in their own words
 |
|
|
|
 Isn't The President Part Of That Blame Game? - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 12/9/09 — Monday, December 14, 2009 —  Q Did the President in the meeting with Congress tell the Republicans and Minority Leader Boehner that they almost seem to be rooting against recovery?MR. GIBBS: Well, I think the President did mention, and I think Republicans agreed, that the room was not without politics, and that politics obviously has -- I think politics has clearly played a role in many of their statements and votes on the Recovery Act. I don't think that's any big secret. Q He thinks Republicans basically want the jobless rate to stay above 10 percent -- MR. GIBBS: Well, I think the President would like Democrats and Republicans alike to prove to the American people that we can set aside whatever narrow political agendas anybody has in order to address the severity of the economic downturn and the joblessness that's resulted from it. And I can think of nothing better than taking the President up on, again, two of the ideas that have normally enjoyed very bipartisan support: increasing our investment in infrastructure, which will create jobs; and help to hundreds of thousands of small businesses across the country in terms of getting access to credit; tax incentives for hiring. Look, again, the most important thing is those things in a nonpartisan environment would get the support of Republicans and Democrats alike. I don't think that should be any different with this President, nor would it or should it be with any other President. I think we have a challenge that the American people have laid before us, and that is to solve the problems that they have without getting involved in that blame game. And I think -- Q Isn't the President part of that blame game, too? I mean, he took the partisan swipe yesterday in that speech. I mean, even here you talked about their failed stewardship on the deficit. I mean, this administration doesn't miss an opportunity to blame the past administration. MR. GIBBS: Well, look -- well, Savannah, I appreciate the ability to forget what happened every -- to forget every -- Q But my point -- MR. GIBBS: No, no, but understand we've -- I appreciate the ability to forget anything that happened before we got here. The President didn't -- the President inherited an economic downturn, he inherited a massive budget deficit. He understands one thing: The American people put him here to solve the problems that were created however and by whoever they were created. That's what the President is going to do. He's going to make decisions that won't be altogether wildly popular with the American people. But I think he believes that the American people will understand that we're making those tough decisions to pull ourselves back from falling into another Great Depression. It is hard to argue, Savannah, it is hard to argue that the steps taken in the Recovery Act didn't directly lead to the first economic growth in a year. Don't believe me; ask John McCain's economist who said we created jobs, that we put ourselves on a path towards economic growth. That's not me. That's -- that was our rival's chief economist in the campaign. I think what the President believes is we have a unique opportunity -- setting aside all of that -- to move forward on behalf of the American people; to do it in a way that truly addresses their problems without falling into the convenient political back-and-forth and games that have always governed Washington. We can show the American people this -- at this time and this year that it's possible to do that. Q You said the President does recognize that he's got the job now, so now it falls to him to fix it. Is there any statute of limitations, though, on how often he may mention what he inherited or the mess he inherited or how the past administration failed? MR. GIBBS: Again, it would be easy to put it all in a box and just forget about it, but we didn't get here overnight. We're not going to get out of our problems overnight. It's not part of the blame game. It's just -- it's a fact of life. Bush Administration | Economy | President Obama | Press Briefing | Republicans | Robert Gibbs | Unemployment | White House Press Corps Labels: Bush Administration, Economy, President Obama, Press Briefing, Republicans, Robert Gibbs, Unemployment, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 10:05:00 PM  Have To Get Our Fiscal House In Order - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 11/23/09 — Monday, November 30, 2009 —  MR. GIBBS: Jake.Q While we're on the subject of the deficit, the President said last week, "I think it's important though to recognize that if we keep adding to the debt, even in the midst of this recovery, at some point people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy in a way that could actually lead to a double-dip recession." What steps is the President prepared to take to get us out of this hole? MR. GIBBS: Well, again, we'll broaden this just slightly. For the entirety of our administration, we've dealt with in many ways dual challenges: How do you get the economy back on track, what do you have to do to both create economic growth, which then is what you have to have in order to create job growth; as well as understanding a dramatic change in the past decade in our fiscal situation. So obviously, both of those have to be taken into account. Like I said a second ago, the biggest driver in -- the two biggest drivers were tax cuts and prescription drug benefit programs that weren't paid for. The second biggest driver is a downturn in our economy. So first and foremost, the President will focus on what can be done to get our economy moving again, what can be done to help spur the creation of jobs and continued economic growth. And like I said, I think the conversation in some ways has been changed. The discussion that's being had now, as you know, is how to pay for health care. Q I mean, that's not really any major -- I mean, so the answer to what can be done to get us out of the $12 million hole is to get the economy back in -- MR. GIBBS: Well, first and foremost that's -- yes, that's -- a downturn in the economy, caused by the recession, a change in tax receipts, is first and foremost what can be done. Obviously there are meetings that continue today in terms of putting the budget together for next year, understanding that the President believes that we are going to have to continue next year to balance what has to be done to create -- continue economic growth and create demand for jobs, as well as balancing our fiscal situation, which the President also said last week in those interviews. Q Right, but how could -- okay, understood, the economy -- getting the economy back on track, that will increase revenues. But the President said specifically, even if, when the economy bounces back and -- MR. GIBBS: Well, and you've heard the President talk quite a bit about the fact that we most assuredly have to get our fiscal house in order. Again -- Q Right, so what does he think should be done to do that? MR. GIBBS: Well, that's -- they're working on putting together the budget for next year. One of the first things he talked about was taking into account the massive amounts of money that the government spends on health care each year -- which passing health care reform, over the next 10-year period cuts about $130 billion, according to the Senate bill, out of the deficit. Q Well, that's $13 billion a year. That's not even a quarter of what we borrow from China every year. MR. GIBBS: Well, but if you don't start somewhere, Jake, you're not going to get anywhere. I think the President understands that we've got, again, very dual challenges that have to be addressed in getting our economy moving again, as well as taking into account our long-term fiscal health. Economy | Federal Deficit | President Obama | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Federal Deficit, President Obama, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 9:53:00 AM There's No Doubt - Air Force One Press Gaggle by Robert Gibbs 7/14/09 — Tuesday, July 14, 2009 —  Q Robert, can you describe what the President's mood is coming to Michigan, given the unemployment numbers here and the, sort of, mood?MR. GIBBS: Look, obviously this is -- I think as he said this afternoon in the Oval -- or this morning in the Oval Office, obviously you've got a state that the unemployment rate is the greatest in the nation and obviously is a state that has dealt with economic transformation, the loss of auto and manufacturing jobs well before the recession hit. So obviously this is probably as hard-hit an area as there is in the entire country. I think one of the things that is important about today's stop is one aspect of putting people back to work and laying that long-term foundation for economic growth is increasing the number of people that we have in this country that get a post-high school education, that get the job training and placement help necessary for the jobs of the future. And that's the program -- the new initiative that the President will highlight today that he talked originally about in the joint session of Congress. But obviously, look, there are lots and lots of people that are hurting all throughout Michigan and the Midwest as a result, again, of not just the downturn in the economy but things that they've struggled with economically for quite some time. Q Do you feel like you guys are moving money fast enough into Michigan -- stimulus money fast enough into Michigan? MR. GIBBS: The recovery plan is ahead of the pace that was originally set -- Q (Inaudible.) MR. GIBBS: Well, in Michigan and throughout the country. I think Michigan is one of the -- one of the top 10 state recipients for money. Look, I think you can talk to people in Michigan that have watched recovery money go in. There's no doubt that there are fewer teachers that have been laid off because of money that has come in to help education funding. There's no doubt that people have been hired because road construction projects are starting here and in the Detroit area and throughout the state that have put people back to work. Obviously, we've got a lot of work to do in the Midwest and in Michigan and throughout the country. Money has moved quickly. It has moved ahead of pace. And it has prevented an even sharper economic downturn from occurring. Q Do you know how many jobs have been created so far in Michigan? MR. GIBBS: I don't have an exact Michigan figure, no. Air Force One | Economy | President Obama | Press Gaggle | Robert Gibbs | Stimulus Package | White House Press Corps Labels: Air Force One, Economy, President Obama, Press Gaggle, Robert Gibbs, Stimulus Package, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 10:53:00 PM The Stimulus Is Working: We're Definitely Headed Toward 10% - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 7/2/09 — Friday, July 03, 2009 —  Q President Obama announced on June 8 that the administration was accelerating stimulus spending to save or create 600,000 jobs. The U.S. economy lost 467,000 jobs last month, and the unemployment rate went up to 9.5 percent. I just wondered what's the President's reaction to the higher unemployment rate, and are you concerned that the economy is losing steam faster than the Recovery Act can help it?MR. GIBBS: Well, let me take that question and address it on a couple of different levels. I think you saw the President already say today, and he'll say it again later today, that obviously he's deeply disappointed by the continued job loss in our economy. Continuing to lose jobs is something that he and the administration are working to address. Understand that it has been 549 days since we have been in a month that has seen a net positive job creation. I think -- though the President remains deeply concerned that we are losing jobs month to month, I do think if you look at some -- if you step back and look at the numbers through a quarterly basis, or as the Bureau of Labor Statistics did today, they looked at -- from November of 2008 through I believe March of 2009 -- the average job loss for those months approached 700,000. In the most previous quarter, that job loss averaged 436,000. So I think there is a sense that the beginnings of stabilization are taking hold and hopefully the worst job loss is behind us. You all heard me say the second time I walked into this room that it was likely to get worse before it was going to get better. I don't think anybody believed, and we certainly never said, that a recovery plan in and of itself would solve our economic problems or that after only a hundred-some days it would turn an economy, as I said, that's been in the worst financial shape that we've seen it in since the Great Depression. I do think there's obviously evidence that the recovery plan is working. Last month personal incomes were up as a result of the recovery plan. But I think you'll hear the President say later today that he sees this economy through the eyes of the American people, and obviously the American people are continuing to hurt. Q Does the government think it's doing everything it can do at this point to -- MR. GIBBS: Absolutely. Absolutely. I mean, there's -- again, there's money in the recovery plan to deal with -- health and education money to states to plug those holes. But understand that the recovery is just one aspect of it, as we've talked about. There is financial stabilization. There's housing that you have to be -- there's a whole host of issues that the President and the administration are focused on in order to turn the economy around. Q So, again, just to follow up on that, is the message to the American people that the recovery, the stimulus, are working, just be patient? MR. GIBBS: Well, our message is we didn't get into this problem overnight, as the American people understand, and it's not likely