, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Homeland Security will report on their implementation of this Presidential Memorandum, including the resources they have disseminated to health care providers, including pharmacies, to support safe access to legal medication abortion.

Today’s announcements build on the Administration’s strong record of taking action since the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. These ongoing efforts to defend reproductive rights include:

Protecting Access to Abortion, including Medication Abortion

• Defend FDA Approval of Medication Abortion in Court.  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and DOJ are defending access to mifepristone—a safe and effective drug used in medication abortion that FDA first approved more than twenty years ago—and FDA’s independent, expert judgment in court, including in a lawsuit before the Supreme Court that attempts to curtail access nationwide. The Administration will continue to stand by FDA’s decades-old approval and regulation of the medication and by FDA’s ability to review, approve, and regulate a wide range of prescription medications. Efforts to impose outdated restrictions on mifepristone would limit access to reproductive health care in every state in the country.
  
• Protect Access to Safe and Legal Medication Abortion.  On what would have been the 50th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, President Biden issued a Presidential Memorandum directing agencies to consider further efforts to protect access to medication abortion. This Presidential Memorandum was issued in the face of attacks by state officials to prevent women from accessing mifepristone and discourage pharmacies from becoming certified to dispense the medication. These attacks followed independent, evidence-based action taken by FDA to allow mifepristone to continue to be prescribed by telehealth and sent by mail as well as to enable interested pharmacies to become certified.
  
• Partner with State Leaders on the Frontlines of Abortion Access.  The White House continues to partner with leaders on the frontlines of protecting access to abortion—both those fighting extreme state legislation and those advancing proactive policies to protect access to reproductive health care, including for patients who are forced to travel out of state for care. The Vice President has led these efforts, traveling to 20 states and meeting with more than 250 state legislators, health care providers, and advocates in the past year. Today, she is kicking off her nationwide Fight for Reproductive Freedoms tour in Wisconsin.
  
• Ensure Access to Emergency Medical Care.  Republican elected officials in states across the country have put women’s lives at risk by banning abortion even when her doctor determines that an abortion is necessary to prevent serious health consequences. The Administration is committed to ensuring all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy loss and other pregnancy-related emergencies, have access to the full rights and protections for emergency medical care afforded under federal law—including abortion care when that is the stabilizing treatment required. HHS issued guidance and Secretary Becerra sent letters to providers affirming the Administration’s view that EMTALA preempts conflicting state law restricting access to abortion in emergency situations. The Department of Justice has taken action defend and enforce these protections in court, including in a case currently before the Supreme Court.
  
• Provide Access to Reproductive Health Care for Veterans.  The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) issued an interim final rule to allow VA to provide abortion counseling and, in certain circumstances, abortion care to veterans and VA beneficiaries. VA provides abortion services when the health or life of the patient would be endangered if the pregnancy were carried to term or when the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest. When working within the scope of their federal employment, VA employees may provide abortion services as authorized by federal law regardless of state restrictions. DOJ will support and provide representation to any VA providers whom states attempt to prosecute for violations of state abortion laws where those providers were appropriately carrying out their duties under VA’s interim final rule. 
  
• Support Access to Care for Service Members.  The Department of Defense (DoD) has taken action to ensure that Service members and their families can access reproductive health care and that DoD health care providers can operate effectively. DoD has released policies to support Service members and their families’ ability to travel for lawful non-covered reproductive health care and to bolster Service members’ privacy and afford them the time and space needed to make personal health care decisions.
  
• Defend Reproductive Rights in Court. DOJ created a Reproductive Rights Task Force, which monitors and evaluates state and local actions that threaten to infringe on federal protections relating to the provision or pursuit of reproductive health care, impair women’s ability to seek abortion care where it is legal, impair individuals’ ability to inform and counsel each other about the care that is available in other states, ban mifepristone based on disagreement with FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy, or impose criminal or civil liability on federal employees who provide legal reproductive health services in a manner authorized by federal law.

Supporting Women’s Ability to Travel for Medical Care

• Defend the Right to Travel.  On the day of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, President Biden reaffirmed the Attorney General’s statement that women must remain free to travel safely to another state to seek the care they need. In November 2023, DOJ filed a statement of interest in two lawsuits challenging the Alabama Attorney General’s threat to prosecute people who provide assistance to women seeking lawful out-of-state abortions. DOJ explained that the threatened Alabama prosecutions infringe the constitutional right to travel and made clear that states may not punish third parties for assisting women in exercising that right. DOJ continues to monitor states’ efforts to restrict the constitutional right to travel across state lines to receive lawful health care.
  
• Support Patients Traveling Out of State for Medical Care.  HHS issued a letter to U.S. governors inviting them to apply for Section 1115 waivers to expand access to care under the Medicaid program for women traveling from a state where reproductive rights are under attack and women may be denied medical care. HHS continues to encourage state leaders to consider and develop new waiver proposals that would support access to reproductive health care services.

Safeguarding Access to Contraception

• Strengthen Access to Affordable, High-Quality Contraception.  Ahead of the one-year anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the President issued an Executive Order directing agencies to consider actions to improve access and affordability for women with private health insurance; promote increased access to over-the-counter contraception; support access to affordable contraception through Medicaid and Medicare; ensure Service members, veterans, and Federal employees are able to access contraception; bolster contraception access across Federal health programs; and support access for college students and employees. These are just some of the recent actions taken by the Biden-Harris Administration to implement this Executive Order:
  • Following FDA’s approval of the first daily oral contraceptive in the United States without a prescription, the Departments of the Treasury, Labor, and HHS issued a Request for Information to solicit public input on how to best ensure coverage and access to over-the-counter preventive services, including contraception, at no cost and without a prescription from a health care provider.
  • Vice President Harris and the Department of Education convened representatives from 68 college and university leaders in 32 states to hear promising strategies from leaders of postsecondary institutions for protecting and expanding access to contraception for their students and on campus.
  • The Gender Policy Council, Domestic Policy Council, and leaders from the Departments of the Treasury, Labor, and HHS convened private sector leaders to stress the need to continue to build on the significant progress already made under the Affordable Care Act in expanding access to contraception and call on participants to take robust additional actions to improve access.
  • The Health Resources and Services Administration proposed new data measures for federally funded health centers that, once finalized, will help ensure that patients are screened for contraception needs. Screening and data measures will help enhance the overall delivery of voluntary family planning and related services, which is a required primary health care service under federal law.
  • The Office of Personnel Management launched a public education campaign to highlight contraception benefits available to federal employees and their family members.
  • HHS is continuing its public-private partnership to expand access to contraception with Upstream, a national nonprofit organization that provides health centers with free patient-centered, evidence-based training and technical assistance to eliminate provider-level barriers to offering the full range of contraceptive options. To date, HHS has connected Upstream to nearly 100 health care clinics, resulting in partnerships that will help Upstream accelerate their national expansion to reach 5 million women of reproductive age every year.

• Clarify Protections for Women with Private Health Insurance. Under the Affordable Care Act, most private health plans must provide coverage for contraception and family planning counseling with no out-of-pocket costs. The Departments of the Treasury, Labor, and HHS convened a meeting with health insurers and employee benefit plans. These agencies called on the industry to meet their obligations to cover contraception as required under the law. Following this conversation, these agencies issued guidance to clarify protections for contraceptive coverage under the Affordable Care Act.
  
• Expand Access Under the Affordable Care Act.  The Departments of the Treasury, Labor, and HHS proposed a rule to strengthen access to contraception under the Affordable Care Act so all women with private health coverage who need and want contraception can obtain it without cost sharing. Millions of women have already benefited from this coverage, which has helped them save billions of dollars on contraception.
  
• Support Title X Clinics.  Last year, HHS provided $263 million to over 4,000 Title X clinics across the country to provide a wide range of voluntary, client-centered family planning and related preventive services. The Title X Family Planning Program remains a critical part of the nation’s safety net, providing free or low-cost services for 2.6 million clients in 2022.
  
• Promote Access to Contraception for Service Members and Their Families and Certain Dependents of Veterans.  To improve access to contraception at military hospitals and clinics, DoD expanded walk-in contraceptive care services for active-duty Service members and other Military Health System beneficiaries, and eliminated TRICARE copays for certain contraceptive services. And VA proposed a rule to eliminate out-of-pocket costs for certain types of contraception through the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Promoting Safety and Security of Patients, Providers, and Clinics

• Promote Safety and Security of Patients, Providers and Clinics. DOJ continues to robustly enforce the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, which protects the right to access and provide reproductive health services.

Safeguarding Privacy and Sensitive Health Information

• Strengthen Reproductive Health Privacy under HIPAA.  HHS issued a proposed rule to strengthen privacy protections under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). As proposed, this rule would prevent an individual’s information from being disclosed to investigate, sue, or prosecute an individual, a health care provider, or a loved one simply because that person sought, obtained, provided, or facilitated legal reproductive health care, including abortion. By safeguarding sensitive information related to reproductive health care, the rule will strengthen patient-provider confidentiality and help health care providers give complete and accurate information to patients. Prior to the proposed rule, HHS issued guidance reaffirming HIPAA’s existing protections for the privacy of individuals’ protected health information.
  
• Take Action Against Illegal Use and Sharing of Sensitive Health Information.  The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has committed to enforcing the law against illegal use and sharing of highly sensitive data, including information related to reproductive health care. Consistent with this commitment, the FTC has taken several enforcement actions against companies for disclosing consumers’ personal health information, including highly sensitive reproductive health data, without permission.
  
• Help Consumers Protect Their Personal Data.  The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) launched a new guide for consumers on best practices for protecting their personal data, including geolocation data, on mobile phones. The guide follows a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued by FCC that would strengthen data breach rules to provide greater protections to personal data. Separately, HHS issued a how-to guide for consumers on steps they can take to better protect their data on personal cell phones or tablets and when using mobile health apps, like period trackers, which are generally not protected by HIPAA.
  
• Protect Students’ Health Information.  ED issued guidance to over 20,000 school officials to remind them of their obligations to protect student privacy under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). The guidance helps ensure that school officials—at federally funded school districts, colleges, and universities—know that, with certain exceptions, they must obtain written consent from eligible students or parents before disclosing personally identifiable information from students’ educational records, which may include student health information. The guidance encourages school officials to consider the importance of student privacy, including health privacy, with respect to disclosing student records. ED also issued a know-your-rights resource to help students understand their privacy rights for health records at school. 
  
• Safeguard Patients’ Electronic Health Information.  HHS issued guidance affirming that doctors and other medical providers can take steps to protect patients’ electronic health information, including their information related to reproductive health care. HHS makes clear that patients have the right to ask that their electronic health information generally not be disclosed by a physician, hospital, or other health care provider. The guidance also reminds health care providers that HIPAA’s privacy protections apply to patients’ electronic health information.

Reinforcing Nondiscrimination Protections under Federal Law

• Protect Students from Discrimination Based on Pregnancy.  The Department of Education (ED) released a resource for universities reiterating their responsibilities not to discriminate on the basis of pregnancy or pregnancy-related conditions, including termination of pregnancy. This guidance reminds schools of their existing and long-standing obligations under Title IX.
  
• Strengthen Nondiscrimination in Healthcare.  HHS issued a proposed rule to strengthen nondiscrimination in health care. The proposed rule would implement Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and affirms protections consistent with President Biden’s Executive Orders on nondiscrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Providing Access to Accurate Information and Legal Resources

• Ensure Easy Access to Reliable Information.  HHS launched and maintains ReproductiveRights.gov, which provides timely and accurate information on people’s right to access reproductive health care, including contraception, abortion services, and health insurance coverage, as well as how to file a patient privacy or nondiscrimination complaint. DOJ also launched justice.gov/reproductive-rights, a webpage that provides a centralized online resource on the Department’s ongoing work to protect access to reproductive health care services under federal law.
  
• Hosted a Convening of Lawyers in Defense of Reproductive Rights.  DOJ and the Office of White House Counsel convened more than 200 lawyers and advocates from private firms, bar associations, legal aid organizations, reproductive rights groups, and law schools across the country for a convening of pro-bono attorneys, as directed in the first Executive Order. Following this convening, reproductive rights organizations launched the Abortion Defense Network to offer abortion-related legal defense services, including legal advice and representation.

Promote Research and Data Collection

• Use Data to Track Impacts on Access to Care.  HHS convened leading experts to discuss the state of existing reproductive health research and what the data tells us about the impact of the overturning of Roe v. Wade, as well as the future of research on reproductive health care access. These convenings helped identify research gaps, opportunities for collaboration, and ways to bolster research efforts for both Federal agencies and external partners.

###

The post FACT SHEET: White House Task Force on Reproductive Healthcare Access Announces New Actions and Marks the 51st Anniversary of Roe v. Wade appeared first on The White House.

Fifty-one years ago today, the Supreme Court recognized a woman’s constitutional right to make deeply personal decisions with her doctor—free from the interference of politicians. Then, a year and a half ago, the Court made the extreme decision to overturn Roe and take away a constitutional right. As a result, tens of millions of women now live in states with extreme and dangerous abortion bans. Because of Republican elected officials, women’s health and lives are at risk. In states across the country, women are being turned away from emergency rooms, forced to go to court to seek permission for the medical attention they need, and made to travel hundreds of miles for health care.

Even as Americans—from Ohio to Kentucky to Michigan to Kansas to California—have resoundingly rejected attempts to limit reproductive freedom, Republican elected officials continue to push for a national ban and devastating new restrictions across the country. 

On this day and every day, Vice President Harris and I are fighting to protect women’s reproductive freedom against Republicans officials’ dangerous, extreme, and out-of-touch agenda. We stand with the vast majority of Americans who support a woman’s right to choose, and continue to call on Congress to restore the protections of Roe in federal law once and for all.

###

The post Statement from President Joe Biden on the 51st Anniversary of Roe v. Wade appeared first on The White House.

One year ago today, during Lunar New Year celebrations in Monterey Park, California, 11 innocent people were killed in a heinous act of gun violence that struck at the heart and soul of one of the largest Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander communities in our nation. In mere moments, friends and families gathering together in joy and hope were devastated by a senseless, horrific mass shooting. Two days later, this tragedy was compounded by another. As we mourned with the community of Monterey Park, we learned a gunman killed seven people in Half Moon Bay, California. Jill and I continue to pray for the families of the victims and many others traumatized by these attacks.

These shootings shocked the conscience of our nation. In the weeks that followed at my State of the Union address, Jill and I were honored to host Brandon Tsay, who heroically disarmed the Monterey Park shooter and prevented further bloodshed. I also traveled to Monterey Park, where I spent hours meeting with families who lost loved ones, and announced an Executive Order containing new actions to crack down on the epidemic of gun violence tearing our country apart. We launched the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, and my administration is implementing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act—the most meaningful gun safety legislation in nearly 30 years—which strengthens background checks, expands the use of red flag laws, improves access to mental health services for students dealing with the trauma of gun violence, and more. 

In the wake of the tragic shootings in Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay, California has also taken action, passing more than 20 new gun safety laws and investing in proven solutions like gun violence intervention programs. Other states should follow their lead.

Importantly, we also need Congress to do its part. It’s long past time we banned assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, ended immunity from liability for gun manufacturers, passed a national red flag law, enacted universal background checks, and required safe storage of guns. We cannot tackle the gun violence epidemic in America while Republicans in Congress sit on their hands. 

###

The post Statement from President Joe Biden Marking One Year Since Shootings in Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay appeared first on The White House.

One year ago today, during Lunar New Year celebrations in Monterey Park, California, 11 innocent people were killed in a heinous act of gun violence that struck at the heart and soul of one of the largest Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander communities in our nation. In mere moments, friends and families gathering together in joy and hope were devastated by a senseless, horrific mass shooting. Two days later, this tragedy was compounded by another. As we mourned with the community of Monterey Park, we learned a gunman killed seven people in Half Moon Bay, California. Jill and I continue to pray for the families of the victims and many others traumatized by these attacks.

These shootings shocked the conscience of our nation. In the weeks that followed at my State of the Union address, Jill and I were honored to host Brandon Tsay, who heroically disarmed the Monterey Park shooter and prevented further bloodshed. I also traveled to Monterey Park, where I spent hours meeting with families who lost loved ones, and announced an Executive Order containing new actions to crack down on the epidemic of gun violence tearing our country apart. We launched the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, and my administration is implementing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act—the most meaningful gun safety legislation in nearly 30 years—which strengthens background checks, expands the use of red flag laws, improves access to mental health services for students dealing with the trauma of gun violence, and more. 

In the wake of the tragic shootings in Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay, California has also taken action, passing more than 20 new gun safety laws and investing in proven solutions like gun violence intervention programs. Other states should follow their lead.

Importantly, we also need Congress to do its part. It’s long past time we banned assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, ended immunity from liability for gun manufacturers, passed a national red flag law, enacted universal background checks, and required safe storage of guns. We cannot tackle the gun violence epidemic in America while Republicans in Congress sit on their hands. 

###

The post Statement from President Joe Biden Marking One Year Since Shootings in Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay appeared first on The White House.

Yesterday, Lael Brainard, Assistant to the President and National Economic Advisor convened a meeting with stakeholders to discuss the Administration’s support for AI policy that promotes fair, open, and competitive markets and that creates opportunities for small businesses and new entrants.  

In the meeting, participants discussed the risks of concentration across the AI ecosystem and ways to support competition as AI systems continue to develop and become more widely used across the economy. This included a focus on the challenges participants raised about the high levels of concentration in the production of critical inputs including semiconductors, computing power, cloud storage, talent, and data. Participants also covered how open-source models and more tailored AI applications may shape the competitive landscape. Participants raised concerns about the risks of collusive behavior and highlighted the need to scrutinize partnerships and investments across the industry.

Participants also addressed the possible harms from lack of competition in AI including with respect to prices, quality, innovation, privacy. They also addressed how the rise of AI will affect competition law and policy in the coming years, including ways in which it may exacerbate existing challenges such as price-fixing and self-preferencing. Finally, the discussion turned to steps the Administration and others can take to promote competition and ensure that the benefits of AI are more broadly available. This includes support for publicly-funded research initiatives, effective use of procurement tools, and other steps.

The Biden-Harris Administration has made clear that promoting competition and innovation is a central part of AI policy. President Biden’s Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence calls on agencies “to promote competition in AI and related technologies, as well as in other markets” as they develop policies and regulations. The President’s Executive Order also supports small businesses commercializing AI products and directs a pilot of the National AI Research Resource (NAIRR) to provide federally-supported computing power, data, and other resources to AI researchers and smaller companies. The Administration is also committed to a whole-of-government approach to promote competition and protect consumers as laid out in President Biden’s Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy. This includes the application of competition policy and antitrust laws “to meet the challenges posed by new industries and technologies” as they develop.

Representatives from the White House National Economic Council, National Security Council, Domestic Policy Council, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Council of Economic Advisers and from the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice attended the listening session. Outside participants in today’s meeting included:

• Nidhi Hegde, American Economic Liberties Project
• Sacha Haworth, Tech Oversight Project
• Chris Hughes, Economic Security Project & The New School
• Taylor Jo Isenberg, Economic Security Project
• Samir Jain, Center for Democracy and Technology
• Amba Kak, AI Now Institute
• Barry Lynn, Open Markets Institute
• Tejas Narechania, UC Berkeley School of Law
• Emily Peterson-Cassin, Demand Progress
• David Segal, Yelp
• Ganesh Sitaraman, Vanderbilt Law School
• Charlotte Slaiman, Public Knowledge
• Matt Stoller, American Economic Liberties Project
• Maurice Stucke, University of Tennessee College of Law

###

The post Readout of White House Meeting on Competition Policy and Artificial Intelligence appeared first on The White House.

Yesterday, Lael Brainard, Assistant to the President and National Economic Advisor convened a meeting with stakeholders to discuss the Administration’s support for AI policy that promotes fair, open, and competitive markets and that creates opportunities for small businesses and new entrants.  

In the meeting, participants discussed the risks of concentration across the AI ecosystem and ways to support competition as AI systems continue to develop and become more widely used across the economy. This included a focus on the challenges participants raised about the high levels of concentration in the production of critical inputs including semiconductors, computing power, cloud storage, talent, and data. Participants also covered how open-source models and more tailored AI applications may shape the competitive landscape. Participants raised concerns about the risks of collusive behavior and highlighted the need to scrutinize partnerships and investments across the industry.

Participants also addressed the possible harms from lack of competition in AI including with respect to prices, quality, innovation, privacy. They also addressed how the rise of AI will affect competition law and policy in the coming years, including ways in which it may exacerbate existing challenges such as price-fixing and self-preferencing. Finally, the discussion turned to steps the Administration and others can take to promote competition and ensure that the benefits of AI are more broadly available. This includes support for publicly-funded research initiatives, effective use of procurement tools, and other steps.

The Biden-Harris Administration has made clear that promoting competition and innovation is a central part of AI policy. President Biden’s Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence calls on agencies “to promote competition in AI and related technologies, as well as in other markets” as they develop policies and regulations. The President’s Executive Order also supports small businesses commercializing AI products and directs a pilot of the National AI Research Resource (NAIRR) to provide federally-supported computing power, data, and other resources to AI researchers and smaller companies. The Administration is also committed to a whole-of-government approach to promote competition and protect consumers as laid out in President Biden’s Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy. This includes the application of competition policy and antitrust laws “to meet the challenges posed by new industries and technologies” as they develop.

Representatives from the White House National Economic Council, National Security Council, Domestic Policy Council, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Council of Economic Advisers and from the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice attended the listening session. Outside participants in today’s meeting included:

• Nidhi Hegde, American Economic Liberties Project
• Sacha Haworth, Tech Oversight Project
• Chris Hughes, Economic Security Project & The New School
• Taylor Jo Isenberg, Economic Security Project
• Samir Jain, Center for Democracy and Technology
• Amba Kak, AI Now Institute
• Barry Lynn, Open Markets Institute
• Tejas Narechania, UC Berkeley School of Law
• Emily Peterson-Cassin, Demand Progress
• David Segal, Yelp
• Ganesh Sitaraman, Vanderbilt Law School
• Charlotte Slaiman, Public Knowledge
• Matt Stoller, American Economic Liberties Project
• Maurice Stucke, University of Tennessee College of Law

###

The post Readout of White House Meeting on Competition Policy and Artificial Intelligence appeared first on The White House.

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

 
1:47 P.M. EST
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Chatty Friday.  We were just saying everybody is chatty out here.
 
Oh my gosh, the first row. 

Q    Yes!

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Let’s give it up — (applause) —

Q    Almost the second —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — give it up to the ladies.  (Applause.)

Q    And no heels!
 
Q    Yes, we’re all wearing snow boots.

Q    Should I move to the third row?  It seems like —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Joe Joe, you have failed us in the second row.  You have failed us in the second row.  (Laughter.) 
 
Q    Almost.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Almost.  Almost. 
 
All right.  With that, good afternoon.  Happy Friday.  Thank you for those who were able to show up in this winter — wonderful winter storm in D.C.  I have a couple of things at the top. 
 
So, today we got more evidence that President Biden’s economic plan is delivering results that more and more Americans are feeling.  Consumer sentiments increased 13 percent this month, rising to the — its highest level in more than two years. 
 
In the last two months, sentiments has surged by 29 percent — the biggest two-month jump in more than 30 years.  It’s clear Americans are starting to feel President Biden’s strong economy.  Wages have risen faster than inflation for 10 months in a row.  The unemployment rate has remained below 4 percent for the longest stretch in 50 years.  Inflation has fallen by about two thirds.  We have more work to do, obviously, but we are on the right path. 
 
President Biden’s agenda is a sharp contrast with congressional Republicans’ plans to cut taxes for the wealthy and big corporations while raising healthcare and prescription drug costs for hardworking American families. 
 
And a few moments ago — I saw some of you have already been reporting this — the President signed the continuing resolution passed by bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate that prevents a needless shutdown, maintains current funding levels, and includes no extreme policies. 
 
Instead of wasting more time on partisan appropriation bills that violate the budget agreement two thirds of them voted for last spring, House Republicans must finally do their jobs and work across the aisle to pass full-year funding bills that deliver for the American people and address urgent domestic and national security priorities by passing the President’s supplemental request. 
 
Today, more good news, President Biden announced his administration is canceling debt for another 74,000 student borrowers across the country.  With today’s actions, the Biden-Harris administration has now canceled debts for 3.6 million Americans.  And that’s a big deal, as some will say around here — a big deal. 
 
The — those receiving relief as a part of today’s announcement include teachers, nurses, firefighters, and others who earn forgiveness after 10 years of public service. 
 
It also includes people who have been in repayment for 20 years but never got the relief that they earned.  And in practical terms, it means that today, thanks to President Biden and this administration, millions of American families have a bit more breathing room to start a business, save their — save for their kid’s college, or buy their first home. 
 
From day one of the — of this administration, the President vowed to improve the student loan system so that obtaining higher education provides Americans with opportunity and prosperity, not unmagi- — unimaginable burdens of student loan debt. 
 
The President will continue using every tool at his disposal to get student loan borrowers the relief they need to reach their dreams. 
 
Turning to this — this afternoon, the President’s — obviously, his schedule this afternoon.  The President knows that mayors get things done, and he is looking forward to welcoming bipartisan mayors attending the U.S. Conference of Mayors Winter Meeting to the White House later today. 
 
The President will highlight the ongoing partnership between federal and local governments to ensure communities across the country realize the full potential of Investing in America agenda. 
 
The President will highlight the most significant investment in our nation’s infrastructure in generations, the biggest investment in fighting climate change, progress preventing [and] reducing crime, our work to end homelessness, and much more. 
 
With that we have the — the Admiral here, John Kirby, who’s here to discuss the Middle East.
 
Admiral, the podium is yours.
 
MR. KIRBY:  Good afternoon, everybody. 
 
President Biden had a chance to speak this morning with Prime Minister Netanyahu.  The President and the Prime Minister discussed ongoing efforts to secure the release of all remaining hostages that are being held by Hamas. 
 
The two leaders also reviewed the situation in Gaza and the shift to targeted operations that will enable the flow of increasing amounts of humanitarian assistance while keeping the military pressure on Hamas and its leaders significant. 
 
The President welcomed the decision from the government of Israel to permit the shipment of flour for the Palestinian people directly through Ashdod port while our teams are separately working on options for more direct maritime delivery of assistance into Gaza. 
 
The President also discussed recent progress in ensuring the Palestinian Authority’s revenues are available to pay salaries, including for the Palestinian security forces in the West Bank. 
 
The President also discussed Israel’s responsibility, even as it maintains military pressure on Hamas and its leaders, to reduce civilian harm and to protect the innocents.
 
The President also discussed his vision for a more durable peace and security for Israel, fully integrated within the region, and a two-state solution with Israel’s security guaranteed.
 
Now — and we’ll have a formal readout of the call here shortly if it’s not out already. 
 
Just one last thing.  This morning, U.S. forces conducted three successful self-defense strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen.  This is the fourth preemptive action that the U.S. military has taken in the past week against Houthi missile launchers that were ready to launch attacks — in this case, anti-ship missiles. 
 
CENTCOM — Central Command — will have a more — more details on this a little bit later, but, as you know, there are U.S. Navy ships in the Red Sea as well as international shipping.
 
These actions were, I want to stress again, done in self-defense, but it also helps make safer international waters for both naval vessels as well as mar- — merchant — merchant shipping. 
 
Thank you. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Colleen.
 
Q    John, so the call with Bibi and the President today was the first since Christmas. 
 
MR. KIRBY:  Yes. 
 
Q    Can you talk a little bit about why the delay, especially because they were talking so frequently over the fall?
 
And then, also, on Bibi.  Does the President think a two-state solution is possible with Bibi in office, given what he’s said about it?
 
MR. KIRBY:  On the modalities of the call and the frequencies, as I’ve said before, they will talk as appropriate.  This was deemed by both leaders as the — as the — the best opportunity for yet another call, Colleen, and I have no doubt that there will be additional calls going forward, clearly.
 
The President still believes in the promise and the possibility of a two-state solution.  He recognizes that’s going to take a lot of hard work.  It’s going to take a lot of leadership there in the region, particularly, on both sides of the issue. 
 
And the United States stands firmly committed to — to eventually seeing that outcome.  Right now — and we’re — obviously, we’re talking to them actively about post-conflict Gaza and what governance there needs to look like and the importance of an independent Palestinian state for long-term security, not just for the Palestinian people but for the Israeli people as well. 
 
Currently, of course, we’re rightly focused, as I said in the opening statement, on making sure Israel has what it — continues to has — have what it needs to defend itself. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Weijia.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  And thanks, John.  So, you continue to reiterate the administration’s policy that you support a two-state solution.  Senator Elizabeth Warren says that if “Netanyahu opposes that, then we need to question why we are supporting the Netanyahu government.”  So, why is the U.S. supporting a government that opposes U.S. policy?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m not sure what the context means of supporting the government, but let’s just take it — I’m going to assume it’s meant in the context of this war they’re fighting.  It is certainly supporting the Is- — we’re certainly supporting the Israeli governments to defend themselves. 
 
But it’s really bigger than that, Weijia.  It’s about supporting the Israeli people’s right to exist, right to be a nation.  I mean, again, you don’t have to look any further than the 2017 manifesto of Hamas to see what their ultimate plans are.  They want to wipe the country off the face of the — off the map. 
 
So, we’re defending Israel’s right to defend itself.  The Israeli people get to decide who represents them, who their elected officials are.  We don’t decide that.  And we will always work with whoever the Israeli people decide to put in — into power and government.  We’ll always work with them, regardless of the differences, maybe, on political issues. 
 
They chose this government.  This is the government that is in charge of conducting warfare against Hamas.  We’re going to make sure that they have what they need, in addition to making sure, as I said in the opening statement, that we’re doing everything we can to alleviate the humanitarian suffering in Gaza. 
 
Q    Warren is not alone in expressing these concerns.  Is the President worried that, given what Netanyahu has said about opposing a Palestinian state, it could complicate the efforts to pass the supplemental?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The President is under — two things — under no illusions of how elusive a two-state solution has been and how much hard work there’s going to be ahead for all of us to try to get there. 
 
On the — on the supplemental — again, I don’t want to negotiate here in public — we believe that we’re making progress here in terms of working in a bipartisan way with the — with senators.  And we’ll see where this goes. 
 
But — but the President comes away from the meeting with congressional leaders the other day — largely, that was a meeting about Ukraine —
 
Q    Right.
 
MR. KIRBY:  — and bipartisan support on Ukraine, but that they understand the — the urgency of — of supporting Israel as well. 
 
Q    Thanks, John.
 
Q    Thanks.  Thanks, John.  You’ve said that — or you said yesterday that the U.S. is taking away capabilities from the Houthis with each and every one of these strikes and making it harder for them to continue to propagate these attacks.  Can you quantify that progress, describe that?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I would leave it to the Pentagon to go through their battle damage assessment.  After every strike, they’ll — they’ll do an assessment on how successful it was.  They believe that they have had good effects on degrading some of these Houthi capabilities. 
 
But clearly — and the President alluded to this yesterday — they still have some offensive capability.  And we’re going to keep taking the actions we believe we need to take to defend ourselves.  But I — I couldn’t give you a percentage.  That’s really a better question for U.S. Central Command or for DOD to speak to.
 
Q    And you also said yesterday, the U.S. has additional options available to take on the Houthis.  What is the administration waiting for to use those other options?  Is there some red line or something that would happen?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I don’t think it’d be fair to say we’re waiting on anything.  I mean, we’ve been — we’ve been taking shots as needed, including this morning. 
 
Well, you know, three anti-ship cruise missiles were sitting on the rails ready to go, and we knocked them out before they had a chance to launch them.  And we also designated the Houthis as a specially designated global terrorist.  That allows us some additional economic levers that we didn’t have available to us before.  And we’ll keep reviewing our options going forward. 
 
Again, I’ll say it that — that the Houthis need to stop these attacks.  They can make that choice.  Clearly, they’ve made opposite choices.  So, we have choices to make too, and we have options available to us as well.  We’ll continue to explore those options. 
 
Clearly, one of the options that we are and will continue to take are in the military realm, if needed. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Andrea.
 
Q    John, just on the North Korean underwater nuclear weapons systems test yesterday.  Do you have any information on that?  What’s your response to that?  And —
 
MR. KIRBY:  I don’t have a lot of specific information.  I — we’re not in a position where we can validate those claims.  We’re in touch, obviously, with our South Korean partners to see whatever information and context they might have about that.  So, I can’t — I can’t verify the claims by the North that they’ve — that they’ve actually tested such a weapon. 
 
It is — it does, though, underscore the continued provo- — provocations by Kim Jong Un and his regime in Pyongyang.  The continued pursuit — again, whether this is true or not, there’s little doubt that they continue to pursue advanced military capabilities to threaten their neighbors and to threaten the region. 
 
And that is why President Biden has taken significant steps to shore up our alliances in the region.  You saw in Camp David a historic agreement between Japan and South Korea to improve trilateral cooperation; a new nuclear consultative group session with South Korea that was announced when President Yoon was here; as well as the addition of U.S. military — particularly intelligence capabilities on and around the Peninsula so that we can get better information about what Kim Jong Un is up to.
 
But we haven’t taken our eye off this one bit. 
 
Q    Okay.  And then on — I’m sorry, just on Gaza and — and that conflict.  We’ve spoken before about your concerns about the conflict spreading.  Now we have reports that a Palestinian American teenager was killed today in the West Bank.  Can you confirm that?  And was that something that President Biden discussed with Netanyahu during the call?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We’re seriously concerned about these reports.  The information is scant at this time.  We don’t have perfect context about exactly what happened here.  Seriously concerned about it.  And we’re going to be in constant touch with counterparts in the region to — to get more information. 
 
But it’s — it’s definitely deeply concerning.  But afraid — I’m afraid I don’t have more information to that right now.
 
Q    Did the President bring it up?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I — I don’t believe that it was a subject of the call.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, M.J.
 
Q    Just back to the issue of the two-state solution.  What would you say is the President’s hope and expectation here?  Is it that the Prime Minister’s stance on this will eventually shift?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The — the hope is that when there’s a — when this conflict is over that we can work in a collaborative way with the Israeli government on — and counterparts in the region on good governance in Gaza — good governance that the President hopes can lead to — (a reporter sneezes) — a viable two-state solution. 
 
Bless you.
 
And, again, he’s not — he’s not Pollyannaish about this.  He understands how hard it is.  This is something he’s been pushing for for a long, long time.  He knows it’s going to take dedicated leadership on all sides here to bring it about.  And — and that means constant engagement by his administration and — and the national security team.  So — so, we’re going to — we’re going to keep at that work. 
 
Q    I guess I’m just wondering: If the two leaders are completely at odds on something as fundamental as the creation of a Palestinian state, do you know if the President has reason to believe that, at some point, the Prime Minister’s view on this will change?  Publicly, he has been very clear about where he stands on this.
 
MR. KIRBY:  You mean the President has been very clear, publicly, where he stands on this?
 
Q    The Prime Minister has been very clear on the fact that he rejects the idea of a Palestinian state.  The President also has been clear that he wants a two-state solution.
 
MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, look, this is just — this — we — we’re not going to agree on everything.  We’ve said that.  And good friends and allies can have those kinds of candid, forthright discussions, and we do.  It’s not going to change the President’s view that the best long-term solution for regional security, particularly the security of the Israeli people, is a free and independent Palestinian state that they can live in — in peace and security with — and this is an important caveat — with Israel’s security also guaranteed.  He still believes in that, and we’re going to continue to talk to our Israeli counterparts. 
 
This isn’t about, you know, trying to twist — twist somebody’s arm or — or force a change in their thinking.  The President — sorry, Prime Minister Netanyahu has — has made clear his concerns about that.  President Biden has made clear his strong conviction that a two-state solution is still the right path ahead.  And we’re going to continue to make that case.
 
Q    So — so, what is the overlap there?  I guess, you know, when the two leaders are having conversation, like their phone call today, what is it that the Prime Minister is saying to the President to indicate that that gap can be bridged?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I won’t get into the Prime Minister’s side of the conversation.  I think that’s better for his staff that — to speak to.  All I can tell you is that the President reiterated his strong conviction in the viability of a two-state solution — understanding, of course, that we’re not going to get there tomorrow, that there’s an active conflict going on, and that we want to make sure Israel has what it needs to defend itself. 
 
But as we’re talking about post-conflict Gaza — and we have been now for many, many weeks — you can’t do that without also talking about the aspirations of the Palestinian people and what that needs to look like for them.  So, we’re going to continue to have those conversations.
 
Q    John, were the Prime Minister’s comments yesterday a factor in why this call took place today?  Was that something that the U.S. decided they wanted the President to speak with him today about that?
 
MR. KIRBY:  No, this was a call that we’ve been actually trying to land on the schedule for quite a bit of time here.  So, this was not — you shouldn’t read into the fact that the call happened today as — as some sort of response to the Prime Minister’s discussions or comments yesterday.
 
Q    And did they talk specifically about those comments yesterday?  Or it was a more general reiteration of the President’s support for a two-state solution?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Again, without getting more beyond the readout, I would just say that there was — certainly, on the agenda for both leaders was to talk about post-conflict Gaza, governance in Gaza, and, of course, a two-state solution.
 
Q    And can you just tell me a bit more about what the President meant yesterday when he was asked by my colleague whether the strikes in Yemen are stopping the Houthis and the President said, “No”?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I think, you know, if you just look at what happened yesterday, it’s pretty self-evident.  They continue to have offensive capability and they continue to be willing to use it.  We also have plenty of defensive capability available to us, and we continue to use it as well.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Did the President address Netanyahu’s use of the phrase “from the river to the sea” in their conversation today?  I know the White House has previously said that phrase is divisive, so —
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m not aware that that specific phrase was discussed.
 
Q    Well, do you condemn him using that phrase?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Look, there’s a — there’s a connotation with that phrase.  We’ve talked about this before.  But when — you know, when you use the phrase “river to the sea,” it — it speaks basically to the mantra of Hamas and in their manifesto, where they basically describe the geographic bounds of what they believe to be Palestine.  And if you look at it on the map, if you go look at the — the four corners that they describe it, it’s basically the State of Israel.  They just don’t believe it should exist. 
 
So, again, it’s — it’s not a phrase that — that we recommend using, given because of that context.
 
Q    But this wasn’t Hamas.  This was Netanyahu.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I understand.  I — I don’t have anything more on that.  And I certainly don’t have anything more on the conversation to read out with respect to that.
 
Q    You had talked about the hard work it will take to, kind of, come to an agreement of sorts on a two-state solution.  Can you outline what that kind of work and conversation would look like?  Does this mean more calls between Biden and Bibi?  How — how does he expect to —
 
MR. KIRBY:  I think there’s certainly going to be more calls between the two leaders.  And there’ll be more conversations between our two teams.  I mean, Secretary of State Blinken has been there — what? — four or five times since the 7th of October, and I have every expectation —
 
Q    Does the President —
 
MR. KIRBY:  — he’ll be back again as well.  And we’re — we’re going to continue to have discussions with the team across a range of issues. 
 
I understand that the two-state solution is the issue today because of the comments in the press here.  But every discussion we’re having in the region has — has a component of it about post-conflict Gaza and governance and what that looks like and, yes, of course, our continued interest in a two-state solution.  But it also has to do with humanitarian assistance, with getting the hostages released, and making sure that Israel has the weapons and capabilities that it — that it needs to — to defend itself. 
 
And I’ll just end with this.  I mean, prior to the 7th of October, as you all know, we were working closely with Israel and Saudi Arabia on a potential normalization deal — a normalization deal that the President believes Hamas was also aware of.  And it certainly could have been a contributing factor to the violence that they visited on the Israeli people on the 7th.
 
(Reporter sneezes.)
 
MR. KIRBY:  Bless you. 
 
Q    Thank you.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I lost my train of thought.  (Laughter.) 
 
But the — the point is we’re — we’re still having discussions with counterparts about that normalization.  And we’ve gotten some positive feedback, even from Saudi Arabia, about what that could look like going forward.
 
As a part of that normalization, should — should we be able to get there — and we were making progress before the 7th — obviously, there would be a component in there for the Palestinians.  There have — there would have to be.  And we’re not giving up on that. 
 
And if you’re able to get to that normalization, that could be a significant milestone in overcoming some of the challenges of a two-state solution.
 
Q    Did the President in his call today with Netanyahu express any concern about Netanyahu continuing to say that he doesn’t stand for a two-state solution? 
 
MR. KIRBY:  I think I’ll just leave my description of the call the way it was, and you — again, you’ll see a readout here coming from us on — on paper. 
 
But, yes, they talked about — they — they talked — in general talked about the possibilities of a two-state solution.  And the President reaffirmed and reiterated his strong belief in that possibility. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Aurelia.
 
Q    Thank you so much.  You mentioned progress on the front of the tax revenue issue in the West Bank.  Does that mean the Israeli Prime Minister has committed to release his tax revenue?
 
MR. KIRBY:  There was — there was discussions in their — in their Cabinet about that.  And that was what I was referencing there was ongoing discussions within the Cabinet about the revenue and — and using it appropriately. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.  John, earlier this week, you talked about the 500 entities — about Iran — 500 entities that have been sanctioned by the administration last year.  Have you seen any impact of these sanctions — any type of impact it has had on Iran’s behavior?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Five hundred entities since the beginning of the administration, not last year.  Some 50 sanctions regimes, about 500 entities. 
 
We know they’ve had an impact on Iran’s economy, which — which struggles.  But look, we also know that there’s other ways that you have to push back on Iran’s destabilizing behaviors, including bolstering and strengthening our — our military capabilities in the region, as well as working with partners.  I mean, we’ve now got a coalition of 20-some-odd countries — ships and aircraft and other capabilities — trying to protect Red Sea shipping. 
 
So, there’s been a lot of effort here to — to — to hold Iran accountable for their destabilizing activities. 
 
Q    And if you allow me, John, a colleague has asked me to ask you: Yesterday, Mexico and Chile, requested the International Criminal Court to investigate potential crimes against civilians in Gaza and the October 7th Hamas attack on Israel.  Any reaction on this —
 
MR. KIRBY:  We’re aware of those — of that report and the potential referral to the ICC.  I don’t have a comment for you on it at this time.  We’re still gathering more information about what this — what this would entail. 
 
But I want to say again that we don’t have any indications that there’s deliberate — deliberate efforts to commit war crimes by the Israeli Defense Forces. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.
 
Q    John, yesterday, Jake Sullivan met with the family members of hostages being held by Hamas.  I’m wondering if you can give us any — any readout?  Were — was he able to provide any updates to the families?  What — what message did he have — have for them during that time?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The main message was that we’re still working out this.  And as I said in — in the readout of the call, that was right at the top of the list for the President to talk to Prime Minister Netanyahu about efforts to get another hostage deal going. 
 
And I just — I want to protect the private nature of the conversation.  But — but Jake also made sure that they were aware that those efforts are ongoing, and that they’re serious.  The discussions we’re having are sober and serious about potentially getting another hostage deal in place. 
 
I’m not suggesting and you shouldn’t take away from this that we’ll have something to announce imminently or that we’re over the finish line.  I don’t mean to suggest that at all.  There’s a lot of hard work still ahead. 
 
But we haven’t given up on the effort.  And the efforts are being taken very seriously by the national security team.  And, you know, Brett McGurk was just in Doha last week, and that was a big reason why he was there. 
 
So, that was — Jake wanted to bring them together, A, to make sure they knew, you know, we still kept — that we kept that connective tissue with them, that we still obviously care about their loved ones and getting them home, that they’re a priority for President Biden, and updated them in general terms about the discussions that we’ve been having in the region. 
 
Q    Was he able to give any kind of update about the condition or what was known about the condition of any of the hostages?  Is — do we have new information or any information about how the hostages are doing at this point?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I don’t have any information to share with you about what we know about the — the individual hostages.  I will say, as I’ve said before: Regrettably, we just don’t have a lot of tactile information about where they are or what specific condition they’re being held. 
 
And as I think you can imagine, it is very likely that they’re being moved around quite a bit.  So, it’s hard to get real fingertip feel on exactly how they are.  But we have to assume they’re being held in just the utmost deplorable of conditions. 
 
Q    On the supplemental, just given the latest developments, I mean, how is the President thinking of this idea of conditioning aid to Israel?  Is this being pushed by some of his allies?  Is that something he supports?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We believe that the approach that we’re taking right now has had results.  And we’re going to continue that approach, which is, obviously, making sure that Israel has the capabilities it needs, and that continues.  But also urging them at every turn to be more precise, more targeted, more deliberate with respect to civilian harm; urging an increase in humanitarian aid and assistance; and of course, trying to get another humanitarian pause in place so we can do a hostage deal. 
 
I would tell you, as I’ve said before, that this approach that we’ve taken of at once supporting Israel and their military capabilities, but also providing advice, counsel, lessons learned from our own experiences in this kind of fighting has had results.  They have changed the way they have conducted operations. 
 
In fact, they have already started a transition to lower-intensity operations, again, largely at our urging.  They opened up Kerem Shalom, a second gate of humanitarian assistance, largely at our urging. 
 
So, the President’s continued discussions with Prime Minister Netanyahu and at lower levels across our team has had results. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Patsy.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.  John, am I correct to understand that the President believes there is wiggle room in the Prime Minister’s position in opposing Palestinian statehood?  And what is the President prepared to offer beyond pushing for a Saudi-Israel normalization deal to convince the Prime Minister to accept the two-state solution?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The Prime Minister should speak to his own headspace when it comes to that.  And of course, he’s talked poli- — publicly about — about a two-state solution. 
 
All I can do is say what I’ve said before: The President still believes in the promise and possibility of that.  He believes it’s going to take hard work and leadership.  He’s willing to put his shoulder to the wheel for that eventual outcome. 
 
At the same time, we’ve got to make sure that they have what they need to defend themselves, and we get humanitarian assistance in. 
 
And, I’m sorry, your second question was —
 
Q    Yeah.  I mean, what is he prepared to offer, whether it’s a carrot or a stick in terms of trying to persuade the Prime Minister to go in line with U.S. policy?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, I’m certainly not going to goti- –negotiate here from the podium about a two-state solution.  It is something that is — remains his policy, his desire to see it.  We’re going to continue to push for that. 
 
Q    Okay.  And Jordan says that Israel targeted their field hospital in Khan Younis today, injuring one patient and a staff.  Can you confirm this?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I cannot.
 
Q    And one more.  Does the administration believe that the Houthis will stop their attacks if there is a ceasefire in Gaza?  And does that play a factor into the calculus on —
 
MR. KIRBY:  I think you got to take anything the Houthis say with a big grain of salt.  We’re not — we’re not taking what they say to the bank. 
 
And this idea that this is somehow about Gaza just doesn’t square with the facts.  I mean, most of the ships that they’re going after have nothing to do with Israel.  So, we’re not taking anything at face value. 
 
They need to stop these attacks.  We’ve got capabilities available to us to use it if we have to. 
 
Q    Just to — just to clarify: What’s happening in the Red Sea, the attacks from the Houthis, does not play a factor into the calculus of whether or not you’re pushing Israel for a ceasefire? 
 
MR. KIRBY:  No. 
 
Q    Thank you. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Brian.
 
Q    Thanks a lot.  Thanks, John.  On Ecuador.  Is the U.S. and — and the President considering ramping up its military assistance to Ecuador as it confronts these violent drug gangs?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m aware of no such plans to do that. 
 
Q    There was — the U.S. had an inaugural working group on defense issues with Ecuador last year.  Is the President wanting to ramp up that cooperation?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m aware of no such plans. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, in the back.
 
Q    All right.  Thank you, Karine.  Thank you, John.  Two questions.  First, does the President plan similar calls, as he had with Prime Minister Netanyahu, with President El-Sisi of Egypt and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Saudi Arabia?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I have little doubt that there’ll be additional conversations with both those leaders, as well as I’m — I’m going to — I suppose, King Abdullah of Jordan as well.  But I don’t have anything on the schedule to speak to today. 
 
Q    All right.  The other question is that when — before he was inaugurated, President Arévalo of Guatemala came to the U.S. and met with Jake Sullivan and others in the National Security Council.  I believe he had a call from the President before he was sworn in. 
 
Is the administration discussing an apology for the 1954 coup in Guatemala come this June on its 60th anniversary?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Not that I’m aware of.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  A couple more in the back.  Go ahead, Jared.
 
Q    Thank you.  So, on this call between the President and the Prime Minister, how much of it was focused on getting a better handle of, kind of, the timeline of these Israeli operations; the transition, I guess, to the less intense operations?  And more broadly, is the President, is the administration satisfied with the progress that they’re seeing Israel making reaching its objectives in the war?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I don’t have a time hack for, like, you know, how long they talked about each topic.  I went through quite a list of topics.  That call was about 30 to 40 minutes long.  It’s — and where they discussed all these things. 
 
Clearly, the President was interested in the Prime Minister’s assessment of how things are going on the battlefield.  And as I said earlier — and they’ve acknowledged — that they have, in fact, begun a transition to lower-intensity operations, which means less troops — they pulled out a whole division from — from the North; a slackening reliance on airstrikes.
 
But again, you know, it’s really for the IDF to describe what those look like and — and the progress that they’re making. 
 
And clearly, yes, the President was interested in Prime Minister Netanyahu’s assessment of progress they’re making.  I won’t divulge that.  That’s really for the IDF to speak to.  But they have in general, in their press conferences, talked about the pressure that they’ve been putting on leaders of Hamas and the numbers of leaders that they’ve been able to take off the battlefield, and the resources and, quite frankly, underground architecture that they’ve been able to take away and degrade. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.
 
Q    Oh, okay.  John, thanks.  Thanks, Karine.  When it comes to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s comments, is there concern that his public comments about a two-state solution could negatively impact the discussions on a hostage release?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The short answer, I think, to that is no.
 
Look, obviously, each of these two leaders have stated publicly a different view on the promise of a two-state solution.  It’s not going to change President Biden’s mind one bit.  He still believes in it. 
 
They also still both believe in the importance of getting these hostages home to their families.  And that’s why we’re continuing to work at this.  And as I said earlier to a previous question, that work is serious and it’s sober and it’s ongoing.  And — and we are represented at that table in the region, trying to get those hostages released. 
 
And — and I — again, I don’t want to — I’m not going to put odds one way or another, except to say that — that there’s a lot of people in the region, including our Israeli counterparts, that are — that are working on this.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right, I’m trying get as many people as we can.  Go ahead, Janne.
 
Q    Thank you.  Thank you, Karine.  And thank you, John.  I have two questions on Russia and South Korea and North Korea.  The Russian ambassador to South Korea said in an interview with the South Korean media that he was ready to improve relationship with South Korea and deny the North Korea and Russia arms deals.  As you know, the North Korea and Russia’s foreign ministers and President Putin have met in Russia this week.  What is your interpretation of this?  And a follow-up.
 
MR. KIRBY:  We’ve talked at length about the burgeoning relationship between North Korea and Russia.  I stood up here and showed you a graphic and a slide of the — the belief we have and the desire by the Russians to purchase ballistic missiles from North Korea — has happened; have been used in Ukraine — as well as artillery ammunition. 

So, the — this burgeoning relationship between the two countries is certainly worrisome.  It’s worrisome for the people of Ukraine and our interests there as well, as well as it is for — for the Peninsula.
 
Q    Quick follow-up.  Kim Jong Un said that South Korea was a “hostile” country.  He then —
 
MR. KIRBY:  It’s not.
 
Q    He then threatened to devastate South Korea and United States and Japan with nuclear weapons.  Do you think these threats from Kim Jong Un are just the words, or do you think that there will be a real war?
 
MR. KIRBY:  You have to take rhetoric like that seriously from a man in charge of a regime that continues to pursue advanced military capabilities, including nuclear capabilities.  That’s why — and I won’t go through the list of all the things that — as I already said to a previous question — that we’re doing to try to address that threat.  You have to take that seriously. 
 
Kim Jong Un ought to focus more on feeding his people than on buying and purchasing advanced military capabilities.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  Just a couple more.  Go ahead.  And then we have to start wrapping it up.  Go ahead.
 
Q    Thank you.  Yes, thanks, John.  Do you — John, do you still oppose a general ceasefire?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Do we still oppose a general ceasefire?  Yes.
 
Q    Why?
 
MR. KIRBY:  For the same reason that we have in the past: We don’t believe a ceasefire is going to be to the benefit of anybody but Hamas.  We do support humanitarian pauses, as I said, to try to get hostages out and more aid in.  But we don’t support a ceasefire at this time. 
 
I think it’s important to remember that there was a ceasefire in place on the 6th of October, and Hamas, Mr. Sinwar —  Mr. Sinwar chose to break that ceasefire.  He’s the one that chose — chose this war.  There was a ceasefire, which we obviously were in supportive of, and Hamas chose to break it.
 
Q    And this — is the current situation beneficial to Israel, speaking strategically here?  The current situa- — is the current situation beneficial to Israel?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The current situation.  What do you mean by “the current situation”?
 
Q    The ongoing conflict.
 
MR. KIRBY:  The Israeli people have every right to expect that their military and that their government is going to act in their safety and security.  And I guarantee you that if — if this was any other country, including this one, we wouldn’t stand for that kind of threat to live next door to us like that — a threat that truly has existential ambitions. 

They want to wipe Israel off the face of the map.  So, the Israeli people have a right to expect that their government is going to try to protect them from that threat, which we still believe — and certainly was verified in the call today — that is a — still a viable threat to the Israeli government, to the Israeli people. 
 
Q    One more question on the Houthis.  How long do you — do you believe you can maintain that current course?  I mean, striking them and then they strike back.  You said you have other options.  At what point you can use another option?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, I’m not going to get ahead of the President or his decision-making.  We have plenty of military capability available to us. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  We’re going to wra- —
 
MR. KIRBY:  We’d like these — just one — I’m sorry. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m so- — no, I’m so sorry.
 
MR. KIRBY:  No, it’s my fault.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m so sorry.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I just got — my throat caught, and I — I got caught on my word.  

We want — we obviously are not seeking a conflict with the Houthis or a war in Yemen.  The — the best outcome would be for these reckless attacks by the Houthis to stop today. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right —

MR. KIRBY:  But we have the capability we need. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Sorry.  Sorry.

MR. KIRBY:  Sorry, sorry.  Sorry, I did it again.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   All right.  Last two.  Go ahead.  And then we’ll end with you.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  John, President Biden admitted yesterday that the retaliatory strikes against the Houthis aren’t working.  Why aren’t they afraid of the U.S.?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, you’d have to ask the Houthis what’s in their mindset.  I’m not going to get in between the ears of Houthi leaders. 
 
They claim it’s about Gaza.  It’s not.  They claim that this is some sort of, you know, U.S. and — and Britain effort to — to have — to wage war on them.  It’s not. 
 
We’re simply trying to do two things.  We’re trying to defend our Navy ships and sailors and the Navy ships and sailors of other nations that are in the Red Sea with us.  And, two, protect international shipping.  This is about self-defense. 
 
And again, this — this conflict — well, first of all, we’re not — we don’t seek a conflict.  There doesn’t need to be a conflict.  But the exchange of fire that we have seen in recent days doesn’t have to go on one day — one day more if the Houthis would make the right decision to stop these attacks.
 
Q    Right, but they’re a terrorist group attacking U.S. interests.  You know, wouldn’t your response make them stop?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Again, terrorist groups commit acts of violence oftentimes for — not just for the sake of committing acts of violence but for political posturing or political messaging of some sort, or perhaps tied to religious fervor. 
 