we're going to get out of this economic problem overnight. We've said that repeatedly. I said this weekend last we think unemployment will continue to grow. We do see some less negative trends in the way unemployment is going, understanding we've still got quite some ways to go. Q At what point would that be? I mean, when is it no longer overnight? MR. GIBBS: When is what no longer overnight? Q You said we didn't get into this problem overnight; we're not going to get out of it overnight. MR. GIBBS: Right. Again -- Q So how long can you still say "overnight"? What's the time that we're talking here? MR. GIBBS: I think this is going to take some time. I think it's going to take months and months. I think we've said that from the very beginning. This is not, again, something that -- remember, the last month in which we created -- we net created jobs in this economy was December 2007. So we understand that in his -- we are in the deepest recession since World War II, and the worst financial crisis, when you take into account the markets and housing, since the Great Depression. That's going to take some time. But I think there certainly is credible evidence -- there's 1,900 construction projects that are in progress. There are -- there's $160 billion in recovery money that's been obligated to this point. And that's going to make a difference. [...] Yes, ma'am. Q Robert, just to follow on what Dan was saying earlier. Yesterday the President, at the health care forum, said the stimulus has done its job. Are we to take that as an indication that the President thinks the stimulus is working? MR. GIBBS: The stimulus is working. The stimulus plan is injecting money into the economy. The stimulus plan has obligated $160 billion to deal with the dip in the amount of growth. The stimulus plan is creating 1,900 road and construction projects. I think you'll hear the President say today, as he's said each and every day of his administration, that we've got a long way to go, that he's not going to be satisfied until we see positive job growth, positive economic growth, and that's going to take some time. Q Well, is it working fast enough? MR. GIBBS: Well, again, this was a program over the course of -- spend out I think 75 to 80 percent of the money over the course of two fiscal years, to do so in a way that's transparent, to do so in a way that's accountable -- which is what has happened in this piece of legislation. And it's just going to take some time. We understand that. Again, the President sees this through the eyes of the American people. The American people are hurting. More and more people are losing their jobs, they're losing their health care, they're losing their hope and their opportunity. And that's what the President is focused on each and every day. Q But the message seems to be, well, just wait, it's coming, it's coming. MR. GIBBS: Well, Yunji, again, let's look at in the second quarter of 2008 -- we just finished the second quarter of 2009 -- in the three-month average, we were losing 153,000 jobs a month. This past quarter it's 436,000 -- because that trend line shows that in the third quarter we went from averaging 153,000 a month in that quarter to 208,000; in the fourth quarter of 2008, we had gone to 553,000 jobs a month. In the first quarter of 2009, we were almost at 700,000 jobs lost a month, including a January number, 741,000 jobs lost, which is the greatest one-month total in the history of our country. That is not something that's going to turn around overnight. The American people understand that. The President understands that. That's why we've taken important steps to get the economy moving again. Is it going to take some time? Absolutely. Is the President impatient for results? You heard him say that last week when you all had a chance to ask him questions about our economy. [...] Peter. Q Robert, you said that hopefully the worst job losses are behind us. Do you still believe that unemployment is going to hit 10 percent sometime this year? MR. GIBBS: Absolutely. We went from 9.4 to 9.5. It may not be next month, but I would assume in the next two to three months I think it's quite clear that we'll hit that number. Again -- and as we talked about earlier, you've got to create about 150,000 jobs a month simply to have the rate stay at the level that it was the previous month. So, yes, I think we're headed -- we're definitely headed toward 10 percent. Q So it'll be a while before the country crosses the threshold of having these job losses end at these levels. MR. GIBBS: I'm sorry? Q It'll be a while, then, yet -- past that before the country passes its threshold where you have these job losses at these levels that we're seeing. MR. GIBBS: Yes, look, I think we're going to continue to -- as we talked about yesterday, employment and unemployment are -- tend to be one of the last things that improve in an economic downturn -- again, understanding the recession we're in is statistically the worst since World War II. Adding in the financial situation, obviously this is the worst economic crisis that our country has dealt with since the Depression. Ensuring that financial stabilization happens, ensuring that small businesses are free to borrow, consumer confidence goes up, people begin to spend money -- a lot of those things are going to have to happen until businesses feel confident enough that we are out of the woods to begin to hire more people. I think that's what you're going to see happen -- businesses having to make those decisions over the course of many months or year. Economy | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Stimulus Package | Unemployment | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Stimulus Package, Unemployment, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 11:04:00 PM Jobs Created or Saved Through Smoke & Mirrors - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 6/8/09 — Monday, June 08, 2009 —  Q Just a few follow-ups. The 150,000 job figure, should we be identifying that as a projection, since it seems like Jared himself -- there is no hard evidence yet of this number, correct?MR. GIBBS: Well, I think, again, I would point you back to his answer about the reports and the economic formulation -- Q But he said it was based on multipliers and an economic formula and that we don't have the facts yet of how many hard jobs. MR. GIBBS: Well, again, Chuck, I think -- and I hate to paraphrase what Jared said, but again, if I move you money because you have a window business, just like the example I was using, or some economic stimulus, you are going to -- you're going to buy supplies from somebody else who is going to create -- Q But you don't know if that's going to create one job or two jobs -- MR. GIBBS: No, but -- Q You don't know that it's going to -- so it's a projection. MR. GIBBS: Based on a tried and true, as he said, economic formula on how to do that. Projections are -- Q Jobs trickling down the window pane -- I mean, why is that not trickle-down economics when you guys are talking about tax cuts and how -- MR. GIBBS: Are you suggesting that the multiplier effect of job creation is part of trickle-down economics? Q I'm suggesting that you guys are saying -- Q Sure, they're jobs -- MR. GIBBS: Point out for me how, if somebody builds a windmill -- right -- and needs -- Q You guys are saying that unmeasured jobs -- and they're out there -- and you're saying it's a result of tax cuts. MR. GIBBS: No -- in the example of window panes, absolutely. But what I'm talking about -- you don't make window panes out of papier-mâché, right? You're going to have to buy aluminum; you're going to have to buy glass. Does the production of aluminum and glass for the purchase of making windows in order to increase the production so that the tax credit can be fully taken advantage of -- are window producers doing that? Yes. Is the sale of aluminum for windows and glass creating jobs? Ask some of the readers of Bloomberg when they make investments in resources -- Q But you're not going to provide numbers on total jobs that have been created or saved through this window pane example. MR. GIBBS: Well, again, there's multipliers and there are formulas, as Jared talked about, in order to make determinations as to what that number is. Q Well, it did sound like you are going to provide a hard number on direct government contracts. Every quarter we will get a hard number. MR. GIBBS: Well, I think that's what Jared talked about as part of the obligation of those reports. Q So far we have none, because there hasn’t been any -- MR. GIBBS: Right. But again, just to build off your examples, Hans, you can't build a window out of nothing. You can't build a wind turbine out of nothing. The purchase of resources to build a wind turbine so that a wind company can take advantage of a tax credit is a multiplier effect that creates jobs based on the purchase of resources to construct that turbine -- right? Q Will you concede that the wind is free? (Laughter.) MR. GIBBS: I will concede that the wind is free. And some of it is blowing hot in my direction. Q Ooh! (Laughter.) Q There are a lot of numbers being thrown around here, and you guys are claiming credit for -- earlier you were claiming credit for summer jobs that won't be there in three years -- MR. GIBBS: No, no, no -- Q -- and that will be -- MR. GIBBS: Hans, I appreciate you asking -- you should ask as many questions as you want, but if Jared gives you an answer about how two part-time jobs equals one full-time employment job, don't act like the question didn’t get answered, because -- Q I'm not. MR. GIBBS: -- and he's not trying to say that -- he didn’t tell you that 125,000 was immediately being factored in. He gave you the formula for part-time and full-time jobs. Q I'm not saying -- I'm just -- I guess what you -- would you then concede that that job won't be there in three years when the stimulus -- MR. GIBBS: Will I concede that a summer job won't be there in the fall? Yes, I will concede that. Q You guys are counting this towards the 3.5. MR. GIBBS: I think Jared answered your question. Send a transcript to -- Economy | Jobs |Obama Administration | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Stimulus Package | Unemployment | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Jobs, Obama Administration, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Stimulus Package, Unemployment, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:53:00 PM The State Dictating Salaries - London Press Conference by the President 4/2/09 — Thursday, April 02, 2009 —  PRESIDENT OBAMA: All right, let me sprinkle in another -- it's got to be an international person. All right, this young lady right there. Q Mr. President, Emma Alberici from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. At the moment, in the U.S., the U.K., and in Australia, executive salaries and bonuses are decided in the boardrooms of major publicly listed companies. Who will be making those decisions on salaries and bonuses as a result of the agreement you've made here today? And if it is still the boards, will they be guided by principles or legislation? PRESIDENT OBAMA: The principles that we outlined I think put in place or move us in the direction of what I consider to be best practices, which is that there is some accountability with respect to executive compensation. Now, theoretically, that should be the shareholders. But the way that too many corporations have operated for too long is that you have a CEO who basically selects his board; the board, in a fairly cozy relationship oftentimes with the executive, hires a executive compensation firm, which, surprisingly, tends to think that it's necessary to retain the best talent to pay people $20 or $30 million a year; and we get into the kinds of habits and practices that I think have not been -- have not served shareholders well, I think ultimately distort the decision-making of many CEOs. When I was in the United States Senate, I actually worked on a piece of legislation that would -- made the simple proposition that executive compensation should be subject to a shareholder vote, even if it was nonbinding, so that there was transparency and accountability and perhaps a shame function that would take place. And that principle, I think, is reflected in these guidelines. What it says is, is that if you get shareholders involved and those shareholders are given a set of principles and best practices by which they can judge executive compensation, then you can still have outsized rewards and success for successful business people, but it will be based on not short-term performance, not three-month performance, not your ability to flip quick profits off products like derivatives that don't turn out to be particularly productive to the company, but based on sustained, effective growth. And that's what's embodied in these documents, and I think that you're going to see a lot of countries try to encourage that kind of transparency and accountability. It doesn't mean the state micromanaging -- ( sneezes) -- excuse me -- I've been fighting this all week -- it doesn't mean that we want the state dictating salaries; we don't. We -- I strongly believe in a free-market system, and as I -- as I think people understand in America, at least, people don't resent the rich; they want to be rich. And that's good. But we want to make sure that there's mechanisms in place that holds people accountable and produces results. Okay? Economy | G20 | International Relations | President Obama | Presidential Press Conference | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, G20, International Relations, President Obama, Presidential Press Conference, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 9:01:00 PM Toning Down The Expectations - Air Force One Press Gaggle by Robert Gibbs 3/31/09 — Tuesday, March 31, 2009 —  Q Can I ask about -- can I sort of put the