And they are a designated terrorist group.  They are conducting terrorist attacks on shipping in the Red Sea.  And we have to respond to that.  I don’t know what the alternative would be.  Should we just stop — stop defending ships and just let them have their way with the Southern Red Sea?  I don’t think that’s in anybody’s interest. 
 
So, we’re not going to — we’re not just going to lay down here and — and wait for them to come to a different approach.  They need to stop the attacks.  If they don’t, we’ll continue to defend ourselves and make it harder for them to conduct them.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay, last one.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Admiral, the House Armed Services Committee has asked Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin to appear publicly before them next month for failing to disclose his hospitalization.  Would the White House support the Secretary testifying publicly?
 
MR. KIRBY:  That’ll be a decision for the Secretary of Defense, and he has to make that decision.
 
Q    And since he was released from the hospital, has he clearly explained to the President or any senior officials here what exactly happened?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m not going to get into the — the personal and private discussions that the Secretary has had with the President of the United States.  They have spoken as recently as late last week.  And as you heard the President say himself, he has full trust and confidence in Secretary Austin and his leadership at the Pentagon, and that will continue.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you so much.
 
MR. KIRBY:  Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I appreciate it.  Have a great weekend.
 
All right, Colleen.
 
Q    Thank you.  So, I wanted to ask about the Uvalde report yesterday.  The President had said that he hadn’t seen the full findings but that he wasn’t sure that there was criminal liability.  So, a couple of things.  I wondered if he had time to look through the full findings and if his opinion has changed at all.  And then, also, if not, is there another way that law enforcement should be held accountable for the failures (inaudible)?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, there’s a couple of things I want to say about that.  The DOJ’s report — which is what you’re obviously referring to, Colleen — shows that there were multiple points of failure with the law enforcement response in Uvalde. 
 
And so, we can only imagine how this news adds to the heartbreaking Uvalde families — how they’re feeling.  And certainly, as — as a mo- — mom, myself, I — this is one of those days that you wish never, ever happens and you don’t want to imagine.  So, this obviously is very heartbreaking, not just for the families for that — for that community.  And so, no community — no community should have to ever go through what Uvalde community suffered. 
 
And — but I’ll say this, and I think it’s really important: that these families were able — in Uvalde were able to turn things around.  And they put — they — they turned their pain into purpose and helped pass the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which we know — which we see it’s already starting to save lives. 
 
And — and so, while the President is going to continue to take — to certainly — to do everything that he can through executive action to protect communities from gun violence, he’s not going to stop to ask Congress to — you know, to do something.  You hear me say that.   You hear him say that often.  They need to do something to stop this epidemic of — of gun violence.
 
And so, we’ve been very clear.  We need universal background checks, a national red flag law.  We must ban assault weapons, obviously, and high-capacity magazines.  And this — these actions can’t wait.  These actions can’t wait. 
 
And so, I just wanted to lay that out because that report was — was, I’m sure, very difficult — forget about us in the room — very difficult for the Uvalde community, and the President understands that.  I just don’t have anything beyond that to add.
 
Q    Okay.  Just — sorry, one more.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah, yeah.  That’s okay.
 
Q    On the — the debate — or the — the discussions on funding.  It sounded like yesterday there — they were pretty close on the immigration and Ukraine funding agreements.  And I just wondered if the White House was willing to concede more.  I think part of the — one of the main issues they were talking about was parole authority.  I wondered if there were any more concessions being made or — like, what’s happening?  (Laughter.)
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, for the past several months, I’ve been very careful to not negotiate from here.  So, I’m not going to — to break that.
 
What I’ll say is — and I’ve said this many times: We really appreciate that senators, both Republican and Democrats, continue to have this conversation, continue to negotiate on border security. 
 
Obviously, this is something that’s import- — that is very important to this President.  It came up in the — in the congressional meeting that they had two days ago.  And the President was very clear that Congress needs to act.  We need to be zeroed-in and focused on this and also the funding for Ukraine, as Ukraine continues — continues to defend themselves from — against Putin’s aggression — right? — Putin’s invasion.  And so, that is some- — something that we need to continue to do. 
 
Obviously, there has been a global coalition that the President has upheld to — including NATO alliances f- — more than 50 countries — in support of Ukraine as they’re trying, again, to fight for their freedom.  So, we need to continue to do that.  The President believes all of the — all of the parts and the pieces and what he’s asked for in his — in his national security supplemental needs to pass. 
 
But going back to border security for a second, we think the conversations are going in the right direction.  We are optimistic about it.  It is important to act now.  The immigration system, what we’ve seen at the border has been broken for decades now, needs to get fixed. 
 
And so, the Pres- — the President is going to continue to encourage Congress to act.  And, again, we are very thankful and appreciative and encouraged by what we’re seeing by senators, both Republicans and Democrats, continuing these negotiation processes.
 
Q    To follow on that: You say that you’re encouraged they’re going in the right direction.  But the President was asked yesterday, “What are the sticking points in the border agreement?”  And he said, “I don’t think we have any sticking points left.”  If that’s true, why haven’t senators announced an agreement yet?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, we’re going to let them speak to that.  But that’s — we’ve been saying it’s headed in the right direction, right?  We’ve been saying that we are encouraged by it, right?  That is, I think — what the President just said lays — pretty much backs up what we’ve been saying. 
 
So, I just don’t want to get into specifics.  As it relates any — as it relates to a specific, I think the negotiators should speak to that.  Let them have those conversations on the Hill.  Let them talk to you all about what it is that they’re discussing specifically.
 
I want to be very careful not to get involved in the negotiation process.  It is — we understand how this works.  And speaking from that — from here, from the podium, don’t want to affect the progress that we believe that they’re making on this. 
 
Look, border security is important.  We understand it’s important to the American people.  We have to do something.  We have to get — get some — get some — an agreement — a bipartisan agreement put forward so that — so that we can deal with that issue at the border.
 
Q    Did something change in the meeting that he had this week with leaders to give him that optimism?  I mean —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah —
 
Q    What — what does he — does he think that it’s close to a done deal to say that yesterday?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I want to be really mindful.  The meeting two days ago was not a negotiation meeting.  It was not.  It was about Ukraine and the importance that — the importance for us to continue to support Ukraine and how Congress has to act.  And what’s expected of us, not just in our national security — obviously, it’s important to our national security — but also globally. 
 
And so, that was the purpose of this meeting.  It was not part of the negotiation.  There are negotiations happening, as I just stated, over at the Hill, with Republicans and Democrat senators.  And we’re going to let those negotiation happen. 
 
What we dis- — what the President wanted to be really clear about is the importance in — to continuing to support Ukraine as they defend themselves. 
 
As you know, Ja- — National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and DNI Avril Haines were a part of that meeting.  They laid out some examples of the consequences for Ukraine on the battlefield. 
 
And so, that is what the conversation was about.  Obviously, and as you all heard from some of these congressional leaders, they brought up the border.  Border security was discussed, but it was not nego- — in a negotiation meeting. 
 
Go ahead.
 
Q    J.B. Pritzker was in Des Moines this week and was talking about the inhumane practices of receiving — you know, these — basically, these migrants are still being sent by airplane to Chicago.  Like, I — I think the total number is 30,000 have been shipped to Chicago alone.
 
And the mayors are meeting in town.  They’re certainly going to ask for more resources.  What — what can the federal government do to help cities like Chicago that are really struggling with this, especially given the subarctic temperatures that —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.
 
Q    — we’re seeing right now.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  And you’ve heard me say this very recently about how those actions that are being taken by Republican leader- — leadership is a inhuha- — inhu- — inhumane, and it’s demoralizing.  And it doesn’t — it doesn’t lead to the safety of — of communities here. 
 
And so, we’ve called that out, and we’ll continue to do that. 
 
And I’ve spoken to this already, but I’ll — I’ll lay it out a little bit more.  During the last year, what our administration was able to do, it — in corrob- — in corroboration with states and cities across the country, we launched this one — one — one-stop shop clinics to help eligible noncitizens get working permits and decompress the re- — respective shelter system. 
 
That was something that — that — that local leaders and state leaders asked for.  And so, we were able to, obviously, work in collaboration in getting that done. 
 
To date, these clinics have — have served more than 10,000 people.  So, they’ve been effective. 
 
And so — and another thing that you’ve heard us speak to is that we’ve provided more than $1 billion in grant funding for jurisdictions hosting recently arrived migrants.  So, that’s been important. 
 
And, look, here’s the thing.  I just went — I just had this whole — kind of this whole back-and-forth with your colleagues here about border security and about this negotiation that’s happening in the Senate.  That’s what we — we would like to see.  We want to do more.  We want to do more, but it requires Congress to act. 
 
That is where we are now.  That’s why it’s so important that these conversations, these negotiations on Capitol Hill with senators, both Republicans and Democrats, have been going on for the past several months.  We are encouraged.  We want to see the supplemental passed.  It is important to get that done as well. 
 
Remember, border security was originally a part of the — of the supplemental.  So, we look — we look forward to continuing collaboration with the states, these jurisdictions, obviously, just to see what else we can do.  But in order to get more, Congress needs to act. 
 
Q    I had a follow-up on what John was saying about deliberate war crimes.  That seems to differentiate between deliberate and inadvertent war crimes.  Can you say anything about —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I —
 
Q    — what you’re parsing is that — that phrasing?  I was — it startled me because it seems to imply that you acknowledge that there have been war crimes committed.  But perhaps not —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I —
 
Q    — deliberate.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I don’t think that’s what the — the Admiral was inferring to.  He doesn’t — I don’t — I — I can speak very — I think very — very, I think, forcefully and — and say that that is not what he was referring to.  
 
Look, we — we have been very clear about Israel’s absolute right to defend itself.  That’s something that we say all the time, right?  Obviously, this is our relationship, what we believe, as well, its — its obligation to abide by international law — right? — to make sure that we are — they are protecting civilian lives, whether Israeli lives or Palestinian lives.  We’ve been really clear about that. 
 
And so — and so, I just want to be really careful.  I’m not going to go beyond what the — what the Admiral said here.  And I wouldn’t parse his words too much here. 
 
But we’ve been very clear on where — where we stand on — on — on what — what we believe we stand on.  Obviously, we want to continue to have these diplomatic conversations, as the President had with Prime Minister Netanyahu.  And our focus has always been making sure, obviously, no civilian lives — right? — one civilian life is too many; getting those — that humanitarian aid into Gaza is incredibly important; making sure hostages — American hostages, all hostages come home; and trying to continue these pauses — these humanitarian pauses that you have seen the President lead on.  And they have been very successful, as — as the Admiral has said.
 
Q    If the International Court did rule that war crimes were committed, would the U.S. support —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m — I’m not going to get into hypothetical- —
 
Q    — that rule?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m just not going to get into hypotheticals from here. 
 
Go ahead, M.J.
 
Q    Karine, does the President believe that a ban on menthol cigarettes would save the lives of Black Americans?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I want to be really careful.  There’s a rulemaking process that’s currently happening.  Not going to get ahead of that.  That is something for, obviously, the respective agency — FDA — to — to kind of take a look at that.  I just don’t — I want to be really mindful — 
 
Q    I wasn’t asking about the rule.  I was just asking whether that is something the President believes.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, I — I hear you.  I just want to be careful because there’s a process — a rulemaking process that’s currently happening on that particular issue.  And I just don’t — I don’t want to comment on this rule because — on that pro- — on your question, because that rulemaking process is currently happening. 
 
FDA is doing their part.  They are the experts here.  I’m just not going to get into specifics of — of that at all.
 
Q    Well, they may be the experts, but I think there’s abundant research that shows that this is a leading cause of deaths for Black Americans.  I’m just asking whether the President believes that could be a benefit of banning menthol cigarettes. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I hear your — I hear your question, M.J.  As you said, there are experts who have spoken to this.  I’ll let the experts speak to this.  When there’s a rulemaking process, this is — this is always the case here.  Because there’s a rulemaking process, we’re just not going to comment. 
 
Go ahead, Jacqui.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.  What is the administration’s response to the 14 House Democrats who voted with Republicans the other day to denounce the, quote, “open-borders policies” of the Biden administration?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — what do you mean?  What’s our comments on what? 
 
Q    Well, do you have a response to 14 Democrats in the House believing that —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh, the —
 
Q    — this President has open-border policies?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, look, we’ve been very clear.  We want to deal with what’s going on at the border.  That’s why we’re having these conversation — these negotiations in the Senate with Republicans and Democrats.
 
The President understands that this is an issue that matters to the American people.  And we feel like those conversations that are happening, those negotiations are heading in the right direction. 
 
And so, the President understands.  He put the border security — right? — there was — that’s part of the supplemental.  His request on funding for border security was part of that national security ask, that emergency ask. 
 
So, we believe we need to do more.  The President understands we need to do more.  And we — we see Republicans and Democrats in the Senate want to do more. 
 
Q    Is it — is it still the position of the administration that the border is secure?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Our position is that we need to do more at the border.  We have to do more at the border.  That’s why these negotiations are currently happening.  That’s our position. 
 
Q    And is it the position of the administration that the efforts to impeach Secretary Mayorkas are unconstitutional?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What we believe is that what House Republicans are doing is playing political games.  That’s what we believe.  And they’re not doing their jobs — the jobs that the American people want them to be doing. 
 
And let’s not forget, they won’t even let Secretary Mayor- — Mayorkas even testify.  They want to impeach him, but they’re not even let — allowing him to testify. 
 
And so, it is shameful.  That’s what we believe.  It is shameful.  And what we’d encourage these House Republicans to do — and this is something that we saw coming out of the midterms in 2022 — American people want to see Republicans and Democrats working together to deliver for them, to address the issues that matter.  That’s what we would rather see. 
 
Q    On the constitutionality portion, though, I saw that there was a memo that came out that was touting this open letter from constitutional law professors, making the argument that impeachment based on policy disagreements is unconstitutional.  Is that the approach the administration is taking to this?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What letter are you speaking to?  The same one?
 
Q    There was an Ian Sams memo that went out, and it was — included an open letter from a number of constitutional law professors who are arguing that impeaching a Cabinet Secretary on the basis of policy disagreements is forbidden in the Constitution. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, I’m going to let my colleague’s letter stand for itself.  I’ve been very clear on how we feel and what be- — we what we think about these impeachment proceedings.  And — and a proceeding that is not even allowing Secretary Mayorkas to testify. 
 
Q    I’m just trying to gather, though — because it came to us from, you know, the White House, obviously —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.
 
Q    — that, you know — is this something that the administration is going to fight in court on the — on a constitutional basis that this is not something that could happen?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  And I will say, I’m going to let my — my White House colleagues at the Counsel — at the Counsel’s Office respond to that. 
 
Go ahead.
 
Q    Karine, a month ago today when you were asked about whether the White House had any regrets about linking Ukraine aid with border funding, you said, “No, not at all.”  I wanted to know if that was still the case today.  Does the White House have any regrets about this strategy?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, not at all, because both of those things are important to the President.  There — they are emergency requests.  That’s why they — he included it in the supplemental.  And we believe all of it needs to move forward. 
 
Q    And then, just very quickly, on student loans.  There has been some Republican criticism from people like Senator Bill Cassidy, Congresswoman Virginia Foxx, specifically saying that the President is pandering in this election year, trying to buy votes with these kinds of moves on student loans.  There have been other lawmakers who have echoed something similar, saying it’s not fair for Americans who didn’t go to college to have to pay for those who racked up too much debt.
 
What is the White House response to that (inaudible)?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, we’ve heard that rhetoric many times before.  That’s nothing new, what you laid out to me.  Look, the President made a promise that he would do everything that he can to take action to give American families a little bit of a breathing room.  And that’s related to student — student debt as well.
 
And you heard at the top when I said — I laid out that, you know, folks should not have to be crushed by student debt to be able to start a family, to be able to — be able to buy a home.  Right? 
 
And so, this is what we have — we’ve seen over the past several decades.  And the President has been very clear: He’s going to do everything that he can to give people a little bit more breathing room to give people — make sure he lower costs for folks. 
 
And that’s what we’re seeing.  Right?  We’re seeing that from — from an array of — of folks just across the spectrum. 
 
And so, I’ve heard those comments.  That is not something that the President believes.  The President believes that it is important.  You’ve got — you’ve got to remember, this is a president who grew up in a middle-class family, who — who knows what it’s like to sit around a kitchen table and try to figure out which bill are you going to pay.  Are you going to pay that medical bill?  Are you going to be able to pay that medical bill?  Are you going to be able to put food on the table?  Are you going to be able to pay the tuition for — for your kid that’s going to college?
 
And these are difficult conversations that American families have every month.  And so, if the President can do something to give families a little bit of dignity, a little bit of an opportunity to really be part of — of a growing economy, be part of the middle class, he’s going to take that action.
 
Go ahead, Sabrina.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  When the President was asked yesterday about Arab Americans not wanting to vote for him over Gaza, his response was to point to former President Trump’s travel ban on Muslim-majority nations.  Putting aside for a moment that most Arab Americans are Christian, is that the bar here, that his predecessor and likely opponent wants to ban Muslims and President Biden doesn’t?  And how does that relate to the substance of their criticism of Gaza?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, I want to be really careful because there’s a mix of — of upcoming election on — on — in your question — in 2024.  Look, I would look at — and I really want to be mindful here and careful. 
 
I think what the President was doing was trying to give a reminder of where we were before — right? — what it looked like before in the last four years in the last administration.
 
You have a president that has been very clear in protecting Arab Am- — Arab Americans or any communities that are under attack, any communities that have felt left behind.  And so, he is — I think his — his record and what he’s been trying to do for folks here in this country — all communities, including the Arab — Arab American community — is very, very clear. 
 
And so, I think he was — it was a question that he was asked.  He answered it very quickly.  It probably — you know, he — he thought of it as, obviously, asked in a political way.  And so, that’s where he went.
 
But I just also want to be super careful because this is an upcoming election.
 
Q    And then away from the campaign, then.  Since the conflict began, the President has sat down with Muslim leaders only once that we know of, on October 26th, and there was only one Palestinian American who was present for that meeting.  Why has the President not met or engaged more directly with Palestinian American leaders in the more than three months since this conflict began?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, as you just stated in the top of your question, he has had direct conversation with leaders in — in the respective communities.  His team has — regularly have stayed in touch with members and leaders of those respective communities that you just laid out: Arab Americans and Muslim Americans as well.  And so, those conversations are obviously very important.
 
I don’t have anything to read out or lay out of any upcoming — upcoming discussions with those leaders in the — in those communities.  But he has been — he’s had direct conversation.  He’s had — listened to them.  Those were private conversations.  We try not to read — read out specifically what was discussed.
 
But obviously, the President and his team has been in regular communications.
 
Go ahead, Akayla.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Monday is obviously the anniversary of — of Roe v. Wade.  Do you have any preview of what the President plans to do to mark the day?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  So, as you know, the — the campaign made an announcement of the four principles here — the President, the Vice President, the First Lady, and the Second Gentleman — are going to do an event on Tuesday as — and touch on Roe v. Wade.  I would refer you to — to them on exactly what that’s going to look like.
 
And, you know, the — the Vice President is going to do a tour specifically focusing on Roe v. Wade.  So, certainly, we would refer you to — to the Vice President’s office.  And, certainly, we’ll have more — more to share on that.
 
All right.  I was t- — I’m being told to wrap it.
 
Go ahead, Sara.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  On Wednesday, when you were asked about, ahead of the meeting, Speaker Johnson’s H.R.2-or-bust position, you had said, Speaker Johnson is not the only congressman in the room.  He has held to this hardline position. 
 
But was there any indication from House members who were present in the meeting or in other conversations that have been had with House members that they — there is a possibility of them taking on a Senate-passed agreement?  Like, if — if an agreement were to be reached and passed in the Senate, has he gotten any kind of assurances that the House would take that on?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I will say, I think there was broad — a broad agreement in the room in that meeting that we needed — they needed to deal with Ukraine and also the border.  So, there was a broad agreement there.  I’m not going to get into specifics on how that would look like. 
 
But I think that’s important.  If both Republicans and Democrats in that meeting are saying, “Yes, we need to deal with this.  We need to figure out how to make sure we support Ukraine.  We need to figure out how to make sure we deal with the border security,” I think that’s important.  And so, that is what we were able to get out of that meeting as well, that type of understanding of addressing those two things.
 
Q    But is he optimistic that even if — you know, if the Senate is able to come to an agreement, that it would be taken on and passed in the House?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, look, I’ll say this — I’ll add to this.  It was a balanced and constructive conversation.  That’s what we saw, and that’s what happened.  And there was, again, broad agreement to — to certainly deal with making sure Ukraine gets the funding that they need, making sure that we deal with border security. 
 
So, that is the two — two important things that came out of that meeting.  We are going to continue to have a conversation in the Senate, do the negotiations in the Senate on the border security to get something done — something that the American people want to see.  And then we’ll see what happens.
 
I don’t want to get into hypotheticals.  I don’t want to guess what’s going to happen.  Obviously, Speaker Johnson has been very vocal, and he can speak for himself.  But it is important.  It is important that we see a bipartisan agreement, bipartisan conversation happening.  And we’ll see where it goes.  But the President is going to continue to encourage, obviously, Congress to move forward.
 
Go ahead, Joey. 
 
Q    Yeah.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I haven’t called on you.
 
Q    Yeah.  Thank you.  Well, regarding the House.  And a version of this question was asked, I think, during the Air Force One gaggle yesterday.  But with Speaker Johnson saying he is communicating regularly with former President Trump on border negotiations, does the White House believe that Speaker Johnson is, in fact, negotiating in good faith toward an agreement on the border?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, I’m going to let Speaker Johnson speak for himself.  What I can say is that, right now, we are in active negotiations with members in the Senate, and it is in good faith.  With Republicans and Democrats, it is happening in good faith.  And we are encouraged by where the conversation is going.  We are — we are — we believe there has been progress. 
 
And so, let’s start there.  Let’s start there and let them do their job and continue — or do their negotiations and continue to have those conversations.  And I’m just going to let the House speak for themselves.
 
Q    Do you think Speaker Johnson actually wants a border agreement?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  That’s for him to speak to.  I’m not going to speak fr- — from here.  I know I keep getting — did I call on you, Weijia?
 
Q    Just a quick follow on — on the border talks. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.
 
Q    Very quick.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.
 
Q    Is the President open to passing, signing a border deal before one is reached on Ukraine or does it have to be concurrent?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I can’t speak to the timeline of all of this.  What I can speak to is we are having those conversation in the — in the Senate, negotiations, as I’ve mentioned multiple times already from here.  I’m sure you’ve — you’re tired of me saying that over and over again. 
 
And what I can also say is that we want to see the full national security supplemental move forward.  That is what we want to see.  We want to see it move forward, and that includes Ukraine, obviously includes Israel, obvious- — obviously includes border security.  That’s what the President wants to see, and that is the direction that we hope that it goes in.
 
All right.  I haven’t called on you.  Go ahead.
 
Q    So, is the White House supportive of the bipartisan tax bill that was introduced this week that expands the Child Tax Credit but also has a lot of cuts for businesses?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, we think that — we are encouraged by what we’re seeing, obviously, with the tax deal that is — that is going forward.  And so, we think that’s important.  Obviously, the President passed the American Rescue Plan, as you know, very early on.  It had the Child Tax Credit.  The President has been very clear that he wanted to see that move forward in full, and it’s — you know, continuing that per- –more permanently. 
 
And so, that is important.  But we are pleased that the House and Ways and Means — House Ways and Means Committee advanced a bipartisan tax bill that will increase that — right? — that will increase it. 
 
And so — and let’s not forget, these — this is for millions of families — millions of families.  It’s going to lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty and support construction of hundreds of thousands of affordable rental housing, as well, in that bipartisan agreement.
 
So, it is a welcome step forward.  And we believe Congress should pass it.
 
All right, guys.  We’ll see you on Monday.  Thank you, everybody. 
 
Q    Have a good weekend.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Stay — stay warm and dry.
 
2:53 P.M. EST
 

The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and NSC Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby appeared first on The White House.

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

 
1:47 P.M. EST
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Chatty Friday.  We were just saying everybody is chatty out here.
 
Oh my gosh, the first row. 

Q    Yes!

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Let’s give it up — (applause) —

Q    Almost the second —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — give it up to the ladies.  (Applause.)

Q    And no heels!
 
Q    Yes, we’re all wearing snow boots.

Q    Should I move to the third row?  It seems like —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Joe Joe, you have failed us in the second row.  You have failed us in the second row.  (Laughter.) 
 
Q    Almost.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Almost.  Almost. 
 
All right.  With that, good afternoon.  Happy Friday.  Thank you for those who were able to show up in this winter — wonderful winter storm in D.C.  I have a couple of things at the top. 
 
So, today we got more evidence that President Biden’s economic plan is delivering results that more and more Americans are feeling.  Consumer sentiments increased 13 percent this month, rising to the — its highest level in more than two years. 
 
In the last two months, sentiments has surged by 29 percent — the biggest two-month jump in more than 30 years.  It’s clear Americans are starting to feel President Biden’s strong economy.  Wages have risen faster than inflation for 10 months in a row.  The unemployment rate has remained below 4 percent for the longest stretch in 50 years.  Inflation has fallen by about two thirds.  We have more work to do, obviously, but we are on the right path. 
 
President Biden’s agenda is a sharp contrast with congressional Republicans’ plans to cut taxes for the wealthy and big corporations while raising healthcare and prescription drug costs for hardworking American families. 
 
And a few moments ago — I saw some of you have already been reporting this — the President signed the continuing resolution passed by bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate that prevents a needless shutdown, maintains current funding levels, and includes no extreme policies. 
 
Instead of wasting more time on partisan appropriation bills that violate the budget agreement two thirds of them voted for last spring, House Republicans must finally do their jobs and work across the aisle to pass full-year funding bills that deliver for the American people and address urgent domestic and national security priorities by passing the President’s supplemental request. 
 
Today, more good news, President Biden announced his administration is canceling debt for another 74,000 student borrowers across the country.  With today’s actions, the Biden-Harris administration has now canceled debts for 3.6 million Americans.  And that’s a big deal, as some will say around here — a big deal. 
 
The — those receiving relief as a part of today’s announcement include teachers, nurses, firefighters, and others who earn forgiveness after 10 years of public service. 
 
It also includes people who have been in repayment for 20 years but never got the relief that they earned.  And in practical terms, it means that today, thanks to President Biden and this administration, millions of American families have a bit more breathing room to start a business, save their — save for their kid’s college, or buy their first home. 
 
From day one of the — of this administration, the President vowed to improve the student loan system so that obtaining higher education provides Americans with opportunity and prosperity, not unmagi- — unimaginable burdens of student loan debt. 
 
The President will continue using every tool at his disposal to get student loan borrowers the relief they need to reach their dreams. 
 
Turning to this — this afternoon, the President’s — obviously, his schedule this afternoon.  The President knows that mayors get things done, and he is looking forward to welcoming bipartisan mayors attending the U.S. Conference of Mayors Winter Meeting to the White House later today. 
 
The President will highlight the ongoing partnership between federal and local governments to ensure communities across the country realize the full potential of Investing in America agenda. 
 
The President will highlight the most significant investment in our nation’s infrastructure in generations, the biggest investment in fighting climate change, progress preventing [and] reducing crime, our work to end homelessness, and much more. 
 
With that we have the — the Admiral here, John Kirby, who’s here to discuss the Middle East.
 
Admiral, the podium is yours.
 
MR. KIRBY:  Good afternoon, everybody. 
 
President Biden had a chance to speak this morning with Prime Minister Netanyahu.  The President and the Prime Minister discussed ongoing efforts to secure the release of all remaining hostages that are being held by Hamas. 
 
The two leaders also reviewed the situation in Gaza and the shift to targeted operations that will enable the flow of increasing amounts of humanitarian assistance while keeping the military pressure on Hamas and its leaders significant. 
 