Russia and China meetings together? Both of those nations have been pretty aggressive in the way they've talked about the U.S., particularly on the currency issue, and are kind of looking to boost their own image and stature in the world by talking that way. How big a part do you think those kinds of issues will play in the meetings tomorrow?MR. GIBBS: Well, I -- look, I can't speak for what those countries will bring up. I think it's been -- we've been quite clear that the reserve currency of the world is now and will continue to be the U.S. dollar, the strength and the breadth of our economy is unmatched. I do think the President looks forward to each of these meetings as a way, again, of speaking of issues that are of mutual concern. Obviously there are -- there's a lot to deal with on the world stage and this is an opportunity for him to get a chance to talk to these two leaders on a very personal level tomorrow. Q Both of these nations are trying to sort of use this moment to more assertively challenge the U.S. So how does the President go into those meetings, sort of knowing that they occur in that context? MR. GIBBS: Well, I don't think it -- look, I think the President will have the issues that he wants to discuss and bring them up with each of those two countries. I don't think that changes what the President does at all. Q Robert, there seems to have been a -- everything seems to be toning down the expectations, trying to tamp down expectations for everything on this trip. What are the fair measuring sticks? April 7th, flying back, measuring sticks out of G20, out of NATO, out of the EU -- is it -- what are they? MR. GIBBS: Well, look, let's take the G20, for example. I think it's likely that we will come out of the G20 with very broad agreement on measures that have to be taken to address the global recession. We've already gotten -- despite what a lot has been written about -- at the financial ministerial level just a couple of weeks ago the commitment to continue to evaluate what has to be done to spur the global economy along. Q What does that mean? "Commitment to evaluate" -- I mean, that sounds like -- do you worry you get so much to a broad consensus -- MR. GIBBS: Let me be more specific, because this also hasn't been reported -- so I'll give you a chance to enumerate my evaluation. As we said last Saturday on the phone call in preparation for this, if you total up what the G20 nations have pledged to address the economic downturn, it represents 1.8 percent of GDP for the G20 nations. That is a significant commitment to addressing the downturn in GDP around the world. The pledge is to evaluate whether or not more steps will be needed in the future to address the breadth and severity of the crisis. I think secondly there will be broad consensus about far stronger financial regulations to ensure that what we're dealing with now never happens again, that we have different rules of the road for the 21st century. And I think that the United States and the Obama administration last week demonstrated its commitment to leadership in this endeavor by rolling out as strong a set of financial regulations as any country has proposed -- as well as a commitment to get them through Congress this year. So that we will not simply propose new rules of the road, but have them instituted by the end of the year, which will make progress in the sense of we won't just be speaking about this stuff, we'll be acting on it. We'll address hedge funds and derivatives as part of regulation. There are tougher capital requirements. There are tools to ensure greater security and safety in our financial system. And finally, as both the President and the Secretary of Treasury have spoken about, they give any administration unique tools and necessary tools to deal with systemic risks like resolution authority, which is something we lack in dealing with something the size of AIG. Q NATO? MR. GIBBS: You know, NATO, I think we will have an opportunity to discuss and review what the President has proposed. As I said, the Secretary of State heard some -- was pleased with what she heard in public and in private. So I think we want -- I think we're making progress and we'll see progress that demonstrates that the concern, as I said a minute ago, about Afghanistan and Pakistan are not simply the concern of one country or one -- Q -- measureable, though? Is it troop commitments? MR. GIBBS: Well, I don't want to get ahead of where we are. I think if we can demonstrate that there's broad international concern and that people are working together to address it, I think that'll be a success. Q What specifically pleased the Secretary of State the most, that she heard? MR. GIBBS: Well, again, I think it was an understanding that -- well, first of all, bringing together neighbors in the region to address in a larger way the problems that we face in Afghanistan and Pakistan. As you know, the President committed at the beginning of his administration to reviewing our policy -- not simply as one that relates to Afghanistan or one that relates to Pakistan, but one that relates to the region as the whole. That was important. Demonstrating -- understanding and demonstrating that commitment I think is important. And she was pleased with what she heard, as I said, in public and in private. Look, I think it's a helpful development if they're willing to continue their involvement to have Iran, a neighbor of Afghanistan, who can and should be concerned about drug trafficking into their country. If they are willing to accept the responsibility of playing a constructive role in that region, I think that's an important development. We'll see as we move forward how that goes. Q What parts of the G20 agenda are still in flux or still being negotiated? Or is it pretty much set right now, in terms of what the outcome will be? MR. GIBBS: I can go ask those guys in terms of what, in terms of the communiqué. I think the call that he had with Prime Minister Brown demonstrated that they made progress on a number of issues. One last thing I forgot to mention at G20 is obviously -- and this is largely agreed upon -- is a far greater commitment to international institutions in order to help emerging economies as we see this massive slowdown in global trade. Q -- contribution? MR. GIBBS: Yes. Q And do you think -- is that on the China agenda? When he meets with Hu, is that about getting them to kick in on this? MR. GIBBS: I will double check on that. But I know, again, that that is -- you know, greater exports from our country into emerging economies means jobs back home, so that's important. Q You talked about his consultations going into the G20, you know, all the conversations he's had with leaders in person and on the phone. Could you quantify that? I mean, pull together how many conversations and meetings he's had? MR. GIBBS: I can go back and try to -- you mean with leaders, not -- Q Yes. MR. GIBBS: Okay. Again, I know that -- like I said, in the past 10 days he's had -- Q We know, but when the President announced -- it seems like he's had a couple different conversations with some leaders, that once -- MR. GIBBS: Let me go back and try to pull together all of it. Again, I know -- you know I think about most of them. As I said, conversations in the past 10 days or so -- teleconferences with Sarkozy and Merkel; conversations with Brown, and visits by Rudd and Lula to the Oval Office. I should mention he talked with Prime Minister Harper in within the last, I think, 48 hours. Q Was it about cars? MR. GIBBS: I think partly to talk about that, but also to talk about G20. Air Force One | Economy | G20 | International Relations | Obama Administration | Press Gaggle | Robert Gibbs | White House Press Corps Labels: Air Force One, Economy, G20, International Relations, Obama Administration, Press Gaggle, Robert Gibbs, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 10:33:00 PM General And Somewhat Nonspecific - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/30/09 — Monday, March 30, 2009 —  Q Thank you. I'd just like to follow up on some of the -- that has been out there here. You've been asked a couple times whether the actions regarding these auto companies should be viewed as something that the banks should pay attention to because a similar approach may come their way. And you said, no, we should look at these as individual cases. So are you essentially --MR. GIBBS: I guess what I'm trying to do is, I'm just trying to -- again, the example I just used with Chuck, I mean, the pathway for two auto companies is, based on the President's decision today, different. So I think to take any series of other entities and put them on that same scale, those paths may also be different. That's all I'm -- Q There's certain principles that underlie all of these decisions, though, obviously, and there is a certain willingness or unwillingness of the administration to dictate certain terms as a condition of receiving federal money. And so are you saying, by saying these are individual cases, are you trying to communicate that these banks really -- don't worry about this, this isn't coming your way? MR. GIBBS: No, I -- Q I think it's a fair question. MR. GIBBS: It is. It's a little general -- general and somewhat nonspecific. And again, what I'm -- I guess what I'm asking is, instead of looking at every entity as the same entity, I think that's -- I don't think that's hypothetically productive. Q Well, do you want me to ask the question that way by inserting all the names of all the banks that have received aid and ask if it would apply to that? I mean, would that be more helpful? MR. GIBBS: Well, again, understanding that some of the circumstances are different. Q But why Rick Wagoner and not Ken Lewis? MR. GIBBS: Again, some of these things are -- I don't have anything specific on Bank of America. But again, I just don't want to be generalistic across the board. Q So, in other words, you really don't want people reading anything more into this? MR. GIBBS: I hope people read into it exactly what I said rather than reading into it what they want to read into it. Q It's our job to help people -- to explain to people what it is that you're saying, and so I'm trying to make sure I understand it. MR. GIBBS: Okay. (Laughter.) Q It sounds like what you're saying is, no, you don't want us to interpret this as a sign of things to come for others -- MR. GIBBS: My hesitancy -- Q -- and if that's the case, why don't you just say -- MR. GIBBS: My hesitancy -- no, no, my hesitancy is just to look at every entity the same way, because, again, the circumstances by which any entity is at any certain point may well be different, even though it's the same type of entity, right? Again, I want to go back to GM and Chrysler. On the face, both are auto companies, right? Both have found themselves at a point where they're seeking additional government assistance, adding in to the additional loans that they got to put them on a path toward viability. But again, the examples by which we're using -- or that the President has made a determination about which direction they're going to go is different even though they're both auto industry. Q Of course, and I'm not suggesting the exact same remedy would apply to any one of these things, but, again, if you look at the general case, you have, say, generically, contracts that at AIG were unbreakable because they're legal contracts but for the UAW, those are contracts that you fully expect them to modify if they're going to get federal assistance. MR. GIBBS: Well, I think this -- I think many people have made -- I think many people have made sacrifices, but, again, without looking through the individual instances of other entities, it's hard to make that generalization. Automobile Industry | Banking | Economy | President Obama | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Treasury Department | White House Press Corps Labels: Automobile Industry, Banking, Economy, President Obama, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Treasury Department, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 9:32:00 PM Dammit, You Guys - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/26/09 — Thursday, March 26, 2009 —  MR. GIBBS: Mark.Q Robert, in the online town meeting, when the President said he doesn't think legalizing marijuana would give the economy a boost, was he giving a political answer or an economic answer? Does he have economic numbers to back that up? MR. GIBBS: I'm unaware of a CEA analysis -- (laughter) -- regarding that. I think the -- Q Will you let us know if there is one? (Laughter.) MR. GIBBS: I think you've heard the President talk about getting us on a path toward sustained economic growth. I don't think he believes that that is a part of that plan. Q What about medicinal marijuana? MR. GIBBS: I think the -- I'd point you to the Justice Department on developments on that. The President asked people to ask their questions. Obviously interests aligned with certain viewpoints did so, and the President wanted to answer the question that, no, it was not -- he did not think a good economic strategy. Q Did that question get the most votes of any? MR. GIBBS: I will ask Macon and those guys. It is interesting when -- I think several of those topics were in things like financial stability or -- Q Green jobs. MR. GIBBS: Green jobs, right. (Laughter.) It's unclear what leap of faith one has to make to ask that question in some of the -- some of those -- right, some of those -- some of those topics. Q Why did he even bring it up? Why did he even bring it up? I mean, no one asked it online and no one asked it -- MR. GIBBS: No, people -- people asked it online – Q I mean, no, I know they voted for it, they voted for it. But he brought it up on his own. This is what I'm saying. Why did he even bring -- MR. GIBBS: April, the concept of the virtual town hall meeting was to have people -- Q Transparency? MR. GIBBS: No, no, let me -- you can ask and I'll answer -- (laughter) -- that the President asked people to go to the web site, ask questions of the administration, vote on which questions they wanted to have the President answer, and that he would do so. And as I said and as Ann said and -- maybe we should have said "clean-energy jobs" -- that would have -- Q You said "green." MR. GIBBS: Yes, I know. That in some topics -- you know, this is not the first time that an interest group gets on a web site and votes many times for their question to be answered, and the President thought he should answer it and I think he did. Q But, Robert, he didn't take on the serious issue. He made a joke out of it. I mean, there were a lot of questions about legalization of marijuana, not as a job creation program, but just as a serious policy issue. And with what's happening in Mexico -- MR. GIBBS: It poses the legal -- I'll do this for the President -- I didn't -- I neither emailed my question in, nor voted for it, but the President opposes the legalization of marijuana, and I'd -- I'll say I did that without even the slightest hint of laughter. Q Can you say why? Q Robert, while you're on this same subject can we follow up? MR. GIBBS: Hold on one sec. Hold on. Q What did the President learn in this? A lot of the questions were things he talks about all the time. Q Annie, there was a question pending on why -- why he feels that way about legalizing marijuana. MR. GIBBS: He does not think that that is -- he opposes it. He doesn't think that's the right plan for America. Q But a follow-up on the process, on the -- MR. GIBBS: Hold on, let me -- I've lost control. (Laughter.) Hold on, what are you -- dammit, you guys don't get to Google this stuff and send in your questions. Hold on, hold on, hold on, let me -- Democracy | Economy | Open Government | President Obama | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | War on Drugs | White House Press Corps Labels: Democracy, Economy, Open Government, President Obama, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, War on Drugs, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:50:00 PM More This Than That - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/23/09 — Tuesday, March 24, 2009 —  Q Robert, in rolling out the details today, Timothy Geithner used a more, sort of, quiet approach -- pen-and-pad with reporters, not getting out there on television in a very public way. Why?MR. GIBBS: You guys always -- every time we do one of these things, we do a background briefing, and somebody asks if it can be on the record -- Q But this was a major -- MR. GIBBS: -- and, you know, we don't want just a speech, we'd like to do some Q&A, and so we put the Secretary of Treasury out on the record to -- Q This was a major event. Everyone was waiting for the details, and it almost seemed like it came out in a less than, sort of, bombastic way. MR. GIBBS: I guess he's worried a little bit less about what the packaging is on the present, and more importantly, what’s inside of the box. I suppose we could have rigged out some flags and printed up some placards and cued up some old campaign music, but I think what's important -- maybe not for Washington reporters, but what’s more important for the American people is to get the details of a plan that works to get their bank lending money again. I think that's, in all honesty, what the Americans people care most about. I think if you objectively look at what this administration has done, or what the economic team has done in the course of about nine weeks of service, I think you’d be hard-pressed to find nine weeks where more solutions were outlined of problems and challenges that have been facing this country probably since the 1930s. Q Just to follow another question –- Christina Romer, in an interview with CNN earlier today, talked about how if this doesn’t work that we’ll review it – we’ll tweak it, I think was the exact language that she used. Is there a backup plan if this doesn’t work? And to say "tweak" it, does that sort of instill sort of a lack of confidence that this will actually work? MR. GIBBS: Do we have a backup plan if it doesn’t work, and if we do have a backup plan, does that denote that we're preparing for it not to work? I want to sift through the circular -- Q I asked a backup plan because she said if it doesn’t work we'll "tweak" it. But I'm just wondering, does that give a sense of -- MR. GIBBS: Again, I think it is safe to assume that any policy that this administration or -- I'll speak broadly for any politician in the country -- if they roll out a plan, it's constantly evaluated to ensure that the objectives by which the plan was introduced are met by the implementation of the plan. And if the plan doesn’t meet through its implementation the objectives of what it was outlined to do, that that plan might be augmented to meet those objectives. Q That was deep. That was deep. MR. GIBBS: That was more this than that. (Laughter.) Banking | Economy | Obama Administration | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | TARP | Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner | White House Press Corps Labels: Banking, Economy, Obama Administration, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, TARP, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 2:54:00 PM Framing This Thing - Press Briefing by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner 3/23/09 — Monday, March 23, 2009 —  Q Looking at the example you give in the fact sheet -- the first program -- you start with talking about $100 in bank loans, but the private investor only has to kick in $6 for -- seems to be on the hook for $6 at the end of the day, and the FDIC guarantees between there and whatever was paid for the bad loan.Do you think a person outside this room, outside the Beltway, looking at that would feel like that's a -- you know, you've gotten a good deal by getting someone to kick in $6 for a loan that is valued at a $100, that's being purchased for $84. SECRETARY GEITHNER: I'm very confident you and your colleagues will do a good job of framing this thing -- (laughter) -- but let me just come back to the basic point. Okay? The point is, relative to what? What our job is, is to try to fix this problem in our financial system at least cost to the taxpayer and ways to get the incentives right so we can have private capital come in and not have the government do all of it. And the alternative strategies would have the government either taking on all that risk ourselves, having all those losses on our balance sheet -- or, sitting back and letting this process of deleveraging continue to weigh on the American economy, pushing viable businesses closer to the edge, where they have to shrink their businesses to get through this. And that's not an alternative we're prepared to support. The key thing is, again, that you -- people have to compete for the right to get access to financing in this context and they have to put money at risk for it to work. Yes. Q Can you clarify under both plans who is actually holding the assets at the end of the day, and explain to taxpayers what the upside is to all of that? How are they going to share in the upside of this program? SECRETARY GEITHNER: These funds -- purchase assets -- they're managed by professionals who know how to do this for a living. If there is a return to these over time, which we expect there will be, taxpayers will share in that return. So taxpayers are getting to take the benefits of providing this financing to the market. Now, of course investors will share, too, in that return, as you would expect. That's the simplest way to describe it I think. Banking | Economy | Press Briefing | TARP | Treasury Department | Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner Labels: Banking, Economy, Press Briefing, TARP, Treasury Department, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 4:08:00 PM Making a Hash of the Details - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/17/09 — Tuesday, March 17, 2009 —  MR. GIBBS: Jonathan.Q Last night, administration officials said that after carefully reviewing the situation they concluded that under current law these contracts could not be broken without actually costing the taxpayers more money in legal fees than would have been recouped. A few hours -- MR. GIBBS: To break the -- Q To break the contracts. That under current law, to break those contracts would actually cost the taxpayers more money than to let the money go out. About four hours before that, the President of the United States walked before the cameras and said that to block -- he promised to pursue every legal avenue to block these bonuses and make the American taxpayers whole. Did the President, when he went before the camera, did he know at that time that the legal review had already concluded that actually to block those bonuses would be pretty much legally unfeasible? MR. GIBBS: Yes, and he asked us to look again. That's what he announced at the remarks in which you point -- happened four hours earlier, and that's why the review of provisions in existing law, including the Dodd compensation requirements as contained in the Recovery and Reinvestment Act, are one of the avenues with which the administration continues to look. Again, let's point out that that's a piece of legislation that Congress has passed but rules have yet to be promulgated on, which provides an interesting case because the legislation contains provisions dealing with TARP money and preexisting contracts. Q So when the administration officials came back four hours later and said, you know what, we can't really break these contracts, did that mean that the second review that the President was asking for was over and that -- MR. GIBBS: No, I just -- I'm not announcing the end of the review. I'm bringing you up to date on the existing review that takes place, including the provisions that I just read out. Q And, I'm sorry, one more, then. And when Larry Summers went on television on Sunday morning and said, laws are laws, contracts are contracts; we have to respect them -- MR. GIBBS: Again, you're -- now you're asking me about something that happened Sunday. I've now brought you up to speed on what probably happened at around 4:00 p.m. on Monday. So I think you can assume that what I've said about 4:00 p.m. on Monday brings you most up to date on a timeline that you're asking me about sometime on Sunday morning. Q But how much consultation with the economic team and the political team had been done before Mr. Summers, Dr. Summers's appearance on the Sunday shows? MR. GIBBS: Well, again, the legal deadline for the bonuses had passed. There was a review and there's an existing review, as the President ordered yesterday. Yes, sir. Q Robert, we understand from your answers here that you don't have knowledge of the exact timeline, but would it be accurate to say that you were blind-sided, that the President was blind-sided by this? MR. GIBBS: No. And I will certainly seek better timeline answers to enumerate the negative answer I just gave you. Q Why wouldn't it be accurate to say that? MR. GIBBS: Because the Secretary obviously took steps last week to lessen the blow of what was both contractually obligated and what had been promised but was not part of a contract that lessened the amount of money that was paid out. Again, the Secretary of Treasury did good work in changing what was potentially out there, and I think obviously he did so in order to protect the American taxpayers. And that's why I think -- that's the basis for me answering that question. AIG | Economy | Legislation | President Obama | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | TARP | Treasury Department | White House Press Corps . Labels: AIG, Economy, Legislation, President Obama, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, TARP, Treasury Department, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:43:00 PM Going Backwards - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/16/09  MR. GIBBS: Jake.Q Did you guys first find out about these bonuses last week? MR. GIBBS: I think that's true, based on what I read in the newspaper. Q But you gave money to AIG two or three weeks ago. How could you not know that they have these millions, hundreds of millions of dollars -- MR. GIBBS: Well, again, Jake, there's -- according to news reports, there's existing contracts, some of which the President -- of which the President has asked the Secretary to examine, going forward. I think you also heard the President speak today about having a resolution authority that gives the government and taxpayers far more flexibility in dealing with the disposition of AIG in a way that gives taxpayers protection and flexibility; a disposition that we don't currently have, but steps that we would like to see taken in order to deal with AIG as a whole. Q But why didn't you attach it to the $30 billion you gave a couple weeks ago? MR. GIBBS: Again, Jake, the -- Q You're looking to retroactively attach it to this new $30 billion. MR. GIBBS: Well, they're looking through contracts to see what can be done to wrest these bonuses from their recipients. Q No, I'm sorry, I don't think -- I don't understand, so maybe I'm just not understanding. But President Obama said in early February when he gave the speech on executive compensation, "These kinds of compensation packages in the midst of this economic crisis isn't just bad taste, it's bad strategy, and I will not tolerate it as President. We're going to be demanding some restraint in exchange for federal aid." Since that time, he gave tens of billions of dollars in federal aid to AIG without demanding restraint. MR. GIBBS: Well, again, Jake, we've got existing relationships, contracts, as I just mentioned, that were negotiated a year ago, assistance that was granted outside of the legal authority prior to the