The President welcomed the decision from the government of Israel to permit the shipment of flour for the Palestinian people directly through Ashdod port while our teams are separately working on options for more direct maritime delivery of assistance into Gaza. 
 
The President also discussed recent progress in ensuring the Palestinian Authority’s revenues are available to pay salaries, including for the Palestinian security forces in the West Bank. 
 
The President also discussed Israel’s responsibility, even as it maintains military pressure on Hamas and its leaders, to reduce civilian harm and to protect the innocents.
 
The President also discussed his vision for a more durable peace and security for Israel, fully integrated within the region, and a two-state solution with Israel’s security guaranteed.
 
Now — and we’ll have a formal readout of the call here shortly if it’s not out already. 
 
Just one last thing.  This morning, U.S. forces conducted three successful self-defense strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen.  This is the fourth preemptive action that the U.S. military has taken in the past week against Houthi missile launchers that were ready to launch attacks — in this case, anti-ship missiles. 
 
CENTCOM — Central Command — will have a more — more details on this a little bit later, but, as you know, there are U.S. Navy ships in the Red Sea as well as international shipping.
 
These actions were, I want to stress again, done in self-defense, but it also helps make safer international waters for both naval vessels as well as mar- — merchant — merchant shipping. 
 
Thank you. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Colleen.
 
Q    John, so the call with Bibi and the President today was the first since Christmas. 
 
MR. KIRBY:  Yes. 
 
Q    Can you talk a little bit about why the delay, especially because they were talking so frequently over the fall?
 
And then, also, on Bibi.  Does the President think a two-state solution is possible with Bibi in office, given what he’s said about it?
 
MR. KIRBY:  On the modalities of the call and the frequencies, as I’ve said before, they will talk as appropriate.  This was deemed by both leaders as the — as the — the best opportunity for yet another call, Colleen, and I have no doubt that there will be additional calls going forward, clearly.
 
The President still believes in the promise and the possibility of a two-state solution.  He recognizes that’s going to take a lot of hard work.  It’s going to take a lot of leadership there in the region, particularly, on both sides of the issue. 
 
And the United States stands firmly committed to — to eventually seeing that outcome.  Right now — and we’re — obviously, we’re talking to them actively about post-conflict Gaza and what governance there needs to look like and the importance of an independent Palestinian state for long-term security, not just for the Palestinian people but for the Israeli people as well. 
 
Currently, of course, we’re rightly focused, as I said in the opening statement, on making sure Israel has what it — continues to has — have what it needs to defend itself. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Weijia.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  And thanks, John.  So, you continue to reiterate the administration’s policy that you support a two-state solution.  Senator Elizabeth Warren says that if “Netanyahu opposes that, then we need to question why we are supporting the Netanyahu government.”  So, why is the U.S. supporting a government that opposes U.S. policy?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m not sure what the context means of supporting the government, but let’s just take it — I’m going to assume it’s meant in the context of this war they’re fighting.  It is certainly supporting the Is- — we’re certainly supporting the Israeli governments to defend themselves. 
 
But it’s really bigger than that, Weijia.  It’s about supporting the Israeli people’s right to exist, right to be a nation.  I mean, again, you don’t have to look any further than the 2017 manifesto of Hamas to see what their ultimate plans are.  They want to wipe the country off the face of the — off the map. 
 
So, we’re defending Israel’s right to defend itself.  The Israeli people get to decide who represents them, who their elected officials are.  We don’t decide that.  And we will always work with whoever the Israeli people decide to put in — into power and government.  We’ll always work with them, regardless of the differences, maybe, on political issues. 
 
They chose this government.  This is the government that is in charge of conducting warfare against Hamas.  We’re going to make sure that they have what they need, in addition to making sure, as I said in the opening statement, that we’re doing everything we can to alleviate the humanitarian suffering in Gaza. 
 
Q    Warren is not alone in expressing these concerns.  Is the President worried that, given what Netanyahu has said about opposing a Palestinian state, it could complicate the efforts to pass the supplemental?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The President is under — two things — under no illusions of how elusive a two-state solution has been and how much hard work there’s going to be ahead for all of us to try to get there. 
 
On the — on the supplemental — again, I don’t want to negotiate here in public — we believe that we’re making progress here in terms of working in a bipartisan way with the — with senators.  And we’ll see where this goes. 
 
But — but the President comes away from the meeting with congressional leaders the other day — largely, that was a meeting about Ukraine —
 
Q    Right.
 
MR. KIRBY:  — and bipartisan support on Ukraine, but that they understand the — the urgency of — of supporting Israel as well. 
 
Q    Thanks, John.
 
Q    Thanks.  Thanks, John.  You’ve said that — or you said yesterday that the U.S. is taking away capabilities from the Houthis with each and every one of these strikes and making it harder for them to continue to propagate these attacks.  Can you quantify that progress, describe that?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I would leave it to the Pentagon to go through their battle damage assessment.  After every strike, they’ll — they’ll do an assessment on how successful it was.  They believe that they have had good effects on degrading some of these Houthi capabilities. 
 
But clearly — and the President alluded to this yesterday — they still have some offensive capability.  And we’re going to keep taking the actions we believe we need to take to defend ourselves.  But I — I couldn’t give you a percentage.  That’s really a better question for U.S. Central Command or for DOD to speak to.
 
Q    And you also said yesterday, the U.S. has additional options available to take on the Houthis.  What is the administration waiting for to use those other options?  Is there some red line or something that would happen?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I don’t think it’d be fair to say we’re waiting on anything.  I mean, we’ve been — we’ve been taking shots as needed, including this morning. 
 
Well, you know, three anti-ship cruise missiles were sitting on the rails ready to go, and we knocked them out before they had a chance to launch them.  And we also designated the Houthis as a specially designated global terrorist.  That allows us some additional economic levers that we didn’t have available to us before.  And we’ll keep reviewing our options going forward. 
 
Again, I’ll say it that — that the Houthis need to stop these attacks.  They can make that choice.  Clearly, they’ve made opposite choices.  So, we have choices to make too, and we have options available to us as well.  We’ll continue to explore those options. 
 
Clearly, one of the options that we are and will continue to take are in the military realm, if needed. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Andrea.
 
Q    John, just on the North Korean underwater nuclear weapons systems test yesterday.  Do you have any information on that?  What’s your response to that?  And —
 
MR. KIRBY:  I don’t have a lot of specific information.  I — we’re not in a position where we can validate those claims.  We’re in touch, obviously, with our South Korean partners to see whatever information and context they might have about that.  So, I can’t — I can’t verify the claims by the North that they’ve — that they’ve actually tested such a weapon. 
 
It is — it does, though, underscore the continued provo- — provocations by Kim Jong Un and his regime in Pyongyang.  The continued pursuit — again, whether this is true or not, there’s little doubt that they continue to pursue advanced military capabilities to threaten their neighbors and to threaten the region. 
 
And that is why President Biden has taken significant steps to shore up our alliances in the region.  You saw in Camp David a historic agreement between Japan and South Korea to improve trilateral cooperation; a new nuclear consultative group session with South Korea that was announced when President Yoon was here; as well as the addition of U.S. military — particularly intelligence capabilities on and around the Peninsula so that we can get better information about what Kim Jong Un is up to.
 
But we haven’t taken our eye off this one bit. 
 
Q    Okay.  And then on — I’m sorry, just on Gaza and — and that conflict.  We’ve spoken before about your concerns about the conflict spreading.  Now we have reports that a Palestinian American teenager was killed today in the West Bank.  Can you confirm that?  And was that something that President Biden discussed with Netanyahu during the call?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We’re seriously concerned about these reports.  The information is scant at this time.  We don’t have perfect context about exactly what happened here.  Seriously concerned about it.  And we’re going to be in constant touch with counterparts in the region to — to get more information. 
 
But it’s — it’s definitely deeply concerning.  But afraid — I’m afraid I don’t have more information to that right now.
 
Q    Did the President bring it up?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I — I don’t believe that it was a subject of the call.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, M.J.
 
Q    Just back to the issue of the two-state solution.  What would you say is the President’s hope and expectation here?  Is it that the Prime Minister’s stance on this will eventually shift?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The — the hope is that when there’s a — when this conflict is over that we can work in a collaborative way with the Israeli government on — and counterparts in the region on good governance in Gaza — good governance that the President hopes can lead to — (a reporter sneezes) — a viable two-state solution. 
 
Bless you.
 
And, again, he’s not — he’s not Pollyannaish about this.  He understands how hard it is.  This is something he’s been pushing for for a long, long time.  He knows it’s going to take dedicated leadership on all sides here to bring it about.  And — and that means constant engagement by his administration and — and the national security team.  So — so, we’re going to — we’re going to keep at that work. 
 
Q    I guess I’m just wondering: If the two leaders are completely at odds on something as fundamental as the creation of a Palestinian state, do you know if the President has reason to believe that, at some point, the Prime Minister’s view on this will change?  Publicly, he has been very clear about where he stands on this.
 
MR. KIRBY:  You mean the President has been very clear, publicly, where he stands on this?
 
Q    The Prime Minister has been very clear on the fact that he rejects the idea of a Palestinian state.  The President also has been clear that he wants a two-state solution.
 
MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, look, this is just — this — we — we’re not going to agree on everything.  We’ve said that.  And good friends and allies can have those kinds of candid, forthright discussions, and we do.  It’s not going to change the President’s view that the best long-term solution for regional security, particularly the security of the Israeli people, is a free and independent Palestinian state that they can live in — in peace and security with — and this is an important caveat — with Israel’s security also guaranteed.  He still believes in that, and we’re going to continue to talk to our Israeli counterparts. 
 
This isn’t about, you know, trying to twist — twist somebody’s arm or — or force a change in their thinking.  The President — sorry, Prime Minister Netanyahu has — has made clear his concerns about that.  President Biden has made clear his strong conviction that a two-state solution is still the right path ahead.  And we’re going to continue to make that case.
 
Q    So — so, what is the overlap there?  I guess, you know, when the two leaders are having conversation, like their phone call today, what is it that the Prime Minister is saying to the President to indicate that that gap can be bridged?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I won’t get into the Prime Minister’s side of the conversation.  I think that’s better for his staff that — to speak to.  All I can tell you is that the President reiterated his strong conviction in the viability of a two-state solution — understanding, of course, that we’re not going to get there tomorrow, that there’s an active conflict going on, and that we want to make sure Israel has what it needs to defend itself. 
 
But as we’re talking about post-conflict Gaza — and we have been now for many, many weeks — you can’t do that without also talking about the aspirations of the Palestinian people and what that needs to look like for them.  So, we’re going to continue to have those conversations.
 
Q    John, were the Prime Minister’s comments yesterday a factor in why this call took place today?  Was that something that the U.S. decided they wanted the President to speak with him today about that?
 
MR. KIRBY:  No, this was a call that we’ve been actually trying to land on the schedule for quite a bit of time here.  So, this was not — you shouldn’t read into the fact that the call happened today as — as some sort of response to the Prime Minister’s discussions or comments yesterday.
 
Q    And did they talk specifically about those comments yesterday?  Or it was a more general reiteration of the President’s support for a two-state solution?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Again, without getting more beyond the readout, I would just say that there was — certainly, on the agenda for both leaders was to talk about post-conflict Gaza, governance in Gaza, and, of course, a two-state solution.
 
Q    And can you just tell me a bit more about what the President meant yesterday when he was asked by my colleague whether the strikes in Yemen are stopping the Houthis and the President said, “No”?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I think, you know, if you just look at what happened yesterday, it’s pretty self-evident.  They continue to have offensive capability and they continue to be willing to use it.  We also have plenty of defensive capability available to us, and we continue to use it as well.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Did the President address Netanyahu’s use of the phrase “from the river to the sea” in their conversation today?  I know the White House has previously said that phrase is divisive, so —
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m not aware that that specific phrase was discussed.
 
Q    Well, do you condemn him using that phrase?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Look, there’s a — there’s a connotation with that phrase.  We’ve talked about this before.  But when — you know, when you use the phrase “river to the sea,” it — it speaks basically to the mantra of Hamas and in their manifesto, where they basically describe the geographic bounds of what they believe to be Palestine.  And if you look at it on the map, if you go look at the — the four corners that they describe it, it’s basically the State of Israel.  They just don’t believe it should exist. 
 
So, again, it’s — it’s not a phrase that — that we recommend using, given because of that context.
 
Q    But this wasn’t Hamas.  This was Netanyahu.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I understand.  I — I don’t have anything more on that.  And I certainly don’t have anything more on the conversation to read out with respect to that.
 
Q    You had talked about the hard work it will take to, kind of, come to an agreement of sorts on a two-state solution.  Can you outline what that kind of work and conversation would look like?  Does this mean more calls between Biden and Bibi?  How — how does he expect to —
 
MR. KIRBY:  I think there’s certainly going to be more calls between the two leaders.  And there’ll be more conversations between our two teams.  I mean, Secretary of State Blinken has been there — what? — four or five times since the 7th of October, and I have every expectation —
 
Q    Does the President —
 
MR. KIRBY:  — he’ll be back again as well.  And we’re — we’re going to continue to have discussions with the team across a range of issues. 
 
I understand that the two-state solution is the issue today because of the comments in the press here.  But every discussion we’re having in the region has — has a component of it about post-conflict Gaza and governance and what that looks like and, yes, of course, our continued interest in a two-state solution.  But it also has to do with humanitarian assistance, with getting the hostages released, and making sure that Israel has the weapons and capabilities that it — that it needs to — to defend itself. 
 
And I’ll just end with this.  I mean, prior to the 7th of October, as you all know, we were working closely with Israel and Saudi Arabia on a potential normalization deal — a normalization deal that the President believes Hamas was also aware of.  And it certainly could have been a contributing factor to the violence that they visited on the Israeli people on the 7th.
 
(Reporter sneezes.)
 
MR. KIRBY:  Bless you. 
 
Q    Thank you.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I lost my train of thought.  (Laughter.) 
 
But the — the point is we’re — we’re still having discussions with counterparts about that normalization.  And we’ve gotten some positive feedback, even from Saudi Arabia, about what that could look like going forward.
 
As a part of that normalization, should — should we be able to get there — and we were making progress before the 7th — obviously, there would be a component in there for the Palestinians.  There have — there would have to be.  And we’re not giving up on that. 
 
And if you’re able to get to that normalization, that could be a significant milestone in overcoming some of the challenges of a two-state solution.
 
Q    Did the President in his call today with Netanyahu express any concern about Netanyahu continuing to say that he doesn’t stand for a two-state solution? 
 
MR. KIRBY:  I think I’ll just leave my description of the call the way it was, and you — again, you’ll see a readout here coming from us on — on paper. 
 
But, yes, they talked about — they — they talked — in general talked about the possibilities of a two-state solution.  And the President reaffirmed and reiterated his strong belief in that possibility. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Aurelia.
 
Q    Thank you so much.  You mentioned progress on the front of the tax revenue issue in the West Bank.  Does that mean the Israeli Prime Minister has committed to release his tax revenue?
 
MR. KIRBY:  There was — there was discussions in their — in their Cabinet about that.  And that was what I was referencing there was ongoing discussions within the Cabinet about the revenue and — and using it appropriately. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.  John, earlier this week, you talked about the 500 entities — about Iran — 500 entities that have been sanctioned by the administration last year.  Have you seen any impact of these sanctions — any type of impact it has had on Iran’s behavior?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Five hundred entities since the beginning of the administration, not last year.  Some 50 sanctions regimes, about 500 entities. 
 
We know they’ve had an impact on Iran’s economy, which — which struggles.  But look, we also know that there’s other ways that you have to push back on Iran’s destabilizing behaviors, including bolstering and strengthening our — our military capabilities in the region, as well as working with partners.  I mean, we’ve now got a coalition of 20-some-odd countries — ships and aircraft and other capabilities — trying to protect Red Sea shipping. 
 
So, there’s been a lot of effort here to — to — to hold Iran accountable for their destabilizing activities. 
 
Q    And if you allow me, John, a colleague has asked me to ask you: Yesterday, Mexico and Chile, requested the International Criminal Court to investigate potential crimes against civilians in Gaza and the October 7th Hamas attack on Israel.  Any reaction on this —
 
MR. KIRBY:  We’re aware of those — of that report and the potential referral to the ICC.  I don’t have a comment for you on it at this time.  We’re still gathering more information about what this — what this would entail. 
 
But I want to say again that we don’t have any indications that there’s deliberate — deliberate efforts to commit war crimes by the Israeli Defense Forces. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.
 
Q    John, yesterday, Jake Sullivan met with the family members of hostages being held by Hamas.  I’m wondering if you can give us any — any readout?  Were — was he able to provide any updates to the families?  What — what message did he have — have for them during that time?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The main message was that we’re still working out this.  And as I said in — in the readout of the call, that was right at the top of the list for the President to talk to Prime Minister Netanyahu about efforts to get another hostage deal going. 
 
And I just — I want to protect the private nature of the conversation.  But — but Jake also made sure that they were aware that those efforts are ongoing, and that they’re serious.  The discussions we’re having are sober and serious about potentially getting another hostage deal in place. 
 
I’m not suggesting and you shouldn’t take away from this that we’ll have something to announce imminently or that we’re over the finish line.  I don’t mean to suggest that at all.  There’s a lot of hard work still ahead. 
 
But we haven’t given up on the effort.  And the efforts are being taken very seriously by the national security team.  And, you know, Brett McGurk was just in Doha last week, and that was a big reason why he was there. 
 
So, that was — Jake wanted to bring them together, A, to make sure they knew, you know, we still kept — that we kept that connective tissue with them, that we still obviously care about their loved ones and getting them home, that they’re a priority for President Biden, and updated them in general terms about the discussions that we’ve been having in the region. 
 
Q    Was he able to give any kind of update about the condition or what was known about the condition of any of the hostages?  Is — do we have new information or any information about how the hostages are doing at this point?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I don’t have any information to share with you about what we know about the — the individual hostages.  I will say, as I’ve said before: Regrettably, we just don’t have a lot of tactile information about where they are or what specific condition they’re being held. 
 
And as I think you can imagine, it is very likely that they’re being moved around quite a bit.  So, it’s hard to get real fingertip feel on exactly how they are.  But we have to assume they’re being held in just the utmost deplorable of conditions. 
 
Q    On the supplemental, just given the latest developments, I mean, how is the President thinking of this idea of conditioning aid to Israel?  Is this being pushed by some of his allies?  Is that something he supports?
 
MR. KIRBY:  We believe that the approach that we’re taking right now has had results.  And we’re going to continue that approach, which is, obviously, making sure that Israel has the capabilities it needs, and that continues.  But also urging them at every turn to be more precise, more targeted, more deliberate with respect to civilian harm; urging an increase in humanitarian aid and assistance; and of course, trying to get another humanitarian pause in place so we can do a hostage deal. 
 
I would tell you, as I’ve said before, that this approach that we’ve taken of at once supporting Israel and their military capabilities, but also providing advice, counsel, lessons learned from our own experiences in this kind of fighting has had results.  They have changed the way they have conducted operations. 
 
In fact, they have already started a transition to lower-intensity operations, again, largely at our urging.  They opened up Kerem Shalom, a second gate of humanitarian assistance, largely at our urging. 
 
So, the President’s continued discussions with Prime Minister Netanyahu and at lower levels across our team has had results. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Patsy.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.  John, am I correct to understand that the President believes there is wiggle room in the Prime Minister’s position in opposing Palestinian statehood?  And what is the President prepared to offer beyond pushing for a Saudi-Israel normalization deal to convince the Prime Minister to accept the two-state solution?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The Prime Minister should speak to his own headspace when it comes to that.  And of course, he’s talked poli- — publicly about — about a two-state solution. 
 
All I can do is say what I’ve said before: The President still believes in the promise and possibility of that.  He believes it’s going to take hard work and leadership.  He’s willing to put his shoulder to the wheel for that eventual outcome. 
 
At the same time, we’ve got to make sure that they have what they need to defend themselves, and we get humanitarian assistance in. 
 
And, I’m sorry, your second question was —
 
Q    Yeah.  I mean, what is he prepared to offer, whether it’s a carrot or a stick in terms of trying to persuade the Prime Minister to go in line with U.S. policy?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, I’m certainly not going to goti- –negotiate here from the podium about a two-state solution.  It is something that is — remains his policy, his desire to see it.  We’re going to continue to push for that. 
 
Q    Okay.  And Jordan says that Israel targeted their field hospital in Khan Younis today, injuring one patient and a staff.  Can you confirm this?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I cannot.
 
Q    And one more.  Does the administration believe that the Houthis will stop their attacks if there is a ceasefire in Gaza?  And does that play a factor into the calculus on —
 
MR. KIRBY:  I think you got to take anything the Houthis say with a big grain of salt.  We’re not — we’re not taking what they say to the bank. 
 
And this idea that this is somehow about Gaza just doesn’t square with the facts.  I mean, most of the ships that they’re going after have nothing to do with Israel.  So, we’re not taking anything at face value. 
 
They need to stop these attacks.  We’ve got capabilities available to us to use it if we have to. 
 
Q    Just to — just to clarify: What’s happening in the Red Sea, the attacks from the Houthis, does not play a factor into the calculus of whether or not you’re pushing Israel for a ceasefire? 
 
MR. KIRBY:  No. 
 
Q    Thank you. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Brian.
 
Q    Thanks a lot.  Thanks, John.  On Ecuador.  Is the U.S. and — and the President considering ramping up its military assistance to Ecuador as it confronts these violent drug gangs?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m aware of no such plans to do that. 
 
Q    There was — the U.S. had an inaugural working group on defense issues with Ecuador last year.  Is the President wanting to ramp up that cooperation?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m aware of no such plans. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, in the back.
 
Q    All right.  Thank you, Karine.  Thank you, John.  Two questions.  First, does the President plan similar calls, as he had with Prime Minister Netanyahu, with President El-Sisi of Egypt and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Saudi Arabia?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I have little doubt that there’ll be additional conversations with both those leaders, as well as I’m — I’m going to — I suppose, King Abdullah of Jordan as well.  But I don’t have anything on the schedule to speak to today. 
 
Q    All right.  The other question is that when — before he was inaugurated, President Arévalo of Guatemala came to the U.S. and met with Jake Sullivan and others in the National Security Council.  I believe he had a call from the President before he was sworn in. 
 
Is the administration discussing an apology for the 1954 coup in Guatemala come this June on its 60th anniversary?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Not that I’m aware of.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  A couple more in the back.  Go ahead, Jared.
 
Q    Thank you.  So, on this call between the President and the Prime Minister, how much of it was focused on getting a better handle of, kind of, the timeline of these Israeli operations; the transition, I guess, to the less intense operations?  And more broadly, is the President, is the administration satisfied with the progress that they’re seeing Israel making reaching its objectives in the war?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I don’t have a time hack for, like, you know, how long they talked about each topic.  I went through quite a list of topics.  That call was about 30 to 40 minutes long.  It’s — and where they discussed all these things. 
 
Clearly, the President was interested in the Prime Minister’s assessment of how things are going on the battlefield.  And as I said earlier — and they’ve acknowledged — that they have, in fact, begun a transition to lower-intensity operations, which means less troops — they pulled out a whole division from — from the North; a slackening reliance on airstrikes.
 
But again, you know, it’s really for the IDF to describe what those look like and — and the progress that they’re making. 
 
And clearly, yes, the President was interested in Prime Minister Netanyahu’s assessment of progress they’re making.  I won’t divulge that.  That’s really for the IDF to speak to.  But they have in general, in their press conferences, talked about the pressure that they’ve been putting on leaders of Hamas and the numbers of leaders that they’ve been able to take off the battlefield, and the resources and, quite frankly, underground architecture that they’ve been able to take away and degrade. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.
 
Q    Oh, okay.  John, thanks.  Thanks, Karine.  When it comes to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s comments, is there concern that his public comments about a two-state solution could negatively impact the discussions on a hostage release?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The short answer, I think, to that is no.
 
Look, obviously, each of these two leaders have stated publicly a different view on the promise of a two-state solution.  It’s not going to change President Biden’s mind one bit.  He still believes in it. 
 
They also still both believe in the importance of getting these hostages home to their families.  And that’s why we’re continuing to work at this.  And as I said earlier to a previous question, that work is serious and it’s sober and it’s ongoing.  And — and we are represented at that table in the region, trying to get those hostages released. 
 
And — and I — again, I don’t want to — I’m not going to put odds one way or another, except to say that — that there’s a lot of people in the region, including our Israeli counterparts, that are — that are working on this.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right, I’m trying get as many people as we can.  Go ahead, Janne.
 
Q    Thank you.  Thank you, Karine.  And thank you, John.  I have two questions on Russia and South Korea and North Korea.  The Russian ambassador to South Korea said in an interview with the South Korean media that he was ready to improve relationship with South Korea and deny the North Korea and Russia arms deals.  As you know, the North Korea and Russia’s foreign ministers and President Putin have met in Russia this week.  What is your interpretation of this?  And a follow-up.
 
MR. KIRBY:  We’ve talked at length about the burgeoning relationship between North Korea and Russia.  I stood up here and showed you a graphic and a slide of the — the belief we have and the desire by the Russians to purchase ballistic missiles from North Korea — has happened; have been used in Ukraine — as well as artillery ammunition. 

So, the — this burgeoning relationship between the two countries is certainly worrisome.  It’s worrisome for the people of Ukraine and our interests there as well, as well as it is for — for the Peninsula.
 
Q    Quick follow-up.  Kim Jong Un said that South Korea was a “hostile” country.  He then —
 
MR. KIRBY:  It’s not.
 
Q    He then threatened to devastate South Korea and United States and Japan with nuclear weapons.  Do you think these threats from Kim Jong Un are just the words, or do you think that there will be a real war?
 
MR. KIRBY:  You have to take rhetoric like that seriously from a man in charge of a regime that continues to pursue advanced military capabilities, including nuclear capabilities.  That’s why — and I won’t go through the list of all the things that — as I already said to a previous question — that we’re doing to try to address that threat.  You have to take that seriously. 
 
Kim Jong Un ought to focus more on feeding his people than on buying and purchasing advanced military capabilities.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  Just a couple more.  Go ahead.  And then we have to start wrapping it up.  Go ahead.
 
Q    Thank you.  Yes, thanks, John.  Do you — John, do you still oppose a general ceasefire?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Do we still oppose a general ceasefire?  Yes.
 
Q    Why?
 
MR. KIRBY:  For the same reason that we have in the past: We don’t believe a ceasefire is going to be to the benefit of anybody but Hamas.  We do support humanitarian pauses, as I said, to try to get hostages out and more aid in.  But we don’t support a ceasefire at this time. 
 
I think it’s important to remember that there was a ceasefire in place on the 6th of October, and Hamas, Mr. Sinwar —  Mr. Sinwar chose to break that ceasefire.  He’s the one that chose — chose this war.  There was a ceasefire, which we obviously were in supportive of, and Hamas chose to break it.
 
Q    And this — is the current situation beneficial to Israel, speaking strategically here?  The current situa- — is the current situation beneficial to Israel?
 
MR. KIRBY:  The current situation.  What do you mean by “the current situation”?
 
Q    The ongoing conflict.
 
MR. KIRBY:  The Israeli people have every right to expect that their military and that their government is going to act in their safety and security.  And I guarantee you that if — if this was any other country, including this one, we wouldn’t stand for that kind of threat to live next door to us like that — a threat that truly has existential ambitions. 

They want to wipe Israel off the face of the map.  So, the Israeli people have a right to expect that their government is going to try to protect them from that threat, which we still believe — and certainly was verified in the call today — that is a — still a viable threat to the Israeli government, to the Israeli people. 
 
Q    One more question on the Houthis.  How long do you — do you believe you can maintain that current course?  I mean, striking them and then they strike back.  You said you have other options.  At what point you can use another option?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, I’m not going to get ahead of the President or his decision-making.  We have plenty of military capability available to us. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  We’re going to wra- —
 
MR. KIRBY:  We’d like these — just one — I’m sorry. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m so- — no, I’m so sorry.
 