creation of the Troubled Asset Relief Program. The President has asked the administration to go back and look at what remedies are possible to block those bonuses. Q Well, why didn't he do that before? MR. GIBBS: Well, again, the excessive compensation rules that you noted -- and I think somebody asked this at the background briefing that we had -- obviously are prospective based on some limitations that we have in looking backwards. The President has asked Secretary Geithner and members of the administration to exhaust all legal remedies in looking backwards to see what steps could be taken to block these bonuses. Q I know, but since -- and I'm sorry to belabor this point -- but since President Obama gave his speech, you guys gave more money to AIG. Why wasn't it attached to the new money? MR. GIBBS: Because it's -- again, it's part of the -- Q Part of the old contract. MR. GIBBS: Right. It's part of -- Q But you're looking now retroactively to see if you can attach something to that old money? MR. GIBBS: That's what we're looking at. Q Well, why didn't you do it at the time, if you're looking to retroactively do it? MR. GIBBS: The administration is taking the steps today to go back and see what can be done, as Jeff said, to call those bonuses back. Q But, Robert, to follow up on Jake's point, did Secretary Geithner make a mistake by not reviewing these contracts -- they're a year old -- before he cut a new check to AIG? Why didn't he do that? MR. GIBBS: I would certainly ask the Treasury -- I'll ask the Treasury that. But again, to some degree, there are legal instruments and contracts that predate this administration, that predate the legal founding of the TARP program. The President has asked this administration to exhaust all legal avenues to see what can and should be done going backwards. Economy | Obama Administration | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | TARP | Treasury Department | Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner | Wall Street | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Obama Administration, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, TARP, Treasury Department, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 12:20:00 AM You Should Be Working on the Economy - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/13/09 — Friday, March 13, 2009 —  MR. GIBBS: Jake. Q The White House has been critical in the last day or so of -- President Obama yesterday, and Larry Summers today -- of trends of bubble and bust, bubble and bust. When do you guys see this having started? Did this start with the dot.com bubble in the '90s? MR. GIBBS: I think, obviously, the tech bubble would certainly be part of that -- would be part of that model. But I think if you look more recently, with both housing and credit cards, what you saw was statistical economic growth. You saw big growth in the stock market, but at the same time the broad number -- a broad swath of the American public, their incomes actually decreased for the very first time in history during a "economic expansion." That's why the President believes that it's important to make investments in health care, energy independence and education in order to provide a foundation to grow our economy long term in a stable -- with a stable foundation, in a way that doesn't depend on the boom and the bust. Q Just as a quick follow-up, you guys have obviously started a campaign of trying to build more confidence in the economy and in the decisions that you guys have made. Can you just walk us through a little bit how this decision was made -- for the President's new language and Larry Summers' new language, talking about the economy and the investments you guys are making? MR. GIBBS: I think it's important -- the President wanted to, as he I think has done in the beginning of his tenure here and certainly in the campaign, to explain to the American people the choices that we have and the decisions that are being made, where we've started, the challenges that we've gone through to get to the point we're at now, the very complicated and tough decisions that we have to make in order to create jobs, stabilize our financial system, prevent further erosion in the housing market and spread of the home foreclosure crisis. Q Right, but only in the last days has he said things aren't as bad -- things weren't as good as we thought they were a few years ago, and they're not as bad now as we think they are -- you know, which is kind of a change in tone from when he was warning of an economic catastrophe if the stimulus bill didn't pass. MR. GIBBS: Well, I think we've seen some glimmers of hope in terms, as I spoke yesterday, of retail sales. And I think Dr. Summers spoke of the notion that through the recovery we might see progress in terms of consumer spending -- the Recovery Act, I'm sorry. Look, as you note, the President is a -- is a very optimistic person by nature. Q I don't think I noted that. (Laughter.) MR. GIBBS: Well, I will note in your absence -- (laughter) -- that he's a very optimistic person. I think he would tell you that there are many situations that probably -- where things might not always be as bad as they seem or not as good as they may seem. But I think that's why he's decided to make tough decisions, and that's why the argument that he's made over the last few days and Dr. Summers made -- the importance of making these investments. Many people have asked, you know, well, why are you dealing with health care and energy when you should be working on the economy? And I think the President, through this argument, can very clearly demonstrate for people how dealing with many of these problems, including getting us back on that path toward fiscal sustainability, are important not just in the short-term recovery, but laying that foundation for long-term growth. Economy | President Obama | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, President Obama, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:45:00 PM Outlawing Bubbles - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/12/09 — Thursday, March 12, 2009 — MR. GIBBS: He's far more eloquent than I am, so if you're -- Q He phrased it rather interestingly, saying, "We cannot go back to endless cycles of bubble and bust." Does he think the business cycle can be repealed? I mean, I just -- you know, bubbles are one thing, but -- MR. GIBBS: Well, read me the phrase again. Q "We cannot go back to endless cycles of bubbles and bust." Surely there are going to be ups and downs in an economy. MR. GIBBS: Well, right. But again, there -- certainly there are ups and downs. There are ups and down in lots of facets of life. But are those ups and downs controlled by a sustained economic idea that creates jobs of the future, invests in the education in order to produce people to do those jobs of the future, take into account some fiscal restraint and fiscal responsible to ensure that government lending isn't crowding out private investment? But the President will I think take on quite clearly that if -- you know, if -- he does not believe the theory of economic growth through an overheated housing market makes a whole lot of sense. I would posit to you that I've gotten God knows how many questions from up here about the danger of toxic assets that were leveraged by factors of 30 and 40 to 1, surrounding many of the mortgages that -- or some of the mortgages that were contained in an overheated and over-speculated housing market. I don't think there's any doubt about that. Or whether we've seen through any number of statistics -- the President doesn't believe that economic growth is having six credit cards maxed out at $25,000 to $50,000; that that may produce in economic statistics great increases in retail sales or consumer spending, but I don't think any of us here would argue that that is a case for long-term sustained economic growth. I don't think the President is -- I'm not even sure where one would go to repeal the business cycle. Q It's not like they're going to outlaw irrational exuberance or investors making -- MR. GIBBS: No, I don't think it outlaws -- I mean, I don't think we're going to outlaw irrational exuberance. I do believe, though, the President believes that we must make tough choices now in order to put ourselves on a path that presents for the American people the opportunity to grow their economy not on something that will bust in three years, you know; not on something that will see stock prices go through the roof only to have stock prices collapse through the floor in a matter of months. I mean, you know, let's -- the high point of the market recently was October of 2007, right -- 14,000 and some change. Exactly two months before, economists now believe what I think in the end might well be one of the biggest and deepest recessions in our country's history started. I think there's an -- I'm not an economist, but I'm pretty sure it all didn't go to pot in that November. Economy | President Obama | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Wall Street | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, President Obama, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 9:45:00 PM Six Weeks and Six Days - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/9/09 — Monday, March 09, 2009 —  Q Back to Warren Buffett for a second. Understanding what you said and what he said about part of the confusion that people feel is the function of 535 members in Congress, and so on. He did say the President has the most authoritative voice. Does the President bear any responsibility for what Warren Buffett described as confusion and fear --MR. GIBBS: Well, look, I think that Mr. Buffett, and again I -- I think Mr. Buffett is talking about a period of time that has spanned now two administrations, that has watched different policy proposals to deal with different things. But I think Mr. Buffett would agree that -- and in fact, said in not so many words -- but that this problem isn't going to be fixed overnight. We didn't get here -- we didn't get here overnight; the problems that we dealt with starting in sort of early to mid-September of last year didn't start last summer. Many of those problems started years ago. Many of the systemic problems that were rooted in what ultimately failed took place a while ago. Q In terms of communicating a solution or even a sense that we have it well in hand, can you -- any room for improvement there? MR. GIBBS: Well, I think obviously the President would always say there's room for improvement; that the President believes that we have to continue to give people a realistic sense of where this economy is, but also talk about, as he did at the speech to Congress, that we've got to make sure people understand that brighter days are ahead. But I think there's a sense from certain people that -- of either chagrin or surprise -- that in one day less than seven weeks all of the problems that took many years to take hold haven't necessarily been solved. I think if you look -- if you realistically look at what this administration has done in that six weeks and six days, you'll see putting in place a recovery and reinvestment plan that we think will create jobs, put money in taxpayers' pockets, and get money directly out to the states to deal with crushing budget cuts that will impact those that can least afford it; a home foreclosure plan that will begin to address millions of people that have played by the rules, but should they get into further economic trouble, might have problems making their mortgage payment and watch a home foreclosure crisis spread; put in place the building blocks of a financial stability plan through a capital investment program, business and lending initiative that the Secretary announced just last week. And obviously we've started and will continue in Congress and through the G20 to ensure that a regulatory structure is in place to ensure these types of problems never happen again. We've made tremendous progress in getting the pillars, as the President said last week, in place to deal with our economic problems. The recovery will take quite some time, as it's taken quite some time to get into these problems. But the President remains focused each and every day in ensuring that we take the steps to make those decisions and get the economy moving again. Economy | Obama Administration | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Wall Street | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Obama Administration, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 11:20:00 PM Are You Better Off Now Than You Were Four Months Ago? - Air Force One Press Gaggle by Robert Gibbs 3/6/09 — Friday, March 06, 2009 —  Q Can I ask you about the trip today, and then a question about the FDIC? In terms of the trip today, you're going to highlight 25 jobs saved -- and we've lost 651,000, I believe, last month. So, I mean, do you think this makes even a dent in the psyche of the American people? MR. GIBBS: Well, I mean, you know, let's -- I think if -- I think on that scale, you'd never even undertake -- you'd never even undertake any action to seek cuts in wasteful spending unless you saved trillions of dollars with the stroke of one pen. I mean, I think it's a -- you know, I'm sure it's one viewpoint. I think it's a bit cynical to think that the only jobs created or saved today will be the 25 or 27 that the President is going to see in Columbus. I think it demonstrates for the American people that the President has a plan to get the economy moving again, that we're seeing results from that plan, and that the American people -- because they understand this -- know it's going to take us a while to get out of this hole, but that there are brighter days ahead. I'm always amazed -- you know, a week ago we were talking down the economy. This week we're not talking the economy up to the heights of which we -- you know, I mean, there's -- it's a moving set of hurdles. Air Force One | Economy | Obama Administration | Press Gaggle | Robert Gibbs | Unemployment | White House Press Corps Labels: Air Force One, Economy, Obama Administration, Press Gaggle, Robert Gibbs, Unemployment, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 10:52:00 PM Take the Bull by the Tail and Face the Situation - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/4/09 — Thursday, March 05, 2009 — Q Secretary Vilsack, just moments ago, spoke about saving $18 million in savings on modernizing financial systems, $400,000 by canceling a consulting contract. And he spoke very movingly about everybody is tightening their belts in this nature and, therefore, the government needs to do so. You probably know where I'm heading with this. The President is going to sign a bill, the spending bill, which contains $8 billion in earmarks. Democrats in the Senate are now calling for the President to, if not make an effort to have it stripped in the Senate, to veto the bill. Evan Bayh has an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal today. I don't fully understand this argument that this is -- we're moving forward. This bill hasn't even come to the President's desk yet. If you guys are really serious, why not take the bull by the horns and get this stuff out of the omnibus spending bill? MR. GIBBS: Well, let me try again, what we've talked about before. This is the culmination of the legislative business from the previous fiscal year and the previous Congress. The President is greatly concerned, and I think that shows in the efforts that he's taken to illuminate through transparency and accountability wasteful spending and earmarks in legislation. That's why he put his on the Internet. That's why he hasn't asked for any in the past few years. The President believes that we can work with Congress to reduce wasteful spending in the future. Q Why not now? MR. GIBBS: Well, we are -- Q This isn't a legislation -- I guess -- you make it sound as if the legislation is written and it's just waiting for him to sign, and it's not. It's being worked on right now on Capitol Hill. It's in the progress of being assembled. So it's not that he comes to office and this is outstanding business. MR. GIBBS: Well -- well, it is outstanding business in the sense that typically appropriations bills are done before half the fiscal year is over. Q Right, but it's not too late to, like, tell Harry Reid, if you send this to me with this $8 billion --- MR. GIBBS: I think as I said before, Jake, that the President will lay out some very clear objectives on how we move forward. There will be, over the course of the next several years, dozens and dozens of appropriations bills that cross his desk. And we'll change the rules going forward, understanding that we have to deal with last year's business. Congress | Economy | Legislation | Obama Administration | Pork | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | White House Press Corps Labels: Congress, Economy, Legislation, Obama Administration, Pork, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 2:50:00 PM Of Course We Have A Plan; We Just Don't Know What It Is - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 3/3/09 — Wednesday, March 04, 2009 —  Q February 10th, Secretary Geithner came out with his plan to deal with the banks, and there was obviously some negative reaction to that. And at the time we were told, well, this was a broad outline; details are going to be filled in. It's three weeks later, and a lot of analysts on Wall Street continue to say, we don't know where the bottom is because we don't know how many toxic assets are out there. So when are you coming out with more details?MR. GIBBS: Well, but let's complicate the question a little bit. Let's -- because I think you may have seemingly vastly oversimplified that the market on 20-some days ago acted on one piece of information and has followed Jake's trend for the better part of those three weeks in order to get us to where we are yesterday. Q There was a lot of negative reaction to the plan. We could agree on that. MR. GIBBS: We could, and we could also agree on that -- in watching your network I've seen any number of reports about the earnings of different companies. I've seen bank problems in Europe. I've seen bank problems in Eastern Europe. We've seen regulatory failings both here and overseas. I think the larger message of what the President was trying to convey today is that it's also overly simplistic to look at any one piece of information or one group of information that's driving the market in any particular direction. I'd -- Q Okay, so people could agree -- MR. GIBBS: Hold on, let me finish. I think the broad scope of data and information that we're getting denotes the fact that the economy is suffering severe problems. I think that's probably what has driven, in the short term, the market to where it is. And I don't think that's necessarily surprising given the data that we see. I don't -- I think the market is looking at what Mr. Buffett said over the weekend. I think the market is probably looking at the notion that the growth rate in the 4th quarter was vastly different than what we presupposed because we ended December -- we now understand that goods were sitting in warehouses, but not leaving stores. So I think a lot of things are priced into the market. Q We can agree the President can't control all this economic data, especially around the world and other countries. But he does have some control over what his administration is going to do about failing U.S. banks, toxic assets that these banks have on their books. And this administration said at the beginning they were going to deal with that problem. So the question is, putting aside all the other data, what is the administration doing to deal with U.S. banks? MR. GIBBS: Well, I've been asked in recent days about Citi. I was asked yesterday about AIG. As you know, Treasury and others are beginning the process of trying to find out exactly the health of banks given different economic scenarios. The President and his team have developed and passed through Congress a comprehensive recovery plan that is beginning. Tax cuts will start showing up in people's pay checks in April. Again, if you want to take just your time line of three weeks or three and a half weeks, I don't think the American -- I think the American people understand we didn't get into this problem in the beginning of February. So we're not likely to get out of this problem by the end of March. We've got many steps to take, and the administration and the President particularly have taken those steps: a home foreclosure plan that for the very first time deals with people that have played by the rules, but if the economy changes and gets even worse, they may find their selves the next on their block with a home foreclosure sign. So let's take steps to reduce that and make sure that the crisis in home foreclosures doesn't spread. The budget obviously doesn't just look in the short term, but lays out a long-term plan for economic growth. And I would be happy for any number of reasons if this were a three to six week problem. But I think the American people understand that. Q Does it take longer the longer it is for you to come up with a plan, is really my question, because if you keep three weeks, three weeks, then -- MR. GIBBS: Well, I guess our -- we're passing in the night largely because despite my enumeration of the many things that we're doing, you at least have priced into the market with the acceptance of -- Q But you came back to housing and other things, and I understand they're all part of the broader issue. MR. GIBBS: Right. They're all part of the broader issue because, again, as I've said many times from up here, there isn't just one thing that we have to do. There isn't just -- if just passing an $800 billion recovery plan would get the economy going again, I'm sure that would be received quite well here. We'd have more time, probably, on the weekend. But again, there's -- the economy faces many challenges, and the President and the administration are working day and night to address the many challenges that have gotten us to this point, and the many steps that we have to take over the course of the next many months to turn the economy around. And look, let me -- let me look ahead. We have unemployment numbers coming out on Friday. I don't anticipate that they're going to be good. I don't know anything, I'm just surmising. But I don't think that's -- I don't think that speaks to the implementation of the recovery plan. But I do believe and understand, and the President believes that we have taken and are continuing to take the steps that we need to get the economy back on track. Economy | Obama Administration | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Treasury Secretary | Unemployment | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Obama Administration, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Treasury Secretary, Unemployment, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 5:21:00 PM How Many Jobs Did Robin Hood Create - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 2/26/09 — Friday, February 27, 2009 —  Q On jobs, which is the big complaint up on Capitol Hill right now from Republicans, that this plan is a job killer, I mean, the $787 billion plan was all about jobs more than anything else, and now you've got a plan in place that -- how can you possibly tax people making over $250,000 something like $667 billion over the next 10 years and not have a downward effect on jobs? MR. GIBBS: Well, Chip, how did it work in 1994 and 1995 and 1996 and 1997? Q I guess their argument would be, imagine if they didn't have those -- those taxes, how much better it would have been? MR. GIBBS: Isn't it interesting that there's always some little slip? Again, you know -- again, I don't do this by happenstance. There isn't a member of Congress, if they were to file a single taxpayer form, that makes above $200,000 a year. Q Well, Congress. MR. GIBBS: Well –- Q There's a lot of millionaires up there. MR. GIBBS: Well, that's true. But it's on their income. I mean, I think it's interesting, as people listen to those complaining about some aspects of the budget, I think it's just interesting to note -- I think the President was pretty clear on Tuesday -- we're talking about people that earn in excess of a quarter of a million dollars a year. Q And a huge percentage of those people are small business owners. MR. GIBBS: Some of them are, sure. Some of them are big business owners. Some of them are home-run hitters in major league baseball. Some of them run kickoffs back for a living. Some of them are the President of the United States. Q But a lot of them create jobs. MR. GIBBS: Some of them -- certainly, some of them, that's what their job is. But I would reject this overall premise that when we're asking for tax fairness from the American people, that we're -- that this is going to kill jobs. I guess if I follow the logic of the Republicans on Capitol Hill, how do you explain last month's unemployment figures? Current tax rates, 550,000 jobs -- what happened? Q This is a unique moment. (Laughter.) MR. GIBBS: Apparently, it always is. The President believes that he's put forth a budget and a Reinvestment and Recovery Plan that will save and create 3.5 million jobs, get our economy back on track, make the necessary and needed investments for sustained long-term growth in things like health care, education and energy, and do so in a way that's most fair for the American people. And again, I go back to my first thing -- the President ran specifically on the promises that are contained in what he believes is a blueprint and a vision for our future. And that's what the American people -- that's the result they rendered in November. Economy | Obama Administration | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Taxes | Unemployment | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Obama Administration, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Taxes, Unemployment, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 3:31:00 PM Charity Begins With Government - White House Press Briefing by OMB Director Peter Orszag 2/26/09 — Thursday, February 26, 2009 —  Q Peter, for those who are making more than $250,000, I understand that they're going to be limited in terms of the itemized deductions for their -- filing their taxes, including charitable contributions. Considering that at least one-third of charitable organizations last year took a real nosedive, and you have some big names -- the Salvation Army, Goodwill, American Red Cross -- how do you stop the bleeding when it comes to those charitable groups, considering that you're now taking away an incentive to actually contribute?DIRECTOR ORSZAG: Well, let me be very clear. In the recovery act, the President supported -- and contained in the recovery act, there's $100 million to support non-profits and charities as we get through this period of economic difficulty. In addition, the recovery itself will provide a strong boost not only to charities, but to the overall economy and to the people who contribute to charities. But I think the real question as you look out over time is the following: When a middle-income family makes a $1,000 contribution to a charity, they save $150 in their taxes. When Bill Gates makes that same contribution to that same charity, he saves $3,500 in his taxes. All we're saying is we think Bill Gates should get a $2,800 tax break -- still a lot larger than a middle-income family -- rather than the $3,500 one. Q And to the larger point, is there a concern that you have people -- that the wealthier folks who are providing the jobs, who are spending the money, and also contributing to charitable organizations -- that in some ways they are going to start saving, that