MR. KIRBY:  No, it’s my fault.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m so sorry.
 
MR. KIRBY:  I just got — my throat caught, and I — I got caught on my word.  

We want — we obviously are not seeking a conflict with the Houthis or a war in Yemen.  The — the best outcome would be for these reckless attacks by the Houthis to stop today. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right —

MR. KIRBY:  But we have the capability we need. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Sorry.  Sorry.

MR. KIRBY:  Sorry, sorry.  Sorry, I did it again.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   All right.  Last two.  Go ahead.  And then we’ll end with you.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  John, President Biden admitted yesterday that the retaliatory strikes against the Houthis aren’t working.  Why aren’t they afraid of the U.S.?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Well, you’d have to ask the Houthis what’s in their mindset.  I’m not going to get in between the ears of Houthi leaders. 
 
They claim it’s about Gaza.  It’s not.  They claim that this is some sort of, you know, U.S. and — and Britain effort to — to have — to wage war on them.  It’s not. 
 
We’re simply trying to do two things.  We’re trying to defend our Navy ships and sailors and the Navy ships and sailors of other nations that are in the Red Sea with us.  And, two, protect international shipping.  This is about self-defense. 
 
And again, this — this conflict — well, first of all, we’re not — we don’t seek a conflict.  There doesn’t need to be a conflict.  But the exchange of fire that we have seen in recent days doesn’t have to go on one day — one day more if the Houthis would make the right decision to stop these attacks.
 
Q    Right, but they’re a terrorist group attacking U.S. interests.  You know, wouldn’t your response make them stop?
 
MR. KIRBY:  Again, terrorist groups commit acts of violence oftentimes for — not just for the sake of committing acts of violence but for political posturing or political messaging of some sort, or perhaps tied to religious fervor. 
 
And they are a designated terrorist group.  They are conducting terrorist attacks on shipping in the Red Sea.  And we have to respond to that.  I don’t know what the alternative would be.  Should we just stop — stop defending ships and just let them have their way with the Southern Red Sea?  I don’t think that’s in anybody’s interest. 
 
So, we’re not going to — we’re not just going to lay down here and — and wait for them to come to a different approach.  They need to stop the attacks.  If they don’t, we’ll continue to defend ourselves and make it harder for them to conduct them.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay, last one.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Admiral, the House Armed Services Committee has asked Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin to appear publicly before them next month for failing to disclose his hospitalization.  Would the White House support the Secretary testifying publicly?
 
MR. KIRBY:  That’ll be a decision for the Secretary of Defense, and he has to make that decision.
 
Q    And since he was released from the hospital, has he clearly explained to the President or any senior officials here what exactly happened?
 
MR. KIRBY:  I’m not going to get into the — the personal and private discussions that the Secretary has had with the President of the United States.  They have spoken as recently as late last week.  And as you heard the President say himself, he has full trust and confidence in Secretary Austin and his leadership at the Pentagon, and that will continue.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you so much.
 
MR. KIRBY:  Thank you.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I appreciate it.  Have a great weekend.
 
All right, Colleen.
 
Q    Thank you.  So, I wanted to ask about the Uvalde report yesterday.  The President had said that he hadn’t seen the full findings but that he wasn’t sure that there was criminal liability.  So, a couple of things.  I wondered if he had time to look through the full findings and if his opinion has changed at all.  And then, also, if not, is there another way that law enforcement should be held accountable for the failures (inaudible)?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, there’s a couple of things I want to say about that.  The DOJ’s report — which is what you’re obviously referring to, Colleen — shows that there were multiple points of failure with the law enforcement response in Uvalde. 
 
And so, we can only imagine how this news adds to the heartbreaking Uvalde families — how they’re feeling.  And certainly, as — as a mo- — mom, myself, I — this is one of those days that you wish never, ever happens and you don’t want to imagine.  So, this obviously is very heartbreaking, not just for the families for that — for that community.  And so, no community — no community should have to ever go through what Uvalde community suffered. 
 
And — but I’ll say this, and I think it’s really important: that these families were able — in Uvalde were able to turn things around.  And they put — they — they turned their pain into purpose and helped pass the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which we know — which we see it’s already starting to save lives. 
 
And — and so, while the President is going to continue to take — to certainly — to do everything that he can through executive action to protect communities from gun violence, he’s not going to stop to ask Congress to — you know, to do something.  You hear me say that.   You hear him say that often.  They need to do something to stop this epidemic of — of gun violence.
 
And so, we’ve been very clear.  We need universal background checks, a national red flag law.  We must ban assault weapons, obviously, and high-capacity magazines.  And this — these actions can’t wait.  These actions can’t wait. 
 
And so, I just wanted to lay that out because that report was — was, I’m sure, very difficult — forget about us in the room — very difficult for the Uvalde community, and the President understands that.  I just don’t have anything beyond that to add.
 
Q    Okay.  Just — sorry, one more.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah, yeah.  That’s okay.
 
Q    On the — the debate — or the — the discussions on funding.  It sounded like yesterday there — they were pretty close on the immigration and Ukraine funding agreements.  And I just wondered if the White House was willing to concede more.  I think part of the — one of the main issues they were talking about was parole authority.  I wondered if there were any more concessions being made or — like, what’s happening?  (Laughter.)
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, for the past several months, I’ve been very careful to not negotiate from here.  So, I’m not going to — to break that.
 
What I’ll say is — and I’ve said this many times: We really appreciate that senators, both Republican and Democrats, continue to have this conversation, continue to negotiate on border security. 
 
Obviously, this is something that’s import- — that is very important to this President.  It came up in the — in the congressional meeting that they had two days ago.  And the President was very clear that Congress needs to act.  We need to be zeroed-in and focused on this and also the funding for Ukraine, as Ukraine continues — continues to defend themselves from — against Putin’s aggression — right? — Putin’s invasion.  And so, that is some- — something that we need to continue to do. 
 
Obviously, there has been a global coalition that the President has upheld to — including NATO alliances f- — more than 50 countries — in support of Ukraine as they’re trying, again, to fight for their freedom.  So, we need to continue to do that.  The President believes all of the — all of the parts and the pieces and what he’s asked for in his — in his national security supplemental needs to pass. 
 
But going back to border security for a second, we think the conversations are going in the right direction.  We are optimistic about it.  It is important to act now.  The immigration system, what we’ve seen at the border has been broken for decades now, needs to get fixed. 
 
And so, the Pres- — the President is going to continue to encourage Congress to act.  And, again, we are very thankful and appreciative and encouraged by what we’re seeing by senators, both Republicans and Democrats, continuing these negotiation processes.
 
Q    To follow on that: You say that you’re encouraged they’re going in the right direction.  But the President was asked yesterday, “What are the sticking points in the border agreement?”  And he said, “I don’t think we have any sticking points left.”  If that’s true, why haven’t senators announced an agreement yet?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, we’re going to let them speak to that.  But that’s — we’ve been saying it’s headed in the right direction, right?  We’ve been saying that we are encouraged by it, right?  That is, I think — what the President just said lays — pretty much backs up what we’ve been saying. 
 
So, I just don’t want to get into specifics.  As it relates any — as it relates to a specific, I think the negotiators should speak to that.  Let them have those conversations on the Hill.  Let them talk to you all about what it is that they’re discussing specifically.
 
I want to be very careful not to get involved in the negotiation process.  It is — we understand how this works.  And speaking from that — from here, from the podium, don’t want to affect the progress that we believe that they’re making on this. 
 
Look, border security is important.  We understand it’s important to the American people.  We have to do something.  We have to get — get some — get some — an agreement — a bipartisan agreement put forward so that — so that we can deal with that issue at the border.
 
Q    Did something change in the meeting that he had this week with leaders to give him that optimism?  I mean —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah —
 
Q    What — what does he — does he think that it’s close to a done deal to say that yesterday?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I want to be really mindful.  The meeting two days ago was not a negotiation meeting.  It was not.  It was about Ukraine and the importance that — the importance for us to continue to support Ukraine and how Congress has to act.  And what’s expected of us, not just in our national security — obviously, it’s important to our national security — but also globally. 
 
And so, that was the purpose of this meeting.  It was not part of the negotiation.  There are negotiations happening, as I just stated, over at the Hill, with Republicans and Democrat senators.  And we’re going to let those negotiation happen. 
 
What we dis- — what the President wanted to be really clear about is the importance in — to continuing to support Ukraine as they defend themselves. 
 
As you know, Ja- — National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and DNI Avril Haines were a part of that meeting.  They laid out some examples of the consequences for Ukraine on the battlefield. 
 
And so, that is what the conversation was about.  Obviously, and as you all heard from some of these congressional leaders, they brought up the border.  Border security was discussed, but it was not nego- — in a negotiation meeting. 
 
Go ahead.
 
Q    J.B. Pritzker was in Des Moines this week and was talking about the inhumane practices of receiving — you know, these — basically, these migrants are still being sent by airplane to Chicago.  Like, I — I think the total number is 30,000 have been shipped to Chicago alone.
 
And the mayors are meeting in town.  They’re certainly going to ask for more resources.  What — what can the federal government do to help cities like Chicago that are really struggling with this, especially given the subarctic temperatures that —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.
 
Q    — we’re seeing right now.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  And you’ve heard me say this very recently about how those actions that are being taken by Republican leader- — leadership is a inhuha- — inhu- — inhumane, and it’s demoralizing.  And it doesn’t — it doesn’t lead to the safety of — of communities here. 
 
And so, we’ve called that out, and we’ll continue to do that. 
 
And I’ve spoken to this already, but I’ll — I’ll lay it out a little bit more.  During the last year, what our administration was able to do, it — in corrob- — in corroboration with states and cities across the country, we launched this one — one — one-stop shop clinics to help eligible noncitizens get working permits and decompress the re- — respective shelter system. 
 
That was something that — that — that local leaders and state leaders asked for.  And so, we were able to, obviously, work in collaboration in getting that done. 
 
To date, these clinics have — have served more than 10,000 people.  So, they’ve been effective. 
 
And so — and another thing that you’ve heard us speak to is that we’ve provided more than $1 billion in grant funding for jurisdictions hosting recently arrived migrants.  So, that’s been important. 
 
And, look, here’s the thing.  I just went — I just had this whole — kind of this whole back-and-forth with your colleagues here about border security and about this negotiation that’s happening in the Senate.  That’s what we — we would like to see.  We want to do more.  We want to do more, but it requires Congress to act. 
 
That is where we are now.  That’s why it’s so important that these conversations, these negotiations on Capitol Hill with senators, both Republicans and Democrats, have been going on for the past several months.  We are encouraged.  We want to see the supplemental passed.  It is important to get that done as well. 
 
Remember, border security was originally a part of the — of the supplemental.  So, we look — we look forward to continuing collaboration with the states, these jurisdictions, obviously, just to see what else we can do.  But in order to get more, Congress needs to act. 
 
Q    I had a follow-up on what John was saying about deliberate war crimes.  That seems to differentiate between deliberate and inadvertent war crimes.  Can you say anything about —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I —
 
Q    — what you’re parsing is that — that phrasing?  I was — it startled me because it seems to imply that you acknowledge that there have been war crimes committed.  But perhaps not —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I —
 
Q    — deliberate.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I don’t think that’s what the — the Admiral was inferring to.  He doesn’t — I don’t — I — I can speak very — I think very — very, I think, forcefully and — and say that that is not what he was referring to.  
 
Look, we — we have been very clear about Israel’s absolute right to defend itself.  That’s something that we say all the time, right?  Obviously, this is our relationship, what we believe, as well, its — its obligation to abide by international law — right? — to make sure that we are — they are protecting civilian lives, whether Israeli lives or Palestinian lives.  We’ve been really clear about that. 
 
And so — and so, I just want to be really careful.  I’m not going to go beyond what the — what the Admiral said here.  And I wouldn’t parse his words too much here. 
 
But we’ve been very clear on where — where we stand on — on — on what — what we believe we stand on.  Obviously, we want to continue to have these diplomatic conversations, as the President had with Prime Minister Netanyahu.  And our focus has always been making sure, obviously, no civilian lives — right? — one civilian life is too many; getting those — that humanitarian aid into Gaza is incredibly important; making sure hostages — American hostages, all hostages come home; and trying to continue these pauses — these humanitarian pauses that you have seen the President lead on.  And they have been very successful, as — as the Admiral has said.
 
Q    If the International Court did rule that war crimes were committed, would the U.S. support —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m — I’m not going to get into hypothetical- —
 
Q    — that rule?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m just not going to get into hypotheticals from here. 
 
Go ahead, M.J.
 
Q    Karine, does the President believe that a ban on menthol cigarettes would save the lives of Black Americans?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I want to be really careful.  There’s a rulemaking process that’s currently happening.  Not going to get ahead of that.  That is something for, obviously, the respective agency — FDA — to — to kind of take a look at that.  I just don’t — I want to be really mindful — 
 
Q    I wasn’t asking about the rule.  I was just asking whether that is something the President believes.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, I — I hear you.  I just want to be careful because there’s a process — a rulemaking process that’s currently happening on that particular issue.  And I just don’t — I don’t want to comment on this rule because — on that pro- — on your question, because that rulemaking process is currently happening. 
 
FDA is doing their part.  They are the experts here.  I’m just not going to get into specifics of — of that at all.
 
Q    Well, they may be the experts, but I think there’s abundant research that shows that this is a leading cause of deaths for Black Americans.  I’m just asking whether the President believes that could be a benefit of banning menthol cigarettes. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I hear your — I hear your question, M.J.  As you said, there are experts who have spoken to this.  I’ll let the experts speak to this.  When there’s a rulemaking process, this is — this is always the case here.  Because there’s a rulemaking process, we’re just not going to comment. 
 
Go ahead, Jacqui.
 
Q    Thank you, Karine.  What is the administration’s response to the 14 House Democrats who voted with Republicans the other day to denounce the, quote, “open-borders policies” of the Biden administration?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — what do you mean?  What’s our comments on what? 
 
Q    Well, do you have a response to 14 Democrats in the House believing that —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh, the —
 
Q    — this President has open-border policies?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, look, we’ve been very clear.  We want to deal with what’s going on at the border.  That’s why we’re having these conversation — these negotiations in the Senate with Republicans and Democrats.
 
The President understands that this is an issue that matters to the American people.  And we feel like those conversations that are happening, those negotiations are heading in the right direction. 
 
And so, the President understands.  He put the border security — right? — there was — that’s part of the supplemental.  His request on funding for border security was part of that national security ask, that emergency ask. 
 
So, we believe we need to do more.  The President understands we need to do more.  And we — we see Republicans and Democrats in the Senate want to do more. 
 
Q    Is it — is it still the position of the administration that the border is secure?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Our position is that we need to do more at the border.  We have to do more at the border.  That’s why these negotiations are currently happening.  That’s our position. 
 
Q    And is it the position of the administration that the efforts to impeach Secretary Mayorkas are unconstitutional?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What we believe is that what House Republicans are doing is playing political games.  That’s what we believe.  And they’re not doing their jobs — the jobs that the American people want them to be doing. 
 
And let’s not forget, they won’t even let Secretary Mayor- — Mayorkas even testify.  They want to impeach him, but they’re not even let — allowing him to testify. 
 
And so, it is shameful.  That’s what we believe.  It is shameful.  And what we’d encourage these House Republicans to do — and this is something that we saw coming out of the midterms in 2022 — American people want to see Republicans and Democrats working together to deliver for them, to address the issues that matter.  That’s what we would rather see. 
 
Q    On the constitutionality portion, though, I saw that there was a memo that came out that was touting this open letter from constitutional law professors, making the argument that impeachment based on policy disagreements is unconstitutional.  Is that the approach the administration is taking to this?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What letter are you speaking to?  The same one?
 
Q    There was an Ian Sams memo that went out, and it was — included an open letter from a number of constitutional law professors who are arguing that impeaching a Cabinet Secretary on the basis of policy disagreements is forbidden in the Constitution. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, I’m going to let my colleague’s letter stand for itself.  I’ve been very clear on how we feel and what be- — we what we think about these impeachment proceedings.  And — and a proceeding that is not even allowing Secretary Mayorkas to testify. 
 
Q    I’m just trying to gather, though — because it came to us from, you know, the White House, obviously —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.
 
Q    — that, you know — is this something that the administration is going to fight in court on the — on a constitutional basis that this is not something that could happen?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  And I will say, I’m going to let my — my White House colleagues at the Counsel — at the Counsel’s Office respond to that. 
 
Go ahead.
 
Q    Karine, a month ago today when you were asked about whether the White House had any regrets about linking Ukraine aid with border funding, you said, “No, not at all.”  I wanted to know if that was still the case today.  Does the White House have any regrets about this strategy?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, not at all, because both of those things are important to the President.  There — they are emergency requests.  That’s why they — he included it in the supplemental.  And we believe all of it needs to move forward. 
 
Q    And then, just very quickly, on student loans.  There has been some Republican criticism from people like Senator Bill Cassidy, Congresswoman Virginia Foxx, specifically saying that the President is pandering in this election year, trying to buy votes with these kinds of moves on student loans.  There have been other lawmakers who have echoed something similar, saying it’s not fair for Americans who didn’t go to college to have to pay for those who racked up too much debt.
 
What is the White House response to that (inaudible)?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, we’ve heard that rhetoric many times before.  That’s nothing new, what you laid out to me.  Look, the President made a promise that he would do everything that he can to take action to give American families a little bit of a breathing room.  And that’s related to student — student debt as well.
 
And you heard at the top when I said — I laid out that, you know, folks should not have to be crushed by student debt to be able to start a family, to be able to — be able to buy a home.  Right? 
 
And so, this is what we have — we’ve seen over the past several decades.  And the President has been very clear: He’s going to do everything that he can to give people a little bit more breathing room to give people — make sure he lower costs for folks. 
 
And that’s what we’re seeing.  Right?  We’re seeing that from — from an array of — of folks just across the spectrum. 
 
And so, I’ve heard those comments.  That is not something that the President believes.  The President believes that it is important.  You’ve got — you’ve got to remember, this is a president who grew up in a middle-class family, who — who knows what it’s like to sit around a kitchen table and try to figure out which bill are you going to pay.  Are you going to pay that medical bill?  Are you going to be able to pay that medical bill?  Are you going to be able to put food on the table?  Are you going to be able to pay the tuition for — for your kid that’s going to college?
 
And these are difficult conversations that American families have every month.  And so, if the President can do something to give families a little bit of dignity, a little bit of an opportunity to really be part of — of a growing economy, be part of the middle class, he’s going to take that action.
 
Go ahead, Sabrina.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  When the President was asked yesterday about Arab Americans not wanting to vote for him over Gaza, his response was to point to former President Trump’s travel ban on Muslim-majority nations.  Putting aside for a moment that most Arab Americans are Christian, is that the bar here, that his predecessor and likely opponent wants to ban Muslims and President Biden doesn’t?  And how does that relate to the substance of their criticism of Gaza?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, I want to be really careful because there’s a mix of — of upcoming election on — on — in your question — in 2024.  Look, I would look at — and I really want to be mindful here and careful. 
 
I think what the President was doing was trying to give a reminder of where we were before — right? — what it looked like before in the last four years in the last administration.
 
You have a president that has been very clear in protecting Arab Am- — Arab Americans or any communities that are under attack, any communities that have felt left behind.  And so, he is — I think his — his record and what he’s been trying to do for folks here in this country — all communities, including the Arab — Arab American community — is very, very clear. 
 
And so, I think he was — it was a question that he was asked.  He answered it very quickly.  It probably — you know, he — he thought of it as, obviously, asked in a political way.  And so, that’s where he went.
 
But I just also want to be super careful because this is an upcoming election.
 
Q    And then away from the campaign, then.  Since the conflict began, the President has sat down with Muslim leaders only once that we know of, on October 26th, and there was only one Palestinian American who was present for that meeting.  Why has the President not met or engaged more directly with Palestinian American leaders in the more than three months since this conflict began?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, as you just stated in the top of your question, he has had direct conversation with leaders in — in the respective communities.  His team has — regularly have stayed in touch with members and leaders of those respective communities that you just laid out: Arab Americans and Muslim Americans as well.  And so, those conversations are obviously very important.
 
I don’t have anything to read out or lay out of any upcoming — upcoming discussions with those leaders in the — in those communities.  But he has been — he’s had direct conversation.  He’s had — listened to them.  Those were private conversations.  We try not to read — read out specifically what was discussed.
 
But obviously, the President and his team has been in regular communications.
 
Go ahead, Akayla.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  Monday is obviously the anniversary of — of Roe v. Wade.  Do you have any preview of what the President plans to do to mark the day?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  So, as you know, the — the campaign made an announcement of the four principles here — the President, the Vice President, the First Lady, and the Second Gentleman — are going to do an event on Tuesday as — and touch on Roe v. Wade.  I would refer you to — to them on exactly what that’s going to look like.
 
And, you know, the — the Vice President is going to do a tour specifically focusing on Roe v. Wade.  So, certainly, we would refer you to — to the Vice President’s office.  And, certainly, we’ll have more — more to share on that.
 
All right.  I was t- — I’m being told to wrap it.
 
Go ahead, Sara.
 
Q    Thanks, Karine.  On Wednesday, when you were asked about, ahead of the meeting, Speaker Johnson’s H.R.2-or-bust position, you had said, Speaker Johnson is not the only congressman in the room.  He has held to this hardline position. 
 
But was there any indication from House members who were present in the meeting or in other conversations that have been had with House members that they — there is a possibility of them taking on a Senate-passed agreement?  Like, if — if an agreement were to be reached and passed in the Senate, has he gotten any kind of assurances that the House would take that on?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I will say, I think there was broad — a broad agreement in the room in that meeting that we needed — they needed to deal with Ukraine and also the border.  So, there was a broad agreement there.  I’m not going to get into specifics on how that would look like. 
 
But I think that’s important.  If both Republicans and Democrats in that meeting are saying, “Yes, we need to deal with this.  We need to figure out how to make sure we support Ukraine.  We need to figure out how to make sure we deal with the border security,” I think that’s important.  And so, that is what we were able to get out of that meeting as well, that type of understanding of addressing those two things.
 
Q    But is he optimistic that even if — you know, if the Senate is able to come to an agreement, that it would be taken on and passed in the House?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, look, I’ll say this — I’ll add to this.  It was a balanced and constructive conversation.  That’s what we saw, and that’s what happened.  And there was, again, broad agreement to — to certainly deal with making sure Ukraine gets the funding that they need, making sure that we deal with border security. 
 
So, that is the two — two important things that came out of that meeting.  We are going to continue to have a conversation in the Senate, do the negotiations in the Senate on the border security to get something done — something that the American people want to see.  And then we’ll see what happens.
 
I don’t want to get into hypotheticals.  I don’t want to guess what’s going to happen.  Obviously, Speaker Johnson has been very vocal, and he can speak for himself.  But it is important.  It is important that we see a bipartisan agreement, bipartisan conversation happening.  And we’ll see where it goes.  But the President is going to continue to encourage, obviously, Congress to move forward.
 
Go ahead, Joey. 
 
Q    Yeah.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I haven’t called on you.
 
Q    Yeah.  Thank you.  Well, regarding the House.  And a version of this question was asked, I think, during the Air Force One gaggle yesterday.  But with Speaker Johnson saying he is communicating regularly with former President Trump on border negotiations, does the White House believe that Speaker Johnson is, in fact, negotiating in good faith toward an agreement on the border?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, I’m going to let Speaker Johnson speak for himself.  What I can say is that, right now, we are in active negotiations with members in the Senate, and it is in good faith.  With Republicans and Democrats, it is happening in good faith.  And we are encouraged by where the conversation is going.  We are — we are — we believe there has been progress. 
 
And so, let’s start there.  Let’s start there and let them do their job and continue — or do their negotiations and continue to have those conversations.  And I’m just going to let the House speak for themselves.
 
Q    Do you think Speaker Johnson actually wants a border agreement?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  That’s for him to speak to.  I’m not going to speak fr- — from here.  I know I keep getting — did I call on you, Weijia?
 
Q    Just a quick follow on — on the border talks. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.
 
Q    Very quick.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.
 
Q    Is the President open to passing, signing a border deal before one is reached on Ukraine or does it have to be concurrent?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I can’t speak to the timeline of all of this.  What I can speak to is we are having those conversation in the — in the Senate, negotiations, as I’ve mentioned multiple times already from here.  I’m sure you’ve — you’re tired of me saying that over and over again. 
 
And what I can also say is that we want to see the full national security supplemental move forward.  That is what we want to see.  We want to see it move forward, and that includes Ukraine, obviously includes Israel, obvious- — obviously includes border security.  That’s what the President wants to see, and that is the direction that we hope that it goes in.
 
All right.  I haven’t called on you.  Go ahead.
 
Q    So, is the White House supportive of the bipartisan tax bill that was introduced this week that expands the Child Tax Credit but also has a lot of cuts for businesses?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, we think that — we are encouraged by what we’re seeing, obviously, with the tax deal that is — that is going forward.  And so, we think that’s important.  Obviously, the President passed the American Rescue Plan, as you know, very early on.  It had the Child Tax Credit.  The President has been very clear that he wanted to see that move forward in full, and it’s — you know, continuing that per- –more permanently. 
 
And so, that is important.  But we are pleased that the House and Ways and Means — House Ways and Means Committee advanced a bipartisan tax bill that will increase that — right? — that will increase it. 
 
And so — and let’s not forget, these — this is for millions of families — millions of families.  It’s going to lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty and support construction of hundreds of thousands of affordable rental housing, as well, in that bipartisan agreement.
 
So, it is a welcome step forward.  And we believe Congress should pass it.
 
All right, guys.  We’ll see you on Monday.  Thank you, everybody. 
 
Q    Have a good weekend.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Stay — stay warm and dry.
 
2:53 P.M. EST
 

The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and NSC Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby appeared first on The White House.

Yesterday, Assistant to the President and Director of the Gender Policy Council Jennifer Klein, Senior Advisor for Gender-Based Violence Catherine Powell, and Director of the Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women Rosie Hidalgo met with survivors of stalking to hear their experiences and recommendations for ways the Biden-Harris Administration can continue to support survivors of gender-based violence, including stalking. The roundtable was held during National Stalking Awareness Month, which was galvanized by the murder of Peggy Klinke twenty years ago yesterday.

In their lifetimes, one in three women and one in six men will be affected by stalking. Stalking is increasingly facilitated by technology and takes place both online and offline. It can disrupt victims’ lives, forcing them to miss work or move from their homes, and it can severely impact physical and mental health.

Participants discussed the Administration’s commitment to ending and addressing gender-based violence and stalking wherever it occurs, including through implementation of the first U.S. National Plan to End Gender-Based Violence and the ongoing work of the White House Task Force to Address Online Harassment and Abuse. Biden-Harris Administration leaders emphasized the courageous leadership of survivors and advocates in the anti-stalking field. Survivors, advocates, and Administration officials discussed current needs in the anti-stalking field and strategies to improve support for survivors of stalking, including methods to increase access to training, resources, justice, and safety.

###

The post Readout of White House Roundtable on Supporting Survivors of Stalking in Recognition of National Stalking Awareness Month appeared first on The White House.

Yesterday, Assistant to the President and Director of the Gender Policy Council Jennifer Klein, Senior Advisor for Gender-Based Violence Catherine Powell, and Director of the Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women Rosie Hidalgo met with survivors of stalking to hear their experiences and recommendations for ways the Biden-Harris Administration can continue to support survivors of gender-based violence, including stalking. The roundtable was held during National Stalking Awareness Month, which was galvanized by the murder of Peggy Klinke twenty years ago yesterday.

In their lifetimes, one in three women and one in six men will be affected by stalking. Stalking is increasingly facilitated by technology and takes place both online and offline. It can disrupt victims’ lives, forcing them to miss work or move from their homes, and it can severely impact physical and mental health.

Participants discussed the Administration’s commitment to ending and addressing gender-based violence and stalking wherever it occurs, including through implementation of the first U.S. National Plan to End Gender-Based Violence and the ongoing work of the White House Task Force to Address Online Harassment and Abuse. Biden-Harris Administration leaders emphasized the courageous leadership of survivors and advocates in the anti-stalking field. Survivors, advocates, and Administration officials discussed current needs in the anti-stalking field and strategies to improve support for survivors of stalking, including methods to increase access to training, resources, justice, and safety.

###

The post Readout of White House Roundtable on Supporting Survivors of Stalking in Recognition of National Stalking Awareness Month appeared first on The White House.

President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. today announced the designation of a Presidential Delegation to attend the Inauguration of His Excellency Joseph Boakai on Monday, January 22, 2024, in Monrovia, Liberia. 

The Honorable Linda Thomas-Greenfield, Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations, will lead the delegation.

Members of the Presidential Delegation:

Ms. Catherine Rodriguez, Chargé d’Affaires, a.i., U.S. Embassy Monrovia

The Honorable Stephen K. Benjamin, Assistant to the President and Senior Advisor to the President and Director of the Office of Public Engagement, The White House

The Honorable Isobel Coleman, Deputy Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development

The Honorable Judd Devermont, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for African Affairs, National Security Council, The White House

The post President Biden Announces Presidential Delegation to the Republic of Liberia to Attend the Inauguration of His Excellency Joseph Boakai appeared first on The White House.

President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. today announced the designation of a Presidential Delegation to attend the Inauguration of His Excellency Joseph Boakai on Monday, January 22, 2024, in Monrovia, Liberia. 

The Honorable Linda Thomas-Greenfield, Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations, will lead the delegation.

Members of the Presidential Delegation:

Ms. Catherine Rodriguez, Chargé d’Affaires, a.i., U.S. Embassy Monrovia

The Honorable Stephen K. Benjamin, Assistant to the President and Senior Advisor to the President and Director of the Office of Public Engagement, The White House

The Honorable Isobel Coleman, Deputy Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development

The Honorable Judd Devermont, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for African Affairs, National Security Council, The White House

The post President Biden Announces Presidential Delegation to the Republic of Liberia to Attend the Inauguration of His Excellency Joseph Boakai appeared first on The White House.

East Room

4:05 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, thank you, thank you.  (Applause.)

Thank you.  Thank you very much.  Please — please sit down.

My dad used to have an expression: Quit while you’re ahead.  (Laughter.)

I tell you what, I can’t tell you how pleased I am to have you all here, and I mean it.  For some of you, this is not your first visit.  I know the new mayors, obviously it is. 

But, you know, Mayor Schieve — thanks for that introduction and your leadership of this conference.

A special thanks to the CEO of the Conference of Mayors,

Tom Cochran — Tommy, how you doing, pal? — (applause) — who began his distinguished tenure in 1969.  God bless you, pal.  (Laughter.) 

It’s hell turning 50, isn’t it?

MAYOR SCHIEVE:  We’re the same age.  And Mike Bloomberg is the same age too.  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  All right.  But neither one of us have his money.  (Laughter.)

Well, thank you all, and welcome to the White House.  I mean that sincerely.

Today, we get some good news: We just signed a bill to keep the government open.  (Applause.)  I thought about it when I signed it, but — but, you know, some days, that counts as progress.  (Laughter.)

As many of you know, I started my career as a local official back in Delaware.  And I only ran for Senate because serving locally was too hard.  (Laughter.)  They know where you live and they think you can solve problems that are beyond your authority. 

And believe me, all kidding aside, you have enormous respect for the — I have enormous respect for job you do.  I really mean it.  You can’t go anywhere without people knowing what you’re doing.  You — they know where you live.  And they think you can solve every problem.  (Laughter.)  No, I’m serious.

The fact is, you’re answering key questions people ask every day: Is my neighborhood safe?  Is it going to be okay?  Will this bus get me to work on time?  You know, my kids — will they — they going to have a good future in this town?  Am I able to stay in my hometown?

It matters.  It matters what you do.

Mayors get the job done.  And I’m not being fa- — I’m not just being solicitous.  Those of you who’ve known me for a long time know that’s been my view from the time I got here as a United States senator.

That’s why I’ve filled my administration with so many former mayors — (applause) — including Keisha Lance Bottoms,  Steve Benjamin — Steve, good to see you — Mitch Landrieu, Marty Walsh, Secretary Buttigieg.  (Applause.) 

Pete turned 30 today.  (Laughter.)  He got — my wife is going to — we have — she has a tradition in her family.  Five and girls and one — five sisters — and at everybody’s birthday, you’ve got to sing “Happy Birthday.”  So, stand up, and let’s sing happy birthday.

(The President leads the audience in singing “Happy Birthday” to Secretary Buttigieg.)

And those of you who know my wife know I’m not kidding.  (Laughter.) 

By the way, I tell every young man that tells me “I’m thinking of getting married” or something like — I say, “Look, I” — “You have any advice?”  I said, “Yeah, pick a family with five sisters or more.”  And they look at me, “What the hell is that all about?”  I said, “It’s really simple.  That way, one of them always loves you.  Not the same one.”  (Laughter.)  You always have somebody on your side.

I want to thank Tom — Tom Perez for being the point person for so long.  Where are you, Tom?  There you are.  Stand up, Tom.  (Applause.)  And I know he spent several days this week meeting with many of you, and I hope you — I hope you — he was able to answer all your questions, because he always answers mine.  (Laughter.)

Folks, I made a commitment to be a President for all Americans, whether you live in a — whether you voted for me or not.  And I mean it sincerely.  Whether it —

I made a commitment to rebuild from the middle out and bottom up, not the top down — give everybody a little bit of breathing room.

And, you know, it’s kind of interesting that I — I — a lot of folks who voted every — against everything I’ve done, they’re announcing all these great projects.  (Laughter.)  I tell them — and by the way, as many in blue states as red states — you know? — and red states as blue, for real, because they’re all Americans.

And here’s the deal — (a cell phone in the audience rings) — I know.  I know.  (Laughter.)

Tell the former President I’m busy right now.  (Laughter and applause.)

Look, but I always say, some of the most ardent critics of me are announcing these great programs.  And I say — I have one comment: See you at the groundbreaking.  (Laughter.)

Look, I’ve kept those commitments, and so have you.  And I — look at what we’ve been able to accomplish together.  That’s what I would like to talk a little bit about today. 

I’m not going to take a lot of your time, but the things that are on top of mind for you.

Look, when I came to office, the pandemic was raging.  The economy was reeling.  Cities nationwide faced devastating budget cuts.  And together, we turned things around.  You turned them around.  You turned them around.

It started with the American Rescue Plan: $350 billion for state and local governments.  Money to put cops back on the beat, teachers in the classroom, keep families in their homes –(applause) — and train your workforces and get small businesses on their feet.  Money directly to every single city in the cou- — in the country so you could decide how best to spend your money and meet your residents’ needs without having to go through a statehouse or a governor.  (Applause.)

A lot of — a lot of great governors, a lot of state houses.  But you all know what you need better than anybody.  I like it going directly to you.  When I was a local official, I liked that a lot better.  I liked the Delaware state legislature when I was there.  But guess what?  They had — everybody had to get a piece of it — (laughter) — and my county wouldn’t get what it needed.  Any rate. 

I followed that with the most significant investment

in our nation’s infrastructure in generations: roads, bridges, railroads, ports, airports, public transit, clean water, high-speed Internet, and so much more.

How can we have the best economy in the world if we don’t have the best infrastructure in the world?  Not a joke. 

We used to be number one in the world.  You know what we rank now nationally — our — our infrastructure is rated worldwide?  We’re number 13.  The United States of America is 13, from being number one.  You can’t lead the world unless you have the best infrastructure in the world.

Well, you’re helping us change that.  Now — now, we’ll — we’re going — on our way to leading the world again.

Over 4- — 40,000 new infrastructure projects announced to date and a hell of a lot more to come, with jobs now and jobs for the next decade.

I remember going through — remember we had Infrastructure Week?  (Laughter.)  And then, we had Infrastructure Week.  And then we had Infrastructure Week.  And then we had In- — (laughter).  It never happened.  Well, we’ve got an Infrastructure Decade.  (Applause.)  Because of you.

Just yesterday, I was in — I was in Raleigh, North Carolina.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDENT:  You got it, man.  (Laughter.)  Great city, by the way.  (Laughter.)

And we’re investing $3 billion in the entire state for high-speed Internet by the end of the decade.  (Applause.)  And we’re doing that in all 50 states. 

You know, Franklin Roosevelt brought electricity to rural America.  That’s what he did, because it wasn’t there.  And he realized that it was necessary to equalize the country and to grow the whole country. 

Well, we’re — we’re bringing high-speed Internet to everyone in America.  Rural — it’s the same — same thing, the same necessities, critical to our economy.  How do you get by in a city, a state, a town, your home without accessing Internet — affordable acc- — we’re not leaving anybody behind.

Yesterday, in North Carolina, I also highlighted a $1 billion we’re investing in a new rail line from Raleigh to Richmond.  And that’s a billion dollars.  It’s going to create good-paying jobs, make travel faster, and it’s going to improve the environment considerably by getting tens of thousands of cars off the road.  Because every study shows, if you get a chance to go by electric rail and/or your car, you go by rail if it’s the same time. 

They’ve cut the point going from point A to point B.  Look, right now, is it takes — it takes about three hours to get that route.  Cut it down to two hours.  It changes everything.

And each of you could give examples of infrastructure projects of the one happening now in your states. 

Look, with your help, we’re also making the biggest investment in fighting climate change ever anywhere in the world — (applause) — in the world.  We’ve got more to do. 

Across your cities, we’re working together to help small — small businesses install — install rooftop solar panels, electric buses — city fleets of all electric buses, planning — I just met with a lovely woman who knows a little bit about the environment, going to plant thousands of trees in her city, a million total — a million total.  It’s going to change the — protect against extreme heat and so much more.

My administration continues to work closely with you and your governors and respond quickly to the wake of devastating floods, tornadoes, wildfires, and hurricanes. 

By the way, when I started the job, I kept talking about the need for a deal with the — with the environment.  Said, “We don’t have a problem.”  Anybody think climate is not a problem, raise your hand.  (Laughter.)  Come on, man.  (Laughter.)

I’ve been around the world and on the ground with you, making sure to help strengthen the resilience and withstand the extreme weather and build back a stronger economy and bring back a stronger community.  We’re revitalizing fenceline communities smothered with a legacy of pollution.  I grew up in one of those communities, and Delaware used to have the high- — one of the highest cancer rates in the nation.

When we moved from Scranton — when jobs were eliminated in Scranton, we moved back to Delaware where my dad had been raised — to Claymont, Delaware, right on the border of Pennsylvania, that arch that goes up in it.  More — more oil refineries than any place in the nation, including Houston, at the time.

Well, guess what?  Almost all my friends, including me, we — we had asthma.  We’d go to — you know, my mom would drive us to the local school.  It wasn’t very far — a little Catholic school called Holy Rosary — up the Philadelphia pike.  And if it was the first frost, you’d turn on the windshield wipers — this is the God’s truth — and there’d be an oil slick in the window — an oil slick.

And you all come from places that have those all- — those alleys.  You know — and we’re promoting clean energy and industries of the future.  Our workers have already drawn $640 billion in private investment at home and — from home and around the world — $640 billion.  We’re building factories.  We’re creating jobs here in America. 

Let me give you one example.  America invented the microchip, about as big as the tip of your little finger.  Okay?  We invented and — went to the moon.  We — we modernized it.  We made it — it’s necessary for everything from smartphones to dishwashers to automobiles.  And over time, we went from producing 40 percent of the world’s chips to producing less than 10 percent.

And that’s when I signed the CHIPS and Science Act.  I got on a plane — and maybe I was a little nuts — and flew to South Korea.  And I said, “Why — why don’t you come invest and build us those computer chips in America” so we didn’t have a supply chain problem.  And went around — well, guess what?  They did. 

I asked the — I asked Samsung, “Why are you investing so much money in America?”  They said, “Because you have the best workers in the world, and it’s the safest investment I can make, is in America.” 

Now, semiconductors are investing literally hundreds of billions of dollars producing chips back home, here in America — your cities, your towns — so folks never have to leave home to get — excuse me — to get a good job.

And, by the way, even with those historic investments that we made over the last three years, we still reduced the deficit during this whole period.  All those investments, we still reduced the deficit by $1 trillion.  (Applause.)

And, look, you all — a lot of you come from places like I grew up in, where there used to be that factory that employed 3,000, 2,000, 1,500 people.  All of a sudden, it closed down.  It was there for generations.  People lost heart.  People lost a sense of — literally, a sense of loss.  And it’s particularly those of you from the near-Midwest and the Midwest.  Look at all the factories that picked up and moved. 

Well, our economic agenda has ignited a manufacturing boom, a semiconductor boom, a battery boom, an electric vehicle boom.  We’re making things in America, in every part of America, creating millions of good-paying jobs.  By the way, 800,000 new manufacturing jobs.  And if you work more than —

By the way, you know, these new factories, they call them — when they’re for — to build these new — these chips manufacturing facilities, they have what they call “fabs” factories.  They look like — and I’ve seen them.  They look like great, big football fields in a stadium — I mean, rectangular fields.  And guess what?  You don’t need a college degree.  You know what the average salary is?  $110,000 working there.

And what happens?  The first one is being built outside of Columbus, Ohio, in what I call the “Field of Dreams,” a thousand acres there.  What’s happening there?  Not only you build a factory, but you’re going to end up having to build more — more filling stations, more beauty shops, more drugstores, more — everything — everything moves when that’s happening, when people have money to spend. 

And it’s clean, I might add.  It’s clean.

And when folks see shovels in the ground and people going to work on these projects, they can feel a sense of pride again.

Think what we did.  Most of the major — I come from the corporate capital of the world — not a joke — Delaware.  More corporations incorporated in Delaware than any — every other state in the Union combined — combined.  And guess what?  A lot of those corporations, they’re not bad people, but they decided, “Let’s go with the cheapest labor in the world.”  So, they sent the jobs overseas — shut down the factories at home, sent the jobs overseas, and then imported the product.

Not anymore.  We are sending product overseas, and we’re importing the jobs.  (Applause.)  Pride in hometowns.  I really mean it.

Think about it.  Think about it.  What happens if you build up your — pride in America, pride in — people have pride when things start coming back — pride in knowing you can get big things done when your work together. 

Look, folks, we know pride also means feeling safe in your neighborhoods.  The fact that we’ve made enormous progress preventing and reducing crime through the American Rescue Plan.   We’ve made one of the biggest investments in local public safety ever: over $15 billion.  And much of it has gone directly to you to hire for your departments. 

You’ve done a tremendous job.  You really have.  You’ve done a tremendous job putting these resources to work.  You know how to do it.  And I’m not being solicitous.  Mayors are the people who get things done: hiring more officers for accountable community policing, investing in violence intervention programs proven to reduce crime. 

With your support, I also signed the first gun safety law in 30 years.  (Applause.)  And we’re working with you to implement it, to coordinate these efforts and create the first-ever White House Off- — I — we — what we did, my staff came along and said, you know, we need a White House Office dedicated to getting — getting guns off the street and threatening — and treating the trauma from gun violence, because there’s a lot of trauma as a consequence.

So, we’re deploying teams to meet with communities that have been victimized to make sure they get the help they need.  Working — it’s working because of you, the mayors.  But we –we’ve got to do a lot more.

You know, some of you may remember, a woman named Dianne Feinstein and Joe Biden passed the first assault weapons ban back when I was a senator.  (Applause.)  And mass shootings actually went down.  So, I’m still committed to banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.  (Applause.)  We’ve done it before, and we can do it again. 

And we have to pass universal background checks.  It doesn’t violate the Second Amendment, for God’s sake.  I used to teach the Constitution at the University of Pennsylvania.  Look, folks, the situation is simple.  You know, when the — when the — we passed the Second Amendment, guess what?  You weren’t allowed to have a cannon.  (Laughter.)  And you — no, I’m serious.  Not a joke.  You weren’t allowed to have certain — you weren’t — there were certain limitations of what you could have.

And I love — my friends and I come — the southern part of my state is very conservative, the Delmarva Peninsula.  We talk at you like y’all talk sometimes.  You know what I mean?  (Laughter.)

But all kidding aside, it’s just — it’s just kind of amazing.  They think that you could order — you could have anything.  That never was the case.  There’s always been limitations on what you could purchase.

So, anyway, look — and I love people who say, “The blood of liberty” — or excuse me, the — excuse me — “The tree of liberty is watered with the blood of patriots.”  Well, guess what, man?  I didn’t see a whole lot of patriots that are out there wa- — walking around making sure that we have these weapons.  Well — and if you really want to worry about the government, you need an F-16.  You don’t need an AR-15.  (Laughter.) 

No, I’m not — no, I’m serious.  I mean, think about it.  (Laughter.)  I’m not joking.  Because that’s one of the arguments made by the right, that we need to be able to protect ourselves against the government. 

Well, look —

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible.)  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  If Jill were here, she’d say, “Joe, hush up, boy.”  (Laughter.)

Across the country, violent crime is at — rates are falling.  In some cities, it’s going up, but overall — but not everywhere — overall, we are — we — they’re — they’re falling, these rates — down nearly in every major category.  Record declines in homicide.  It matters.

And at some time, we’ve invested, in the last little bit, billions in improving mental health services to extend care, boost coverage, and address the causes of addiction and mental health issues.  We’re expanding mobile crisis services and community clinics.  We’re helping schools hire 1,400 new counselors — counselors.  Mental health care is healthcare. It’s healthcare.  It’s no different if you broke your arm and need help.  (Applause.)  We have a moral obligation to have our folks’ backs. 

And I want to thank you all — I mean it sincerely — I want to thank you all for what you’re doing to support mental health all across the country.  And the same is true for the fight to end homelessness and move people into supportive and permanent housing.  We’re your partner in this work. 

We’ve got a lot more to do, I know.  Across the country, a record 1 million new housing units under are con- — are under construction today.  We’re expanding our rental assistance to over 100,000 additional families, the biggest increase in 20 years, and have been working to cut red tape to make it easy for people to access federal housing benefits. 

You know, I’ve sent Congress an ambitious plan to do more: lowering housing costs, helping you build affordable housing, provide assistance for renters and first-time homebuyers. 

By the way, most of you come from families like mine.  We weren’t poor, but, you know, we lived in a three-bedroom, split-level home when we moved to Delaware with four kids and a grandpop.  We lived in a decent neighborhood; it was safe.  But it wasn’t what you’d call luxurious.  There wasn’t much leftover. 

My dad used to say, “Joey, you know, a job is about a lot more than a paycheck.  It’s about decency.  It’s about respect.  It’s about being able to look your kid in the eye and say, ‘Honey, everything is going to be okay,’ and mean it.” 

Well, guess what?  What we’re doing is saving the government money.  Providing assistance for renters, first-time homebuyers, that’s how people build equity.  You build equity in your home, that’s how you build wealth.  So, let’s keep pushing, pass the plan into law.

And I want to talk about another top issue: the border.  Now, I love how I turn on, and “Biden — Biden is for a free open border.  Just tear down everything.  Let everybody come, no restrictions.”  Well, one — I — used to be a bipartisan issue in this country, and it should be one again.

I’ve been clear from the very beginning: The system is broken.  My first day in office, I sent Congress a comprehensive plan on immigration reform.  My friends on the other side have done nothing with that. 

Over and over, I’ve asked for resources to step up action at the border.  In October, I asked Congress to fund — for funding that would add another 20 additional bord- — 20 — 2,000 additional border agents and officers, hundreds of new immigration judges to make the judgments on the spot, a new — new detection equipment to stop fentanyl from coming into the country. 

And, by the way, I’ve worked with China and Mexico to slow the flow of fentanyl into the United States.  As I speak, it’s way down.

So, let me be clear.  My team has been at the table for weeks now on a partisan — with a bipartisan group of senators to negotiate a deal, including border, because I believe we need significant policy changes at the border, including changes in our asylum system to ensure that we have authorities we need to control the border.  And I’m ready to act. 

I think — hope — “God willing and the crick not rising,” as my grandpop would say — you know, I think next week, we ought to be able to work out something, at least in the Senate.  And I’m hopeful it’s going to be a bipartisan package the Senate is going to pass, God willing. 

Now, the question is for the Speaker and the House Republicans: Are they ready to act as well?  They have to choose whether they want to solve a problem or keep weaponizing the issue to score political points against the President.  I’m ready to solve the problem.  I really am.  Massive changes — and I mean it sincerely.

Today, folks in America, with in- — with the incredible help of you mayors, we’ve created 14 million new jobs — 14 million new jobs.  (Applause.) 

Americans have filled 16 — filed 16 new — 16 million new business applications since I became President.  That’s a record.  And every single one of them — think about it — is an act of hope.  Someone says they want to risk everything and open a new business, it’s an act of hope.

Wages are rising.  So is household wealth.  We have the lowest inflation rate and the fastest recovery of any major economy in the world.  And that’s a fact.  (Applause.)

In fact, today, costs are down on everything from a gallon of gas to a — to a carton of milk.  You know — I mean, look, I — I was down in Raleigh, as I said, the other day.  I didn’t pass by a gas station that wasn’t under three bucks: $2.99, $2.87.  I mean, come on. 

And, folks, fars are — folks are starting to see it.  Today, I learned that consumer sentiment — and you guys saw it — surged by 29 percent in the last two months, the biggest two-month jump in 30 years.  We’ve got more to do.  And that’s not all, though.  We’re lowering the costs of — for working-class families across the board.

And, by the way, it used to drive my dad crazy.  My dad was a hardworking guy, an honest man who didn’t get a chance to go to college because of the war, but he was a well-read guy.  And the thing that bothered my dad more than anything else was what I call junk fees, the add-on fee by a corporation or a business just because they could do it.

For example, we’re going after junk fees like banning banks and credit unions from charging fees for basic services, like checking your account balance.  To check your account balance, you get a bill for 30 bucks.  Come on.  Or retrieving your bank records, 50 bucks.  Some banks charge as much as, I said, 30 to 50 bucks for the services.  But not anymore.  For families like mine, that extra 30 bucks mattered when I was growing up. 

And speaking of not — being not fair, without the help of a single person on the other side, we finally were able to reduce the exorbitant cost of prescription drugs.  (Applause.)  Any prescription — any one you’re taking for any purpose in your town, you give me that prescription, and if I had the ability, I would take it to Ontario or — or Paris or Belgium and get it for anywhere from 60 to 30 percent less.  Same company, same pharmacy, same pharm- — pharmaceutical company, but that much less.

Look, folks, we finally allowed Medicare to negotiate drug prices.  I’ve been fighting that as a senator for my whole 2,000-year career.  (Laughter.)  Just like the VA has been able to do for decades.

Insulin now — if you have diabetes, insulin is now cast — capped at $35 for seniors on Medicare — (applause) — after being out at $400.  They’re saving hundreds of dollars a month.

And, by the way, starting next year, out-of-pocket drug costs for seniors on Medicare is going to be capped at, total — no matter wh- — how many — no matter what the cost of your — you’re paying, everything will be — you can’t — don’t have to pay more than $2,000 a year for every exp- — and even the expensive cancer drugs, which costs $14-, $16,000 a year.

Folks, I’m going to keep fighting to lower costs for families across the board. 

And, by the way, guess what?  I love it.  They say, “Well, you’re spending all that money.”  Guess what?  That’s money saved — billions of dollars the federal government does not have to pay, billions and billions of dollars.  And that’s a fact.  (Applause.)

By the way, you know how much it costs to make that insulin?  The guy who invented it didn’t want to patent it because he wanted it available for everybody.  You know how much it costs to make it?  Ten dollars — T-E-N.  Package it every way, add all the costs you could possibly think, another $2, maybe $3.  And they’re charging 400 bucks for it?  Come on, man.  (Laughter.)  No, I’m serious.  I’m not joking.

But it saves the government money.  It’s not the government spending money.  It saves the federal government billions of dollars a year — billions.  And it’s going to save more.  We have more work to do, but we’re going to keep moving forward together and, God willing, as partners.

Take student debt relief for public servants.  You know, I know I — I wanted to forgive all student debt, and the Supreme Court said, no, I didn’t have the authority to do that.  Okay.  But then I realized there’s a public service requirement out there.  If you engaged in public service for a serious amount of time —

And, by the way, the reason why any of you — I’m sure not anybody — I’m not going to ask you if you have it.  Anybody had to pay for student debt for yourself and/or a kid or anyone, raise your hand.  Guess what?  The interest you’re paying is more than, in fact, what the — the original bill was. 

Already, I’ve been able to forgive the debt for 3.7 million people — gotten debt relief.  (Applause.) 

And, by the way, when I originally got this passed, it was for everybody.  You didn’t have to be a senior.  For everybody.  But my team was unable to get past — I didn’t have a bunch of mayors.  I had a bunch of senators and congressmen.  (Laughter.)

But all kidding aside, you know, I met yesterday in Raleigh with a dad, who was an impressive guy.  And he was a Principal of the Year — picked as a Principal of the Year in his state. He had two young boys.  He lived in a lovely small home.  And — but he had a debt that — that was $124,000 — student debt, much of it interest.  And he never stopped paying b he — but he always kept his payments going — kept going up.

Well, guess what?  That debt is now forgiven.  And, by the way — (applause) — and, by the way, he’s a former high school principal and now an executive coach for school — for a school district, teaching principals.  He said this debt relief was a game changer for he and his family.  He has two boys I met. 

One — I mean, their — I sat with them in their — in their kitchen for — and their dining room for the better part of two hours.  Now he can stay in a town that he loves, take care of his children in a way that they’re able to meet the basic needs he has. 

It’s not only fair, but it grows the economy.  It grows the economy.  So many who are being able to pay off their student debt are now able to go out and go buy a home, invest in a business, invest in other things and their families — to grow their families. 

And, quite frankly, you, the mayors, are the key to all of this.  I’m not blaming you if you don’t want to be — take credit for it.  But the point is — look, the fact is you’re — you’re the ones responsible.  You’re the ones people listen to.  You talk to people.  You speak plain English or Spanish or whatever language you’re speaking, and you’re able to speak to them directly, and you explain in simple language what we’re doing.

Because, otherwise, people get really, really, really confused.  We talk about — you know, for example, in the speech they put together for me to talk about — talk about the supplemental.  Bless me, Father, for I have sinned.  (The President makes the sign of the cross.)  (Laughter.)

You all know what I mean, the supplemental request I’m making to spend money.  No one knows what — I mean, people are busting their neck.  Whether or not they have a college degree or not, you talk about a supplemental, “What are you talking about?”  We got to speak plain language to people.  And that’s what you do.

Look, let me close with this.  Last week, I visited a small-business community owners near Allentown, Pennsylvania.  Almost — almost Scranton — almost.  (Laughter.)  Close.  Almost Scranton.

And if you notice, those of us who — everybody is from Scranton these days.  (Laughter.)

But, you know, in my fam- — my mother, who was — married my dad when she was 24 years old, I guess lived in Scranton for those 20-some years and maybe another 10.  My mother was in Delaware for 35 years, and she’d be somewhere and they’d say, “Where are you from, ma’am?”  She’d say, “I’m from Scranton.”  (Laughter.)

But, look, they remind me how much our work matters.  They said, back in 2020, when we were down, that they lost businesses and they lost — this is in Allentown, all these folks I met.  I met with business leaders, a bike owner, a — shop owner, et cetera.  But then the laws we passed, they said, the work they’d all done together, helped them get back on their feet.  They’re able to support more cops, more firefighters in the community; more savings for health insurance because of the work we’ve done; more opportunities in manufacturing, infrastructure; new jobs, new businesses, and a new cycle of hope.