they’re not going to give, and that they're going to undermine the success or the progress that you're making? DIRECTOR ORSZAG: I really don't think so. I think what drives charitable contributions is overall economic growth, is other motivations. It's -- typically, again, it's not done for a tax incentive, but rather out of benevolence or some other related desire. And furthermore, if you really wanted to get wonky, if you look at all the provisions in the budget, even from a narrow economic perspective, I think you'll see that there's roughly a wash in terms of the financial incentives for giving to charitable contributions -- to charities. Charity | Economy | Obama Administration | Office of Management and Budget | Peter Orszag | Press Briefing | White House Press Corps Labels: Charity, Economy, Obama Administration, Office of Management and Budget, Peter Orszag, Press Briefing, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:44:00 PM Tax Fairness He Can Believe In - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 2/23/09 — Monday, February 23, 2009 —  MR. GIBBS: Jake.Q Without getting ahead of the President, he has made it clear that -- (laughter) -- MR. GIBBS: I'm going to bring him and put him right here, so that I can stand at least two steps behind him. (Laughter.) He, when we do that, won't be taking any questions. So just FYI. Q But he'll just be ahead of you. MR. GIBBS: Slightly. (Laughter.) Q Without doing that, he's made it very clear that at the very least, letting the Bush tax cuts expire is in the game plan. I'm just wondering, there have been other ideas floated out there in terms of tax cuts, whether -- or tax increases, rather, on people who make more than a quarter million dollars a year. If it doesn't make sense to raise taxes this year because of the recession, might it also be problematic for the economy to recover if taxes are raised next year? Would that principle not still apply? MR. GIBBS: Well, I guess it -- some of that depends maybe where we are on the economy. Let's understand where we are in terms of the fiscal -- I'm sorry, in terms of the economic recovery plan. You have one of, if not the largest, tax cut ever enacted in a two-year period, as the President stated this weekend, going into people's paychecks beginning April 1. The President campaigned on a promise to ensure that money would get into people's pockets that had seen their wages decline over the past few years. And he made good on that promise through the recovery plan, and believes that will have a stimulative effect on the economy. The President has also talked about in some form or another letting the tax cuts for the top 1 or so percent either be repealed or expire, because the President believes that after many years of having a tax code that favored the few over the many, that a combination of both the recovery plan and what may or may not be in the budget for future years begins to right the tables a bit on who this tax code is written for and the people that deserve to be part of the benefit now. Q Because -- if I could just follow up -- to be more precise in my question, isn't it true that the people who we're talking about raising their taxes, people who make more than a quarter million dollars a year, whether it's going from 35 to 39.6, or the hedge fund managers going from 15 to 35 or 39.6, or capital gains taxes going from 15 to 20 -- that these are the people who will invest to create the new jobs, and at a time of recession, taking their money and giving it to the government or giving it to other people actually could impede the cause of job growth? MR. GIBBS: Well, I think the President talked about this extensively on the campaign -- Q But that was before the recession became as big as we now see it. MR. GIBBS: I think I would posit that the recession was big at the end of the campaign. Again, I think there's an element first of tax fairness. And I think that -- I think this President understands that there have been many benefits for the few at the expense of a few benefits for the many; that through the recovery plan and in the coming years, the President believes it's important that those that have not seen much in the way of an increase in their paycheck have more money in their pockets. That may require those that shared in great benefits, huge benefits in the tax cuts from 2001 and 2003 -- again, importantly, for those making more than $250,000 a year, I think the top 1 percent of all wage earners in this country -- is fairness that the President believes is important. Economy | President Obama | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Taxes | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, President Obama, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Taxes, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 9:46:00 PM This Time, It's Personal (Video) - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 2/20/09 — Friday, February 20, 2009 — White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs directly attacks CNBC's Rick Santelli and his call for a New Tea Party protest against President Obama's anti-foreclosure plan. Apparently, to answer Rick's question, President Obama was listening and didn't like what he heard. Q On the foreclosure plan, aside from Rush Limbaugh and that cable rant on the floor of the Exchange, there really does appear to be some -- MR. GIBBS: Chuck's network? (Laughter.) Q -- there really does appear to be some anger out there from people who just don't believe the President when he said that only people who acted responsibly are going to be helped here. How can you assure people that you're going to reward only people, only homeowners who acted responsibly? MR. GIBBS: Well, let's go through this, because I do think this is very important. And I've watched Mr. Santelli on cable the past 24 hours or so. I'm not entirely sure where Mr. Santelli lives, or in what house he lives, but the American people are struggling every day to meet their mortgage, stay in their job, pay their bills, to send their kids to school, and to hope that they don't get sick or that somebody they care for gets sick and sends them into bankruptcy. I think we said a few months ago the adage that if it was good for a derivatives trader that it was good for Main Street. I think the verdict is in on that. Here's what this plan will do: For the very first time, this plan helps those who have acted responsibly, played by the rules, and made their mortgage payments. This will help people who aren't in trouble yet keep from getting in trouble. You can't stay in this program unless you continue to make mortgage payments. That's important for Mr. Santelli and millions of Americans to understand. Here's what this plan won't do: It won't help somebody trying to flip a house. It won't bail out an investor looking to make a quick buck. It won't help speculators that were betting on a risky market. And it is not going to help a lender who knowingly made a bad loan. And it is not going to help -- as the President said in Phoenix, it is not going to help somebody who has long ago known they were in a house they couldn't afford. That's why the President was very clear in saying this was not going to stop every person's home from being foreclosed. But Mr. Santelli has argued, I think quite wrongly, that this plan won't help everyone. This plan will help, by the money that's invested in Freddie and Fannie -- will drive down mortgage rates for millions of Americans. The President in his speech was very clear in saying that every American with a mortgage payment should call their lender and see if they can refinance right now. This plan helps people that have been playing by the rules but can't get refinancing, get that refinancing so their home doesn't become foreclosed on. And Mr. Santelli might also know that if you live in a home that's near one that's been foreclosed, your home value has likely dropped about 9 percent, which for the average home is about $20,000. Now, every day when I come out here, I spend a little time reading, studying on the issues, asking people who are smarter than I am questions about those issues. I would encourage him to read the President's plan and understand that it will help millions of people, many of whom he knows. I'd be more than happy to have him come here and read it. I'd be happy to buy him a cup of coffee -- decaf. (Laughter.) Chuck. Q I want to sort of follow up on the criticism that -- MR. GIBBS: Let me do this, too. This is a copy of the President's home affordability plan. It's available on the White House web site, and I would encourage him: download it, hit print, and begin to read it. Q The criticism that's coming on the housing plan is similar to the criticism that came on the bank bailout vote before you came into office and in Phase II, which is there are people who were irresponsible who will be helped -- period. It's going -- that is a fact, that is going to be -- that is going to be -- people are going to use that to say this is not fair. So what do you -- how do you -- you know, how do you justify that? I mean, how do you -- MR. GIBBS: Well, look, there is -- there will be people that made bad decisions that, in some ways, will get help. This plan, though, I think it's important for the American people to understand, was designed to help those that have been responsible. As the President has said, if your neighbor's house is on fire or if several houses are on fire, you don't debate it; you get a hose and try to put the fire out. That's what's most important. This plan will stop the spread of those foreclosures because it addresses those that are -- that potentially could be in trouble but aren't there yet, get the help they need so that the foreclosure sign doesn't go up on their front yard. But I also think it's tremendously important that for people who rant on cable television to be responsible and understand what it is they're talking about. I feel assured that Mr. Santelli doesn't know what he's talking about. CNBC | Economy | Legislation | Press Briefing | Rick Santelli | Robert Gibbs | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Legislation, Press Briefing, Rick Santelli, Robert Gibbs, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 4:56:00 PM "Let's be clear:" Just Kill Me Now - White House Press Briefing with HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan and FDIC Sheila Chairman Bair 2/18/09 — Thursday, February 19, 2009 —  Q You suggested that there would be help for people with non-conforming loans. I thought that there was not.SECRETARY DONOVAN: To be clear, the modification program that is being announced today will allow any servicer who -- whether that loan is a conforming loan with the GSEs, or it is held by a private label security -- any type of loan as long as the servicer and the investor are willing to step up, they have some skin in the game, so to speak, they're willing to bring the payments down to 38 percent what we call DTI -- debt to income ratio -- we will provide incentives. We will split 50/50 the reduction of those payments down from 38 percent to 31 percent. So any loan, whether it's a GSE loan or not, can participate in that program. And those homeowners who are underwater and also can't afford to pay their mortgages can participate. Q -- respect to the lender? SECRETARY DONOVAN: Just to be clear, we do have guidance -- as Secretary Geithner said earlier, we have guidance as part of TARP, that anyone receiving TARP funding must participate in this program. And we have a range of incentives that will make sure that servicers who have not been able to participate before can do so. Let's be clear: One of the problems is these securities that hold many of these loans are so complex -- they've been sliced and diced into so many pieces -- that they are lots of problems for servicers that have a financial incentive to modify, but they haven't been able to do that. So we're going to provide standardized guidance across all the mortgage market that defines what a reasonable modification is. That will provide a lot of comfort to these servicers who have been concerned about lawsuits. That's first of all. Second of all, we're going to provide the incentives that I talked about before, so there's a financial incentive to participate. And third, a program which really Sheila Bair has been a leader on -- we're going to provide this insurance pool -- the $10 billion insurance pool -- to make sure that future price declines aren't a reason for servicers to not participate. Right now, many are afraid if they modify and home prices fall further, that they're going to lose from that. We're going to help ensure against that so we get greater participation, as well. We think the combination of the carrots and the sticks will be effective in getting much greater participation. Sheila, do you want to add on this? MS. BAIR: Yes, I just need to clarify, there's a difference between a conforming loan and a loan under the conforming limit. So the loans, the modification, "do they have to be below the conforming limit?" That doesn't mean they have to be conforming loans. A lot of them are not. A lot of the high-risk mortgages are in these private label securitizations. And I guess to go back also to an earlier question about, well, why pay them for doing something that makes economic sense already. And I can assure you, our hands-on experience when we became conservator of IndyMac and we're dealing with the investors to try to get those loans modified in the servicing portfolio of IndyMac, and there were two key problems. One, is that investors have different interests. If you reduce the interest rate on these loans, some investors get hurt by that, some get help. If you foreclose, some get hurt, some get help. So the economic incentives are misaligned. The servicer has no skin in the game at all, right? So there's inertia there to begin