I know that sounds corny, but you’re probably the only group who fully understand it.  What do you want to give people who are hurting the most?  Genuine hope — hope they get something done, that there’s a way out. 

Places like Allentown, once left behind, are now coming back.  I mean, for real.  The folks I met in your cities and towns — (applause) — the folks I met in your cities and towns are a big reason why I’ve never been more optimistic about our nation’s future. 

Like I said, I know I only look like I’m 40, but a little more than that.  (Laughter.)  All kidding aside, I’ve been around a long time. 

And I’m ki- — I’ve never been more optimistic in my whole life about the prospects for America, relative to every other nation in the world.  You know all the talk — I’m supposedly an expert on foreign policy because I’ve been doing it so much.  Well, let me tell you, remember everybody said China is going to eat us alive?  Give me a break.  (Laughter.) 

China has got more problems than, as my dad used to say, Carter has little liver pills.  (Laughter.)  I don’t want them to do badly, but I don’t — I want them to play fairly. 

We’re just — we’re more — look where Russia is.  Russia has lost 300,000 forces.  I mean, we are now, if we don’t lose our footing, in the most powerful position we’ve been since the end of World War Two.  We had that post-war period where we knew exactly what we were talking about. 

But now — think about it — if we’re able to maintain support for Ukraine so they don’t fall, as Henry Kissin- — Henry Kissinger called me — asked me to call him about three weeks before he died.  And I was a young senator when he was the Secretary of State, so we had our run-ins and our agreements and disagreements.  And he said, in one part of the conversation was — when I called, he said, “You know, not since Napoleon — not says Napoleon in France has Europe looked at Russia without fear until now.”

If we walk away — if we walk away and Russia is able to sustain their onslaught and bring down Ukraine, what do you think is going to happen in the Balkan countries?  What do you think is going to happen from Poland to Hungary and Orbán?  I mean, seriously, think about it.  It changes the dynamic, magnifi- —

I won’t get on this — I’m not supposed to be talking about this, but same thing with regard to Israel.  Israel has to — has to taper this off.  There’s ways to put this together.  We’re in a position where we’re unable to — I think one of the reasons the Houthi — I can’t prove this — one of the reasons the — the — Hamas did what they did was I was about to work out a deal with Saudi Arabia, wanting to normalize relations.  I mean, fully normalize relations with Israel and bring along six other Arab nations to change the dynamic in the region.

Some of you attended the G20 and — the 20 largest cont- — the 20 heads of states from the major countries of the world.  I got a resolution passed.  Everybody thought I was nuts.  Said that we’re going to build a railroad from Riyadh all the way to England, going underwater — not with the railroad, but a pipeline through — it’s going to go from Riyadh to Saudi Arabia to Jordan to Israel to so on and so forth.

Why?  Because everybody understands their interest is better — better met when they had this inter- — this interconnection economically.

Well, guess what?  We had to remember — I’m going on too long.  I apologize.  But — (laughter) — we have to remember — I mean this from the bottom of my heart — we’ve got to remember who the hell we are.  We are the United States of America.  There is nothing beyond our capacity — nothing, nothing, nothing — when we’ve been — done it together.  Nothing.

We’re the only nation in the world — think about this — that’s come out of every crisis stronger than we went in — no other nation in the world has done — because we’ve worked together.  And the thing I love about you guys is you work together.

We’re going to get this done, folks. 

I want to now turn it over — (applause).

My grandfather — God bless you all.  Now I’m going to turn it over to Tom, who’s going — I’m going to take a few questions.

MR. PEREZ:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Can we give it up for Mr. President?  (Applause.)

AUDIENCE:  Four more years!  Four more years!  Four more years!

MR. PEREZ:  The questions are over, Mr. President.  (Laughter.)

We’re — we’re going to first turn to Mayor Holt of the great city of Oklahoma City.

MAYOR HOLT:  Thank you, Tom. 

THE PRESIDENT:  I want the record to show he didn’t have to say, “Four more years.”  He’s a Republican.  (Laughter.)

MAYOR HOLT:  Mr. President, I know I speak for this bipartisan room of mayors when I thank you for having us here today.  Thank you for the very deep participation that your administration has had in our meeting these last three days.  And, most importantly, thank you for your obvious commitment to our urban priorities these last three years.  We’re so very grateful.  (Applause.)

I want to ask a quick question.  You alluded to this a little bit.  I think I can give you an opportunity to — to expand on it.  Obviously, as mayors, we face countless challenges and opportunities.  But it seems that, at the end of the day, the most important one is always public safety.  Obviously, public safety and law enforcement is often thought to fall under the jurisdiction of local government, but we have long had a partnership with the federal government in that.

And I think we’d all just love to hear — obviously, we’re gratified, as you alluded to, that crime rates have fallen across the country this past year.  But I think we’d all love to hear: What are your thoughts and plans moving forward for how the federal government can partner with cities to continue that momentum and to help us keep our communities safe?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, thank you, Mr. Mayor.  Look, I — I spent a significant portion of my career as Chairman of the Ju- — the Judiciary Committee, which did almost all the crime legislation that exists.  And in the last administration — in 2020, for example, we had the largest increase of murders we’ve ever had in all of America.  Not blaming it on the — that president, particularly. 

But think about what was happening.  We had a lot of crises going on.  We had the whole — the beginning of the pandemic, which wasn’t being acted on.  We had a lot of people just very, very upset, worrying about where they were.  Mental health was deteriorating.

And so, when I got elected, I acted to turn it around.  And so have you.  In 2023, violent crime came down significantly.  It’s one of the largest yearly decri- — declines of homicide ever. 

And the American Rescue Plan, which was a very, very big facility — big facility for you guys to draw on, was one of the largest investments in public safety ever.  More police officers were put on the — on the beat, invested in violence prevention, and it was because you did it and you made — you had the money and you made the investment. 

And I signed — we signed the first meeting of a bipartisan gun safety legislation.  It still helped a lot, these — these phony gun — anyway.  A whole — I won’t go into it.  But you — you did a whole lot.

But mainly, we were able to bring more police officers on and raise the standard — raise the standard expected of them.  I — anyway.

But, you know, we’re in the — it took executive action to keep illegal guns out of our cities, and that’s what we’re doing.  And you’re doing it as well.  And I need — look, more is needed.  A hundred thousand more community police officers on the beat, I think, is what’s needed nationwide — another hundred thousand. 

And — and we have to fund mental health counselors.  You know, what we found is that if — in fact, you know where most — most law enforcement officers are getting killed?  Responding to domestic violence.  You know, we — we expect our cops to do everything.  We except them to be counselors, we expect them to be psychologists, we expect them to be tough guys and women. 

But, you know, the — what you want to do, you want to have someone stop — trying to stop someone from jumping off the top of the roof, you need somebody who has a background and expertise.  So, we’re hiring into the police departments people with different skills than just being able to tote a gun and — and physically protect. 

And so, I think that, you know, one of the reasons I appointed Vivek Murthy — Admiral Murphy to become this — the solic- — excuse me, become the guy in charge of the whole mental health piece of this operation is because he understands it.  And he talks all the time about what we can do to engage in providing for mental health facilities around the wor- — around your cities and — and communities so people can have the help they need.

And, look, you know, we — and, look, I know it’s very controversial.  I know it’s a red, hot-button issue for a lot of Democrats and Republicans.  I come from a state that, back when I was a senator, had — I think it was the third-highest gun ownership in America.  And I don’t know what it is now, but — because of a lot of duck hunting in the — in the Delmarva Peninsula and a lot of other reasons. 

And — and I know how unpopular it was when I started talking about banning assault weapons.  Who needs an AR-15 that can hold a hundred rounds?  Not — not a joke. 

I was — I was campaigning when I was running for reelection as the last time as a senator, and I was down in the — in the Delmarva Peninsula, just on the Maryland border, in where — in the swampy area, a lot of — and I’m walking through, and that’s how — like you guys do.  You campaign.  You go where the people are.

I go through — and so, I’m walking through in a pair of high boots, and a guy said, “Biden, you SOB,” — (laughter) — and I said, “What?”  He said, “You want to take my gun away.”  And I said, “I don’t want to take…” — he was fishing.  And I said, “I don’t want to take your gun away.”  I said, “You’re able to have your gun.”  He said, “You want to take my AR-15.”  I said, “You must be one hell of a lousy hunter.”  (Laughter.)

And — and he looked at me, and he said, “What do you mean?”  I said, “You need an AR-15 that’s basically a semi-automatic and can fact — fire off 20, 30, 50, 60 rounds?”  I said, ”My — the best — last time I checked, deer weren’t wearing Kevlar vests.”  (Laughter.)  And we — we got in the — and then he calmed down, got into conversation, started talking practically about what, in fact, happens — what, in fact, happens.

And, you know, the other thing is background checks.  There’s always been a requirement of a background check.  And now this 16-year-old kid was able to buy an AR- — anyway.

So, I think we have to support community violence intervention programs as well.  Many of you have those programs going in your cities, in your communities.  And you’re seeing they work.  You get people engaged, and you get them involved.

And so, there’s a lot we can do — I think a lot more we can do.  But two of the things are making sure there’s background checks for people to purchase weapons, number one.  And, number two, certain weapons you shouldn’t be able to purchase because you never have — you’re nev- — you’re not able to go out and purchase a machine gun.  I me- — anyway.

There’s certain basic principles that are ma- — just make common sense.  And I think — and, again, you can go back and look — if you want, I’ll send you a copy of the study we did after the — the assault weapons ban lapsed, because it only could last for 10 years.  I couldn’t get it done again.  And it’s interesting.  The number of mass shootings dropped precipitously — dropped precipitously when we had that limitation.  It doesn’t solve every problem.  It’s one of the things we can do.

But any rate, there’s a lot more to say.  I’m probably already saying too much.

MR. PEREZ:  Our second and last question comes from Mayor Katie Rosenberg from the great city of Wausau, Wisconsin. 

MAYOR ROSENBERG:  Thank you so much.  This is an absolute — (applause) — this is an absolute honor.  Thank you for hosting us.  You have a wonderful staff. 

Just about a year ago, the Vice President hosted a lead pipe summit here in Washington.  And I attended that, and it was like shooting me out of a cannon.  I ran home, and we started working on our plan to shore up, pull out all of those lead pipes, and we made our plan — a 15-year plan down to a 5-year plan.

But I’m curious, what other progress are we seeing about these lead pipes being removed across our nation?  It’s really important that we get that out of our drinking water.  Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, first of all, thank you for what you’re doing.  I agree. 

Let me put this in perspective.  The research by the doc shows that reducing lead exposure for children has — this is a study that was done — has the same effect on test scores — just take test scores at school — on test scores as reducing class size from 22 to 15 students and less — one tenth of the cost.  Let me just give you one example of the impact it has on IQ formation and the ability to think and the like.  So, it’s a — it’s a significantly smart investment, number one.

Number two, we have enough money and we’re going to eliminate every lead pipe in America.  (Applause.)  Every one. 

It’s going to take us — it’s going to take us about 10 years, but every single one.  Because you shouldn’t — think about it.  You got 400,000 schools, kids going to the water fountain and drinking wa- — you know, water.  You got so much else that’s going on.  And it can just — and it makes a lot of sense.

And, by the way, it creates a hell of a lot of jobs too.  (Laughter.)

But my point is, it just is — look, exposure to lead impacts on brain development — we know that, particularly for as it’s developing — a hazard to the health of people, it can damage the brain and the kidneys, and interferes with the production of blood — of red blood cells that need to carry the hydrogen.  And studies show that lead exposure hurts cognitive function in children and can even knock off several points of their IQ.

Despite these dangers — the knowledge of how dangerous this is, we’re in a fact where the CDC estimates that over half of American children could be exposed to lead, with the exposure often coming from their own homes with lead pipes.  And it costs a hell of a lot of money to take that pipe from the watermain to the house.  It costs a lot of money.  A lot of people can’t even remotely afford doing it.

But everybody is better off — everybody is better off when we get the lead pipes out of the system.  And, look, our ambitious goal is to remove all lead pipes in America by — within 10 years.  The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law financed over 1,200 drinking water and wastewater projects, and it’s going to replace hundreds of thousands of lead service lines in America beginning right away.  Ongoing efforts in cities like Wausau and Philadelphia and Newark, New Jersey.  They create good-paying jobs as well — good-paying jobs.

And I visited the Hero Plumbing in Milwaukee, by the way, a Black-owned small business that was — replaced over 600 lead pipes in homes and daycare centers.

Well, guess what?  Ten-year effort to bring these — is to bring your states, tribes, and labor unions water utilities and private companies together to deliver clean drinking water to every community in the — in the world — in America.  And so, it just seems to me that it’s one of those things — who the hell can be against clean water?  Except some of the people I know.  But — (laughter).

But all kidding aside, if there’s anything you’re going to expend — expend money on, you want to increase the prospect of growth in schools, I mean, this was a — that study, extensive study done.  It makes a big difference in terms of the ability to learn and ability — and long-term impacts on cognitive capability.

But I’m convinced we can get it done.  I’m convinced we can get it done.

Thank you all very much.  You’re very patient.  (Applause.)  Thank you.  Thank you, thank you, thank you.

You’re all welcome to spend the night.  (Laughter.)

By the way, have you — have you had the chance to see most of the White House yet?  Not all the — well, you ought to take — I don’t know, I might get myself in trouble here.  (Laughter.) 

But, you know, there’s — downstairs, there’s a lot of interesting rooms you can check out.  And up here, the — the dangerous part of up here is that it’s hard to know what room you’re in because all of them are identified by color.  (Laughter.)  The Red Room, the Blue Room, the Green Room — it’s not —

But all kidding aside, welcome to the White House.  This is your house, and I was getting in the elevator to — to come up, and my introducer — where is she?  There she is.  I said every time that I hear “Hail to the Chief,” I wonder, “Where the hell is he?”  (Laughter.)

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible) playing your song.

THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  That’s what my sister says about me being mayor.  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Anyway, thank you, thank you, thank you for everything you do.  (Applause.)

4:56 P.M. EST

The post Remarks by President Biden at the U.S. Conference of Mayors Winter Meeting appeared first on The White House.

East Room

4:05 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, thank you, thank you.  (Applause.)

Thank you.  Thank you very much.  Please — please sit down.

My dad used to have an expression: Quit while you’re ahead.  (Laughter.)

I tell you what, I can’t tell you how pleased I am to have you all here, and I mean it.  For some of you, this is not your first visit.  I know the new mayors, obviously it is. 

But, you know, Mayor Schieve — thanks for that introduction and your leadership of this conference.

A special thanks to the CEO of the Conference of Mayors,

Tom Cochran — Tommy, how you doing, pal? — (applause) — who began his distinguished tenure in 1969.  God bless you, pal.  (Laughter.) 

It’s hell turning 50, isn’t it?

MAYOR SCHIEVE:  We’re the same age.  And Mike Bloomberg is the same age too.  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  All right.  But neither one of us have his money.  (Laughter.)

Well, thank you all, and welcome to the White House.  I mean that sincerely.

Today, we get some good news: We just signed a bill to keep the government open.  (Applause.)  I thought about it when I signed it, but — but, you know, some days, that counts as progress.  (Laughter.)

As many of you know, I started my career as a local official back in Delaware.  And I only ran for Senate because serving locally was too hard.  (Laughter.)  They know where you live and they think you can solve problems that are beyond your authority. 

And believe me, all kidding aside, you have enormous respect for the — I have enormous respect for job you do.  I really mean it.  You can’t go anywhere without people knowing what you’re doing.  You — they know where you live.  And they think you can solve every problem.  (Laughter.)  No, I’m serious.

The fact is, you’re answering key questions people ask every day: Is my neighborhood safe?  Is it going to be okay?  Will this bus get me to work on time?  You know, my kids — will they — they going to have a good future in this town?  Am I able to stay in my hometown?

It matters.  It matters what you do.

Mayors get the job done.  And I’m not being fa- — I’m not just being solicitous.  Those of you who’ve known me for a long time know that’s been my view from the time I got here as a United States senator.

That’s why I’ve filled my administration with so many former mayors — (applause) — including Keisha Lance Bottoms,  Steve Benjamin — Steve, good to see you — Mitch Landrieu, Marty Walsh, Secretary Buttigieg.  (Applause.) 

Pete turned 30 today.  (Laughter.)  He got — my wife is going to — we have — she has a tradition in her family.  Five and girls and one — five sisters — and at everybody’s birthday, you’ve got to sing “Happy Birthday.”  So, stand up, and let’s sing happy birthday.

(The President leads the audience in singing “Happy Birthday” to Secretary Buttigieg.)

And those of you who know my wife know I’m not kidding.  (Laughter.) 

By the way, I tell every young man that tells me “I’m thinking of getting married” or something like — I say, “Look, I” — “You have any advice?”  I said, “Yeah, pick a family with five sisters or more.”  And they look at me, “What the hell is that all about?”  I said, “It’s really simple.  That way, one of them always loves you.  Not the same one.”  (Laughter.)  You always have somebody on your side.

I want to thank Tom — Tom Perez for being the point person for so long.  Where are you, Tom?  There you are.  Stand up, Tom.  (Applause.)  And I know he spent several days this week meeting with many of you, and I hope you — I hope you — he was able to answer all your questions, because he always answers mine.  (Laughter.)

Folks, I made a commitment to be a President for all Americans, whether you live in a — whether you voted for me or not.  And I mean it sincerely.  Whether it —

I made a commitment to rebuild from the middle out and bottom up, not the top down — give everybody a little bit of breathing room.

And, you know, it’s kind of interesting that I — I — a lot of folks who voted every — against everything I’ve done, they’re announcing all these great projects.  (Laughter.)  I tell them — and by the way, as many in blue states as red states — you know? — and red states as blue, for real, because they’re all Americans.

And here’s the deal — (a cell phone in the audience rings) — I know.  I know.  (Laughter.)

Tell the former President I’m busy right now.  (Laughter and applause.)

Look, but I always say, some of the most ardent critics of me are announcing these great programs.  And I say — I have one comment: See you at the groundbreaking.  (Laughter.)

Look, I’ve kept those commitments, and so have you.  And I — look at what we’ve been able to accomplish together.  That’s what I would like to talk a little bit about today. 

I’m not going to take a lot of your time, but the things that are on top of mind for you.

Look, when I came to office, the pandemic was raging.  The economy was reeling.  Cities nationwide faced devastating budget cuts.  And together, we turned things around.  You turned them around.  You turned them around.

It started with the American Rescue Plan: $350 billion for state and local governments.  Money to put cops back on the beat, teachers in the classroom, keep families in their homes –(applause) — and train your workforces and get small businesses on their feet.  Money directly to every single city in the cou- — in the country so you could decide how best to spend your money and meet your residents’ needs without having to go through a statehouse or a governor.  (Applause.)

A lot of — a lot of great governors, a lot of state houses.  But you all know what you need better than anybody.  I like it going directly to you.  When I was a local official, I liked that a lot better.  I liked the Delaware state legislature when I was there.  But guess what?  They had — everybody had to get a piece of it — (laughter) — and my county wouldn’t get what it needed.  Any rate. 

I followed that with the most significant investment

in our nation’s infrastructure in generations: roads, bridges, railroads, ports, airports, public transit, clean water, high-speed Internet, and so much more.

How can we have the best economy in the world if we don’t have the best infrastructure in the world?  Not a joke. 

We used to be number one in the world.  You know what we rank now nationally — our — our infrastructure is rated worldwide?  We’re number 13.  The United States of America is 13, from being number one.  You can’t lead the world unless you have the best infrastructure in the world.

Well, you’re helping us change that.  Now — now, we’ll — we’re going — on our way to leading the world again.

Over 4- — 40,000 new infrastructure projects announced to date and a hell of a lot more to come, with jobs now and jobs for the next decade.

I remember going through — remember we had Infrastructure Week?  (Laughter.)  And then, we had Infrastructure Week.  And then we had Infrastructure Week.  And then we had In- — (laughter).  It never happened.  Well, we’ve got an Infrastructure Decade.  (Applause.)  Because of you.

Just yesterday, I was in — I was in Raleigh, North Carolina.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDENT:  You got it, man.  (Laughter.)  Great city, by the way.  (Laughter.)

And we’re investing $3 billion in the entire state for high-speed Internet by the end of the decade.  (Applause.)  And we’re doing that in all 50 states. 

You know, Franklin Roosevelt brought electricity to rural America.  That’s what he did, because it wasn’t there.  And he realized that it was necessary to equalize the country and to grow the whole country. 

Well, we’re — we’re bringing high-speed Internet to everyone in America.  Rural — it’s the same — same thing, the same necessities, critical to our economy.  How do you get by in a city, a state, a town, your home without accessing Internet — affordable acc- — we’re not leaving anybody behind.

Yesterday, in North Carolina, I also highlighted a $1 billion we’re investing in a new rail line from Raleigh to Richmond.  And that’s a billion dollars.  It’s going to create good-paying jobs, make travel faster, and it’s going to improve the environment considerably by getting tens of thousands of cars off the road.  Because every study shows, if you get a chance to go by electric rail and/or your car, you go by rail if it’s the same time. 

They’ve cut the point going from point A to point B.  Look, right now, is it takes — it takes about three hours to get that route.  Cut it down to two hours.  It changes everything.

And each of you could give examples of infrastructure projects of the one happening now in your states. 

Look, with your help, we’re also making the biggest investment in fighting climate change ever anywhere in the world — (applause) — in the world.  We’ve got more to do. 

Across your cities, we’re working together to help small — small businesses install — install rooftop solar panels, electric buses — city fleets of all electric buses, planning — I just met with a lovely woman who knows a little bit about the environment, going to plant thousands of trees in her city, a million total — a million total.  It’s going to change the — protect against extreme heat and so much more.

My administration continues to work closely with you and your governors and respond quickly to the wake of devastating floods, tornadoes, wildfires, and hurricanes. 

By the way, when I started the job, I kept talking about the need for a deal with the — with the environment.  Said, “We don’t have a problem.”  Anybody think climate is not a problem, raise your hand.  (Laughter.)  Come on, man.  (Laughter.)

I’ve been around the world and on the ground with you, making sure to help strengthen the resilience and withstand the extreme weather and build back a stronger economy and bring back a stronger community.  We’re revitalizing fenceline communities smothered with a legacy of pollution.  I grew up in one of those communities, and Delaware used to have the high- — one of the highest cancer rates in the nation.

When we moved from Scranton — when jobs were eliminated in Scranton, we moved back to Delaware where my dad had been raised — to Claymont, Delaware, right on the border of Pennsylvania, that arch that goes up in it.  More — more oil refineries than any place in the nation, including Houston, at the time.

Well, guess what?  Almost all my friends, including me, we — we had asthma.  We’d go to — you know, my mom would drive us to the local school.  It wasn’t very far — a little Catholic school called Holy Rosary — up the Philadelphia pike.  And if it was the first frost, you’d turn on the windshield wipers — this is the God’s truth — and there’d be an oil slick in the window — an oil slick.

And you all come from places that have those all- — those alleys.  You know — and we’re promoting clean energy and industries of the future.  Our workers have already drawn $640 billion in private investment at home and — from home and around the world — $640 billion.  We’re building factories.  We’re creating jobs here in America. 

Let me give you one example.  America invented the microchip, about as big as the tip of your little finger.  Okay?  We invented and — went to the moon.  We — we modernized it.  We made it — it’s necessary for everything from smartphones to dishwashers to automobiles.  And over time, we went from producing 40 percent of the world’s chips to producing less than 10 percent.

And that’s when I signed the CHIPS and Science Act.  I got on a plane — and maybe I was a little nuts — and flew to South Korea.  And I said, “Why — why don’t you come invest and build us those computer chips in America” so we didn’t have a supply chain problem.  And went around — well, guess what?  They did. 

I asked the — I asked Samsung, “Why are you investing so much money in America?”  They said, “Because you have the best workers in the world, and it’s the safest investment I can make, is in America.” 

Now, semiconductors are investing literally hundreds of billions of dollars producing chips back home, here in America — your cities, your towns — so folks never have to leave home to get — excuse me — to get a good job.

And, by the way, even with those historic investments that we made over the last three years, we still reduced the deficit during this whole period.  All those investments, we still reduced the deficit by $1 trillion.  (Applause.)

And, look, you all — a lot of you come from places like I grew up in, where there used to be that factory that employed 3,000, 2,000, 1,500 people.  All of a sudden, it closed down.  It was there for generations.  People lost heart.  People lost a sense of — literally, a sense of loss.  And it’s particularly those of you from the near-Midwest and the Midwest.  Look at all the factories that picked up and moved. 

Well, our economic agenda has ignited a manufacturing boom, a semiconductor boom, a battery boom, an electric vehicle boom.  We’re making things in America, in every part of America, creating millions of good-paying jobs.  By the way, 800,000 new manufacturing jobs.  And if you work more than —

By the way, you know, these new factories, they call them — when they’re for — to build these new — these chips manufacturing facilities, they have what they call “fabs” factories.  They look like — and I’ve seen them.  They look like great, big football fields in a stadium — I mean, rectangular fields.  And guess what?  You don’t need a college degree.  You know what the average salary is?  $110,000 working there.

And what happens?  The first one is being built outside of Columbus, Ohio, in what I call the “Field of Dreams,” a thousand acres there.  What’s happening there?  Not only you build a factory, but you’re going to end up having to build more — more filling stations, more beauty shops, more drugstores, more — everything — everything moves when that’s happening, when people have money to spend. 

And it’s clean, I might add.  It’s clean.

And when folks see shovels in the ground and people going to work on these projects, they can feel a sense of pride again.

Think what we did.  Most of the major — I come from the corporate capital of the world — not a joke — Delaware.  More corporations incorporated in Delaware than any — every other state in the Union combined — combined.  And guess what?  A lot of those corporations, they’re not bad people, but they decided, “Let’s go with the cheapest labor in the world.”  So, they sent the jobs overseas — shut down the factories at home, sent the jobs overseas, and then imported the product.

Not anymore.  We are sending product overseas, and we’re importing the jobs.  (Applause.)  Pride in hometowns.  I really mean it.

Think about it.  Think about it.  What happens if you build up your — pride in America, pride in — people have pride when things start coming back — pride in knowing you can get big things done when your work together. 

Look, folks, we know pride also means feeling safe in your neighborhoods.  The fact that we’ve made enormous progress preventing and reducing crime through the American Rescue Plan.   We’ve made one of the biggest investments in local public safety ever: over $15 billion.  And much of it has gone directly to you to hire for your departments. 

You’ve done a tremendous job.  You really have.  You’ve done a tremendous job putting these resources to work.  You know how to do it.  And I’m not being solicitous.  Mayors are the people who get things done: hiring more officers for accountable community policing, investing in violence intervention programs proven to reduce crime. 

With your support, I also signed the first gun safety law in 30 years.  (Applause.)  And we’re working with you to implement it, to coordinate these efforts and create the first-ever White House Off- — I — we — what we did, my staff came along and said, you know, we need a White House Office dedicated to getting — getting guns off the street and threatening — and treating the trauma from gun violence, because there’s a lot of trauma as a consequence.

So, we’re deploying teams to meet with communities that have been victimized to make sure they get the help they need.  Working — it’s working because of you, the mayors.  But we –we’ve got to do a lot more.

You know, some of you may remember, a woman named Dianne Feinstein and Joe Biden passed the first assault weapons ban back when I was a senator.  (Applause.)  And mass shootings actually went down.  So, I’m still committed to banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.  (Applause.)  We’ve done it before, and we can do it again. 

And we have to pass universal background checks.  It doesn’t violate the Second Amendment, for God’s sake.  I used to teach the Constitution at the University of Pennsylvania.  Look, folks, the situation is simple.  You know, when the — when the — we passed the Second Amendment, guess what?  You weren’t allowed to have a cannon.  (Laughter.)  And you — no, I’m serious.  Not a joke.  You weren’t allowed to have certain — you weren’t — there were certain limitations of what you could have.

And I love — my friends and I come — the southern part of my state is very conservative, the Delmarva Peninsula.  We talk at you like y’all talk sometimes.  You know what I mean?  (Laughter.)

But all kidding aside, it’s just — it’s just kind of amazing.  They think that you could order — you could have anything.  That never was the case.  There’s always been limitations on what you could purchase.

So, anyway, look — and I love people who say, “The blood of liberty” — or excuse me, the — excuse me — “The tree of liberty is watered with the blood of patriots.”  Well, guess what, man?  I didn’t see a whole lot of patriots that are out there wa- — walking around making sure that we have these weapons.  Well — and if you really want to worry about the government, you need an F-16.  You don’t need an AR-15.  (Laughter.) 

No, I’m not — no, I’m serious.  I mean, think about it.  (Laughter.)  I’m not joking.  Because that’s one of the arguments made by the right, that we need to be able to protect ourselves against the government. 

Well, look —

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible.)  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  If Jill were here, she’d say, “Joe, hush up, boy.”  (Laughter.)

Across the country, violent crime is at — rates are falling.  In some cities, it’s going up, but overall — but not everywhere — overall, we are — we — they’re — they’re falling, these rates — down nearly in every major category.  Record declines in homicide.  It matters.

And at some time, we’ve invested, in the last little bit, billions in improving mental health services to extend care, boost coverage, and address the causes of addiction and mental health issues.  We’re expanding mobile crisis services and community clinics.  We’re helping schools hire 1,400 new counselors — counselors.  Mental health care is healthcare. It’s healthcare.  It’s no different if you broke your arm and need help.  (Applause.)  We have a moral obligation to have our folks’ backs. 

And I want to thank you all — I mean it sincerely — I want to thank you all for what you’re doing to support mental health all across the country.  And the same is true for the fight to end homelessness and move people into supportive and permanent housing.  We’re your partner in this work. 

We’ve got a lot more to do, I know.  Across the country, a record 1 million new housing units under are con- — are under construction today.  We’re expanding our rental assistance to over 100,000 additional families, the biggest increase in 20 years, and have been working to cut red tape to make it easy for people to access federal housing benefits. 

You know, I’ve sent Congress an ambitious plan to do more: lowering housing costs, helping you build affordable housing, provide assistance for renters and first-time homebuyers. 

By the way, most of you come from families like mine.  We weren’t poor, but, you know, we lived in a three-bedroom, split-level home when we moved to Delaware with four kids and a grandpop.  We lived in a decent neighborhood; it was safe.  But it wasn’t what you’d call luxurious.  There wasn’t much leftover. 

My dad used to say, “Joey, you know, a job is about a lot more than a paycheck.  It’s about decency.  It’s about respect.  It’s about being able to look your kid in the eye and say, ‘Honey, everything is going to be okay,’ and mean it.” 

Well, guess what?  What we’re doing is saving the government money.  Providing assistance for renters, first-time homebuyers, that’s how people build equity.  You build equity in your home, that’s how you build wealth.  So, let’s keep pushing, pass the plan into law.

And I want to talk about another top issue: the border.  Now, I love how I turn on, and “Biden — Biden is for a free open border.  Just tear down everything.  Let everybody come, no restrictions.”  Well, one — I — used to be a bipartisan issue in this country, and it should be one again.

I’ve been clear from the very beginning: The system is broken.  My first day in office, I sent Congress a comprehensive plan on immigration reform.  My friends on the other side have done nothing with that. 

Over and over, I’ve asked for resources to step up action at the border.  In October, I asked Congress to fund — for funding that would add another 20 additional bord- — 20 — 2,000 additional border agents and officers, hundreds of new immigration judges to make the judgments on the spot, a new — new detection equipment to stop fentanyl from coming into the country. 

And, by the way, I’ve worked with China and Mexico to slow the flow of fentanyl into the United States.  As I speak, it’s way down.

So, let me be clear.  My team has been at the table for weeks now on a partisan — with a bipartisan group of senators to negotiate a deal, including border, because I believe we need significant policy changes at the border, including changes in our asylum system to ensure that we have authorities we need to control the border.  And I’m ready to act. 

I think — hope — “God willing and the crick not rising,” as my grandpop would say — you know, I think next week, we ought to be able to work out something, at least in the Senate.  And I’m hopeful it’s going to be a bipartisan package the Senate is going to pass, God willing. 

Now, the question is for the Speaker and the House Republicans: Are they ready to act as well?  They have to choose whether they want to solve a problem or keep weaponizing the issue to score political points against the President.  I’m ready to solve the problem.  I really am.  Massive changes — and I mean it sincerely.

Today, folks in America, with in- — with the incredible help of you mayors, we’ve created 14 million new jobs — 14 million new jobs.  (Applause.) 

Americans have filled 16 — filed 16 new — 16 million new business applications since I became President.  That’s a record.  And every single one of them — think about it — is an act of hope.  Someone says they want to risk everything and open a new business, it’s an act of hope.

Wages are rising.  So is household wealth.  We have the lowest inflation rate and the fastest recovery of any major economy in the world.  And that’s a fact.  (Applause.)

In fact, today, costs are down on everything from a gallon of gas to a — to a carton of milk.  You know — I mean, look, I — I was down in Raleigh, as I said, the other day.  I didn’t pass by a gas station that wasn’t under three bucks: $2.99, $2.87.  I mean, come on. 

And, folks, fars are — folks are starting to see it.  Today, I learned that consumer sentiment — and you guys saw it — surged by 29 percent in the last two months, the biggest two-month jump in 30 years.  We’ve got more to do.  And that’s not all, though.  We’re lowering the costs of — for working-class families across the board.

And, by the way, it used to drive my dad crazy.  My dad was a hardworking guy, an honest man who didn’t get a chance to go to college because of the war, but he was a well-read guy.  And the thing that bothered my dad more than anything else was what I call junk fees, the add-on fee by a corporation or a business just because they could do it.

For example, we’re going after junk fees like banning banks and credit unions from charging fees for basic services, like checking your account balance.  To check your account balance, you get a bill for 30 bucks.  Come on.  Or retrieving your bank records, 50 bucks.  Some banks charge as much as, I said, 30 to 50 bucks for the services.  But not anymore.  For families like mine, that extra 30 bucks mattered when I was growing up. 

And speaking of not — being not fair, without the help of a single person on the other side, we finally were able to reduce the exorbitant cost of prescription drugs.  (Applause.)  Any prescription — any one you’re taking for any purpose in your town, you give me that prescription, and if I had the ability, I would take it to Ontario or — or Paris or Belgium and get it for anywhere from 60 to 30 percent less.  Same company, same pharmacy, same pharm- — pharmaceutical company, but that much less.

Look, folks, we finally allowed Medicare to negotiate drug prices.  I’ve been fighting that as a senator for my whole 2,000-year career.  (Laughter.)  Just like the VA has been able to do for decades.

Insulin now — if you have diabetes, insulin is now cast — capped at $35 for seniors on Medicare — (applause) — after being out at $400.  They’re saving hundreds of dollars a month.

And, by the way, starting next year, out-of-pocket drug costs for seniors on Medicare is going to be capped at, total — no matter wh- — how many — no matter what the cost of your — you’re paying, everything will be — you can’t — don’t have to pay more than $2,000 a year for every exp- — and even the expensive cancer drugs, which costs $14-, $16,000 a year.

Folks, I’m going to keep fighting to lower costs for families across the board. 

And, by the way, guess what?  I love it.  They say, “Well, you’re spending all that money.”  Guess what?  That’s money saved — billions of dollars the federal government does not have to pay, billions and billions of dollars.  And that’s a fact.  (Applause.)

By the way, you know how much it costs to make that insulin?  The guy who invented it didn’t want to patent it because he wanted it available for everybody.  You know how much it costs to make it?  Ten dollars — T-E-N.  Package it every way, add all the costs you could possibly think, another $2, maybe $3.  And they’re charging 400 bucks for it?  Come on, man.  (Laughter.)  No, I’m serious.  I’m not joking.

But it saves the government money.  It’s not the government spending money.  It saves the federal government billions of dollars a year — billions.  And it’s going to save more.  We have more work to do, but we’re going to keep moving forward together and, God willing, as partners.

Take student debt relief for public servants.  You know, I know I — I wanted to forgive all student debt, and the Supreme Court said, no, I didn’t have the authority to do that.  Okay.  But then I realized there’s a public service requirement out there.  If you engaged in public service for a serious amount of time —

And, by the way, the reason why any of you — I’m sure not anybody — I’m not going to ask you if you have it.  Anybody had to pay for student debt for yourself and/or a kid or anyone, raise your hand.  Guess what?  The interest you’re paying is more than, in fact, what the — the original bill was. 

Already, I’ve been able to forgive the debt for 3.7 million people — gotten debt relief.  (Applause.) 

And, by the way, when I originally got this passed, it was for everybody.  You didn’t have to be a senior.  For everybody.  But my team was unable to get past — I didn’t have a bunch of mayors.  I had a bunch of senators and congressmen.  (Laughter.)

But all kidding aside, you know, I met yesterday in Raleigh with a dad, who was an impressive guy.  And he was a Principal of the Year — picked as a Principal of the Year in his state. He had two young boys.  He lived in a lovely small home.  And — but he had a debt that — that was $124,000 — student debt, much of it interest.  And he never stopped paying b he — but he always kept his payments going — kept going up.

Well, guess what?  That debt is now forgiven.  And, by the way — (applause) — and, by the way, he’s a former high school principal and now an executive coach for school — for a school district, teaching principals.  He said this debt relief was a game changer for he and his family.  He has two boys I met. 

One — I mean, their — I sat with them in their — in their kitchen for — and their dining room for the better part of two hours.  Now he can stay in a town that he loves, take care of his children in a way that they’re able to meet the basic needs he has. 

It’s not only fair, but it grows the economy.  It grows the economy.  So many who are being able to pay off their student debt are now able to go out and go buy a home, invest in a business, invest in other things and their families — to grow their families. 

And, quite frankly, you, the mayors, are the key to all of this.  I’m not blaming you if you don’t want to be — take credit for it.  But the point is — look, the fact is you’re — you’re the ones responsible.  You’re the ones people listen to.  You talk to people.  You speak plain English or Spanish or whatever language you’re speaking, and you’re able to speak to them directly, and you explain in simple language what we’re doing.

Because, otherwise, people get really, really, really confused.  We talk about — you know, for example, in the speech they put together for me to talk about — talk about the supplemental.  Bless me, Father, for I have sinned.  (The President makes the sign of the cross.)  (Laughter.)

You all know what I mean, the supplemental request I’m making to spend money.  No one knows what — I mean, people are busting their neck.  Whether or not they have a college degree or not, you talk about a supplemental, “What are you talking about?”  We got to speak plain language to people.  And that’s what you do.

Look, let me close with this.  Last week, I visited a small-business community owners near Allentown, Pennsylvania.  Almost — almost Scranton — almost.  (Laughter.)  Close.  Almost Scranton.

And if you notice, those of us who — everybody is from Scranton these days.  (Laughter.)

But, you know, in my fam- — my mother, who was — married my dad when she was 24 years old, I guess lived in Scranton for those 20-some years and maybe another 10.  My mother was in Delaware for 35 years, and she’d be somewhere and they’d say, “Where are you from, ma’am?”  She’d say, “I’m from Scranton.”  (Laughter.)

But, look, they remind me how much our work matters.  They said, back in 2020, when we were down, that they lost businesses and they lost — this is in Allentown, all these folks I met.  I met with business leaders, a bike owner, a — shop owner, et cetera.  But then the laws we passed, they said, the work they’d all done together, helped them get back on their feet.  They’re able to support more cops, more firefighters in the community; more savings for health insurance because of the work we’ve done; more opportunities in manufacturing, infrastructure; new jobs, new businesses, and a new cycle of hope.

I know that sounds corny, but you’re probably the only group who fully understand it.  What do you want to give people who are hurting the most?  Genuine hope — hope they get something done, that there’s a way out. 

Places like Allentown, once left behind, are now coming back.  I mean, for real.  The folks I met in your cities and towns — (applause) — the folks I met in your cities and towns are a big reason why I’ve never been more optimistic about our nation’s future. 

Like I said, I know I only look like I’m 40, but a little more than that.  (Laughter.)  All kidding aside, I’ve been around a long time. 

And I’m ki- — I’ve never been more optimistic in my whole life about the prospects for America, relative to every other nation in the world.  You know all the talk — I’m supposedly an expert on foreign policy because I’ve been doing it so much.  Well, let me tell you, remember everybody said China is going to eat us alive?  Give me a break.  (Laughter.) 

China has got more problems than, as my dad used to say, Carter has little liver pills.  (Laughter.)  I don’t want them to do badly, but I don’t — I want them to play fairly. 

We’re just — we’re more — look where Russia is.  Russia has lost 300,000 forces.  I mean, we are now, if we don’t lose our footing, in the most powerful position we’ve been since the end of World War Two.  We had that post-war period where we knew exactly what we were talking about. 

But now — think about it — if we’re able to maintain support for Ukraine so they don’t fall, as Henry Kissin- — Henry Kissinger called me — asked me to call him about three weeks before he died.  And I was a young senator when he was the Secretary of State, so we had our run-ins and our agreements and disagreements.  And he said, in one part of the conversation was — when I called, he said, “You know, not since Napoleon — not says Napoleon in France has Europe looked at Russia without fear until now.”

If we walk away — if we walk away and Russia is able to sustain their onslaught and bring down Ukraine, what do you think is going to happen in the Balkan countries?  What do you think is going to happen from Poland to Hungary and Orbán?  I mean, seriously, think about it.  It changes the dynamic, magnifi- —

I won’t get on this — I’m not supposed to be talking about this, but same thing with regard to Israel.  Israel has to — has to taper this off.  There’s ways to put this together.  We’re in a position where we’re unable to — I think one of the reasons the Houthi — I can’t prove this — one of the reasons the — the — Hamas did what they did was I was about to work out a deal with Saudi Arabia, wanting to normalize relations.  I mean, fully normalize relations with Israel and bring along six other Arab nations to change the dynamic in the region.

Some of you attended the G20 and — the 20 largest cont- — the 20 heads of states from the major countries of the world.  I got a resolution passed.  Everybody thought I was nuts.  Said that we’re going to build a railroad from Riyadh all the way to England, going underwater — not with the railroad, but a pipeline through — it’s going to go from Riyadh to Saudi Arabia to Jordan to Israel to so on and so forth.

Why?  Because everybody understands their interest is better — better met when they had this inter- — this interconnection economically.

Well, guess what?  We had to remember — I’m going on too long.  I apologize.  But — (laughter) — we have to remember — I mean this from the bottom of my heart — we’ve got to remember who the hell we are.  We are the United States of America.  There is nothing beyond our capacity — nothing, nothing, nothing — when we’ve been — done it together.  Nothing.

We’re the only nation in the world — think about this — that’s come out of every crisis stronger than we went in — no other nation in the world has done — because we’ve worked together.  And the thing I love about you guys is you work together.

We’re going to get this done, folks. 

I want to now turn it over — (applause).

My grandfather — God bless you all.  Now I’m going to turn it over to Tom, who’s going — I’m going to take a few questions.

MR. PEREZ:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Can we give it up for Mr. President?  (Applause.)

AUDIENCE:  Four more years!  Four more years!  Four more years!

MR. PEREZ:  The questions are over, Mr. President.  (Laughter.)

We’re — we’re going to first turn to Mayor Holt of the great city of Oklahoma City.

MAYOR HOLT:  Thank you, Tom. 

THE PRESIDENT:  I want the record to show he didn’t have to say, “Four more years.”  He’s a Republican.  (Laughter.)

MAYOR HOLT:  Mr. President, I know I speak for this bipartisan room of mayors when I thank you for having us here today.  Thank you for the very deep participation that your administration has had in our meeting these last three days.  And, most importantly, thank you for your obvious commitment to our urban priorities these last three years.  We’re so very grateful.  (Applause.)

I want to ask a quick question.  You alluded to this a little bit.  I think I can give you an opportunity to — to expand on it.  Obviously, as mayors, we face countless challenges and opportunities.  But it seems that, at the end of the day, the most important one is always public safety.  Obviously, public safety and law enforcement is often thought to fall under the jurisdiction of local government, but we have long had a partnership with the federal government in that.

And I think we’d all just love to hear — obviously, we’re gratified, as you alluded to, that crime rates have fallen across the country this past year.  But I think we’d all love to hear: What are your thoughts and plans moving forward for how the federal government can partner with cities to continue that momentum and to help us keep our communities safe?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, thank you, Mr. Mayor.  Look, I — I spent a significant portion of my career as Chairman of the Ju- — the Judiciary Committee, which did almost all the crime legislation that exists.  And in the last administration — in 2020, for example, we had the largest increase of murders we’ve ever had in all of America.  Not blaming it on the — that president, particularly. 

But think about what was happening.  We had a lot of crises going on.  We had the whole — the beginning of the pandemic, which wasn’t being acted on.  We had a lot of people just very, very upset, worrying about where they were.  Mental health was deteriorating.

And so, when I got elected, I acted to turn it around.  And so have you.  In 2023, violent crime came down significantly.  It’s one of the largest yearly decri- — declines of homicide ever. 

And the American Rescue Plan, which was a very, very big facility — big facility for you guys to draw on, was one of the largest investments in public safety ever.  More police officers were put on the — on the beat, invested in violence prevention, and it was because you did it and you made — you had the money and you made the investment. 

And I signed — we signed the first meeting of a bipartisan gun safety legislation.  It still helped a lot, these — these phony gun — anyway.  A whole — I won’t go into it.  But you — you did a whole lot.

But mainly, we were able to bring more police officers on and raise the standard — raise the standard expected of them.  I — anyway.

But, you know, we’re in the — it took executive action to keep illegal guns out of our cities, and that’s what we’re doing.  And you’re doing it as well.  And I need — look, more is needed.  A hundred thousand more community police officers on the beat, I think, is what’s needed nationwide — another hundred thousand. 

And — and we have to fund mental health counselors.  You know, what we found is that if — in fact, you know where most — most law enforcement officers are getting killed?  Responding to domestic violence.  You know, we — we expect our cops to do everything.  We except them to be counselors, we expect them to be psychologists, we expect them to be tough guys and women. 

But, you know, the — what you want to do, you want to have someone stop — trying to stop someone from jumping off the top of the roof, you need somebody who has a background and expertise.  So, we’re hiring into the police departments people with different skills than just being able to tote a gun and — and physically protect. 

And so, I think that, you know, one of the reasons I appointed Vivek Murthy — Admiral Murphy to become this — the solic- — excuse me, become the guy in charge of the whole mental health piece of this operation is because he understands it.  And he talks all the time about what we can do to engage in providing for mental health facilities around the wor- — around your cities and — and communities so people can have the help they need.

And, look, you know, we — and, look, I know it’s very controversial.  I know it’s a red, hot-button issue for a lot of Democrats and Republicans.  I come from a state that, back when I was a senator, had — I think it was the third-highest gun ownership in America.  And I don’t know what it is now, but — because of a lot of duck hunting in the — in the Delmarva Peninsula and a lot of other reasons. 

And — and I know how unpopular it was when I started talking about banning assault weapons.  Who needs an AR-15 that can hold a hundred rounds?  Not — not a joke. 

I was — I was campaigning when I was running for reelection as the last time as a senator, and I was down in the — in the Delmarva Peninsula, just on the Maryland border, in where — in the swampy area, a lot of — and I’m walking through, and that’s how — like you guys do.  You campaign.  You go where the people are.

I go through — and so, I’m walking through in a pair of high boots, and a guy said, “Biden, you SOB,” — (laughter) — and I said, “What?”  He said, “You want to take my gun away.”  And I said, “I don’t want to take…” — he was fishing.  And I said, “I don’t want to take your gun away.”  I said, “You’re able to have your gun.”  He said, “You want to take my AR-15.”  I said, “You must be one hell of a lousy hunter.”  (Laughter.)

And — and he looked at me, and he said, “What do you mean?”  I said, “You need an AR-15 that’s basically a semi-automatic and can fact — fire off 20, 30, 50, 60 rounds?”  I said, ”My — the best — last time I checked, deer weren’t wearing Kevlar vests.”  (Laughter.)  And we — we got in the — and then he calmed down, got into conversation, started talking practically about what, in fact, happens — what, in fact, happens.

And, you know, the other thing is background checks.  There’s always been a requirement of a background check.  And now this 16-year-old kid was able to buy an AR- — anyway.

So, I think we have to support community violence intervention programs as well.  Many of you have those programs going in your cities, in your communities.  And you’re seeing they work.  You get people engaged, and you get them involved.

And so, there’s a lot we can do — I think a lot more we can do.  But two of the things are making sure there’s background checks for people to purchase weapons, number one.  And, number two, certain weapons you shouldn’t be able to purchase because you never have — you’re nev- — you’re not able to go out and purchase a machine gun.  I me- — anyway.

There’s certain basic principles that are ma- — just make common sense.  And I think — and, again, you can go back and look — if you want, I’ll send you a copy of the study we did after the — the assault weapons ban lapsed, because it only could last for 10 years.  I couldn’t get it done again.  And it’s interesting.  The number of mass shootings dropped precipitously — dropped precipitously when we had that limitation.  It doesn’t solve every problem.  It’s one of the things we can do.

But any rate, there’s a lot more to say.  I’m probably already saying too much.

MR. PEREZ:  Our second and last question comes from Mayor Katie Rosenberg from the great city of Wausau, Wisconsin. 

MAYOR ROSENBERG:  Thank you so much.  This is an absolute — (applause) — this is an absolute honor.  Thank you for hosting us.  You have a wonderful staff. 

Just about a year ago, the Vice President hosted a lead pipe summit here in Washington.  And I attended that, and it was like shooting me out of a cannon.  I ran home, and we started working on our plan to shore up, pull out all of those lead pipes, and we made our plan — a 15-year plan down to a 5-year plan.

But I’m curious, what other progress are we seeing about these lead pipes being removed across our nation?  It’s really important that we get that out of our drinking water.  Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, first of all, thank you for what you’re doing.  I agree. 

Let me put this in perspective.  The research by the doc shows that reducing lead exposure for children has — this is a study that was done — has the same effect on test scores — just take test scores at school — on test scores as reducing class size from 22 to 15 students and less — one tenth of the cost.  Let me just give you one example of the impact it has on IQ formation and the ability to think and the like.  So, it’s a — it’s a significantly smart investment, number one.

Number two, we have enough money and we’re going to eliminate every lead pipe in America.  (Applause.)  Every one. 

It’s going to take us — it’s going to take us about 10 years, but every single one.  Because you shouldn’t — think about it.  You got 400,000 schools, kids going to the water fountain and drinking wa- — you know, water.  You got so much else that’s going on.  And it can just — and it makes a lot of sense.

And, by the way, it creates a hell of a lot of jobs too.  (Laughter.)

But my point is, it just is — look, exposure to lead impacts on brain development — we know that, particularly for as it’s developing — a hazard to the health of people, it can damage the brain and the kidneys, and interferes with the production of blood — of red blood cells that need to carry the hydrogen.  And studies show that lead exposure hurts cognitive function in children and can even knock off several points of their IQ.

Despite these dangers — the knowledge of how dangerous this is, we’re in a fact where the CDC estimates that over half of American children could be exposed to lead, with the exposure often coming from their own homes with lead pipes.  And it costs a hell of a lot of money to take that pipe from the watermain to the house.  It costs a lot of money.  A lot of people can’t even remotely afford doing it.

But everybody is better off — everybody is better off when we get the lead pipes out of the system.  And, look, our ambitious goal is to remove all lead pipes in America by — within 10 years.  The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law financed over 1,200 drinking water and wastewater projects, and it’s going to replace hundreds of thousands of lead service lines in America beginning right away.  Ongoing efforts in cities like Wausau and Philadelphia and Newark, New Jersey.  They create good-paying jobs as well — good-paying jobs.

And I visited the Hero Plumbing in Milwaukee, by the way, a Black-owned small business that was — replaced over 600 lead pipes in homes and daycare centers.

Well, guess what?  Ten-year effort to bring these — is to bring your states, tribes, and labor unions water utilities and private companies together to deliver clean drinking water to every community in the — in the world — in America.  And so, it just seems to me that it’s one of those things — who the hell can be against clean water?  Except some of the people I know.  But — (laughter).

But all kidding aside, if there’s anything you’re going to expend — expend money on, you want to increase the prospect of growth in schools, I mean, this was a — that study, extensive study done.  It makes a big difference in terms of the ability to learn and ability — and long-term impacts on cognitive capability.

But I’m convinced we can get it done.  I’m convinced we can get it done.

Thank you all very much.  You’re very patient.  (Applause.)  Thank you.  Thank you, thank you, thank you.

You’re all welcome to spend the night.  (Laughter.)

By the way, have you — have you had the chance to see most of the White House yet?  Not all the — well, you ought to take — I don’t know, I might get myself in trouble here.  (Laughter.) 

But, you know, there’s — downstairs, there’s a lot of interesting rooms you can check out.  And up here, the — the dangerous part of up here is that it’s hard to know what room you’re in because all of them are identified by color.  (Laughter.)  The Red Room, the Blue Room, the Green Room — it’s not —

But all kidding aside, welcome to the White House.  This is your house, and I was getting in the elevator to — to come up, and my introducer — where is she?  There she is.  I said every time that I hear “Hail to the Chief,” I wonder, “Where the hell is he?”  (Laughter.)

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  (Inaudible) playing your song.

THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  That’s what my sister says about me being mayor.  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Anyway, thank you, thank you, thank you for everything you do.  (Applause.)

4:56 P.M. EST

The post Remarks by President Biden at the U.S. Conference of Mayors Winter Meeting appeared first on The White House.

President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. spoke this morning with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel.  The President and Prime Minister discussed ongoing efforts to secure the release of all remaining hostages held by Hamas.  The President and the Prime Minister reviewed the situation in Gaza and the shift to targeted operations that will enable the flow of increasing amounts of humanitarian assistance while keeping the military pressure on Hamas and its leaders.  The President welcomed the decision from the Government of Israel to permit the shipment of flour for the Palestinian people directly through Ashdod port while our teams separately work on options for more direct maritime delivery of assistance into Gaza.  The President also discussed the recent progress in ensuring the Palestinian Authority’s revenues are available to pay salaries, including for the Palestinian Security Forces in the West Bank.  The President discussed Israel’s responsibility even as it maintains military pressure on Hamas and its leaders to reduce civilian harm and protect the innocent.  The President also discussed his vision for a more durable peace and security for Israel fully integrated within the region and a two state-solution with Israel’s security guaranteed. 

###

The post Readout of President Joe Biden’s Call with Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel appeared first on The White House.

President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. spoke this morning with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel.  The President and Prime Minister discussed ongoing efforts to secure the release of all remaining hostages held by Hamas.  The President and the Prime Minister reviewed the situation in Gaza and the shift to targeted operations that will enable the flow of increasing amounts of humanitarian assistance while keeping the military pressure on Hamas and its leaders.  The President welcomed the decision from the Government of Israel to permit the shipment of flour for the Palestinian people directly through Ashdod port while our teams separately work on options for more direct maritime delivery of assistance into Gaza.  The President also discussed the recent progress in ensuring the Palestinian Authority’s revenues are available to pay salaries, including for the Palestinian Security Forces in the West Bank.  The President discussed Israel’s responsibility even as it maintains military pressure on Hamas and its leaders to reduce civilian harm and protect the innocent.  The President also discussed his vision for a more durable peace and security for Israel fully integrated within the region and a two state-solution with Israel’s security guaranteed. 

###

The post Readout of President Joe Biden’s Call with Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel appeared first on The White House.