with. The investors are pushing different ways, perhaps threatening lawsuits. So I think what we're trying to do is align economic incentives by saying, if you come this far for us, 38 percent, then we'll help with the interest deduction between 38 and 31. We'll also give you some protection. We know home prices are going down. We know that some of these loans will redefault -- may redefault later and you will have to take a loss because the foreclosure value will be less. So we're going to give you some additional insurance, guarantee against that. Those are the two huge issues that we've heard from investors over and over again. And we think -- it would be nice if it happened voluntarily. We tried voluntary. It didn't work. And we are woefully behind the curve. So I think this program is necessary. I think it does have the right incentives that should get the job done. These modifications, though, absolutely make business sense. At IndyMac, we -- even assuming a 40 percent redefault rate, which is very high, higher than we think -- we're still making $50,000 on average for every loan we modify, just because the value of a performing loan is so much higher than that of a foreclosed home. So this is -- this makes economic sense. It will help the economy. It will help stabilize home prices and prevent us from overshooting, which I think we are in a distinct danger of doing right now. Q It's my understanding that this only applies to first mortgages, so that if you had a second -- a first mortgage and you're not technically underwater with it, but you are with your first and second combined, you're not eligible for assistance, correct? And why not? SECRETARY DONOVAN: That's not correct, actually. We do have one element of the program that says if your total debt, including second lien but also credit card and other debt, is more -- your payments on all that debt is more than 55 percent of your income, then we think you're very unlikely to succeed. And therefore, we're going to require those families to go into counseling to try and reduce their other debts, and then they could become eligible for the program. Q (Inaudible.) SECRETARY DONOVAN: If they want to benefit from the program, we're going to have to do something to reduce their overall debt. What we don't want is to provide a modification that's set up for failure. We want to make sure that we're setting people up to succeed. So if their overall household debt is too high, that's going to be a requirement to be able to participate in the program, if they want to get the -- but on second liens, you are eligible to participate. And what we have generally seen is that the second liens on modifications are not a problem to participation, because no payments are made to the second liens whatsoever under this program. We're going to focus on getting affordability. Their payments have to get down to the 31 percent level. And we will not be making payments to those second liens, because, frankly, they're not -- they don't have a value in this case if the homeowner can't even afford to pay the first mortgage. So no payments will be made. We've been in extensive discussions with the servicing community; we don't believe that's going to be an issue for the program and they will be able to participate. Economy | FDIC | UUD | Press Briefing | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, FDIC, HUD, Press Briefing, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 4:31:00 PM Any Particular Concerns - Air Force One Press Gaggle by Robert Gibbs 2/16/09 NOTE: Due to the incredibly slow and sporadic manner in which the White House Press Office releases press briefing and gaggle transcripts, this entry is just now being posted after a delay of several days. This transcript was only released at about 8pm on 2/18/08, even though the timestamp on the document misleadingly claims "February 16th, 2009 at 1:51 pm". "For Immediate Release" seems to be a relativistic term on these documents and should not be taken seriously.  Q And what about Wall Street worries? Are there any plans -- are there any worries about what Wall Street might do after these reports are given to the administration tomorrow?MR. GIBBS: You know, I don't know of any particular concerns that Wall Street might have over these. Obviously, I think Wall Street and Main Street continue to be concerned about where we are economically. But, again -- I'll paraphrase part of your question, which was to put our economy back on a path toward sustained, long-term economic growth is likely going to require us looking beyond one day's market reaction to anything, in order to get us on that pathway. Air Force One | Economy | Press Gaggle | Robert Gibbs | White House Press Corps Labels: Air Force One, Economy, Press Gaggle, Robert Gibbs, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 12:03:00 AM Because Democrats and Republicans Worked Together (Laughter) - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 2/13/09 — Wednesday, February 18, 2009 —  Q Can I follow up one thought, or try Jennifer's question one more time --MR. GIBBS: Sure. It's allowed. (Laughter.) Q -- looking forward on the Gregg nomination. What can you do differently to make sure this kind of thing doesn't happen again. Does it -- does the White House Counsel's Office need to be more deeply involved? Do they need to ask more questions? I mean, you know, the -- MR. GIBBS: Well, I just -- I'm not entirely sure. You guys ask questions for a living. What might we pose that -- Q Yes, that would be an excellent idea. Get us involved. (Laughter.) MR. GIBBS: "Are you likely within a seven-day period to come to a different conclusion than the one which you're giving the President?" (Laughter.) You know, I don't -- Q Well, most of us thought he might. (Laughter.) MR. GIBBS: I mean, I don't know -- I don't know, maybe -- Q "Are you aware the President is a Democrat?" (Laughter.) MR. GIBBS: You know, the ten best questions I'll certainly get from you all over e-mail, I'll pass on to the Counsel's Office to expand our process. You know, again, I think that -- you know, like I said, it's hard to generalize over individual instances. You know, I mean, there's been a lot of discussion about, even in today's papers, about what does this mean for bipartisanship; is bipartisanship dead; isn't it just futile or silly for the President to reach out to the other side of the aisle? You know, it all seems somewhat silly to me, the arguments. I think if you look at the four -- the almost four weeks of this administration, and even a little bit beforehand because the President had to be -- was involved in talking to senators, including working with Senator Gregg on approving the money for -- the additional $350 billion for financial stability. That was done with Democrats and Republicans. The legislation the President signed to ensure that if a woman works in a factory all her life and is paid less than a man, that that won't stand in a court of law in this country. And that was done with Democrats and Republicans working together, and the President's signature. The expansion of children's health insurance, a very successful program that will now cover an additional 4 million people, was done with bipartisan support, and the President's signature. And I think when the dust finally settles today, whatever time that is, I think you'll see an economic recovery plan that moves forward because Democrats and Republicans worked together in order to get it to the President's desk -- something, as I've said, he'll sign quickly. And then we'll look forward and continue to reach out to Republicans in a way that moves an agenda forward that works best for the American people. The President is not going to -- the President is not going to stop reaching out to Republicans because one Republican he respects decided to change his mind and continue to serve and represent his state in the U.S. Senate. The President will continue to work and reach out to folks to move the agenda of this country forward. Bipartisanship | Congress | Economy | Legislation | Nominees | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | White House Press Corps Labels: Bipartisanship, Congress, Economy, Legislation, Nominees, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 9:22:00 PM Obviously, Eh? - Press Briefing by Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough 2/17/08 NOTE: whitehouse.gov has yet to post the 2/13/09 press briefing after 5 days. That's right five days.  Q Hello, Denis and Bill. One quick question, just to confirm, this is the first -- President Obama's first face-to-face meeting as President with another foreign leader, right?MR. McDONOUGH: That is -- MR. BURTON: As President, but during the transition there was the meeting with Mexican President. Q Yes. And can you please just speak a little bit more, elaborate on the import of Larry Summers and Carole Browner being a part of the delegation? MR. McDONOUGH: Well, you know, the President is obviously, as I said, eager to develop a close, personal working relationship with the Prime Minister. But he also wanted to have some of his key White House staff join the delegation. Obviously, the White House staff are closely coordinating with their agencies here in Washington. But given the strong importance of the economic recovery plan and the investments that the President and Congress have called for in that plan, he thought it would be very important to have Larry along on the delegation to make sure that there is an opportunity to, as I said before, look at the synergies and the opportunities in these two packages, both Canadian package and the President's economic recovery plan. Obviously trade, as I mentioned before, is a piece of that; it's a $1.5 billion trading relationship back and forth every day. And of course as I mentioned with Dr. Browner that given the simple fact that Canada is our largest energy supplier, and given the fact that we share, obviously, a lot of environmental concerns and a lot of geography, and obviously given that we want to begin to prepare for the global efforts that will be undertaken over the course of this year, we wanted to make sure that we hit the ground running with a very important neighbor and ally. Canada | Denis McDonough | Economy | Press Briefing | White House Press Corps Labels: Canada, Denis McDonough, Economy, Press Briefing, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 4:48:00 PM One Measurement - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 2/11/09 — Wednesday, February 11, 2009 —  Q Robert, if I can follow up on Jennifer's question, do you feel -- the President said on Monday night in his press conference Secretary Geithner would unveil details the next day. Do you feel that -- do you feel that it was ready? Was the plan ready? Does the President feel it was ready? And number two, if so, is he pleased with how it was communicated yesterday and how it was rolled out?MR. GIBBS: I was going to say, you're not judging me already, are you? Again, I think there's a -- again, I think there's a tendency to look at simply one measurement of this, and by and large that measurement was a few stock markets. I don't believe -- Q Well, a few stock markets that people all over the country are investing in. MR. GIBBS: I understand, I understand. But what I'm saying is the plan wasn't created, nor do I think it should be judged by a one-day reaction in any of those stock markets. The plan that was outlined was ready. Again, part of what this plan will do will be to consult with those private entities in not just the formation, but the execution of the plan. And those consultations are ongoing. But again, the -- again, I just hesitate to judge the breadth of this and the comprehensiveness of this based on one day's reaction. I don't think that's -- I don't think that's how we judge the health of the financial system and I don't think it should be how one judges this plan. Q Even if you don't -- even if you disregard the fall in the market, there was widespread confusion about the plan, period. Is that a result of poor communication, or is that a result of it not -- just all the details not being there? MR. GIBBS: You know, I would ask you to go back and look at all of the news on this, read beyond the larger font and the bigger, bolder print, and dig deep into many of the things that I outlined that were pointed out as big weaknesses in the previous plan that are addressed by what Secretary Geithner said yesterday -- a plan that's based on transparency and disclosure; something that works with the private markets and understands that the taxpayers alone can't do all of this work; that coordinates among the agencies that are involved; that evaluates the financial health of the system and the individual banks, and does so by greatly expanding a program that we think will help provide credit to families and businesses and to people looking to buy homes right now. I think if you look through this you'll find -- you'll undoubtedly find, as I said, some disappointment by people that had hoped that there would be some large big bank announced that would take up in one fell swoop everything that had been wrong with the system over the course of several years and wipe it away overnight. But I think the President was very clear yesterday in saying there's no easy way out of this. There's no easy way out of this for the country, and there's also no easy way out of this for Wall Street. Economy | Obama Administration | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Treasury Department | Treasury Secretary | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Obama Administration, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Treasury Department, Treasury Secretary, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:58:00 PM The Party Now Is Over - Press Conference by the President 2/9/09 — Tuesday, February 10, 2009 — Q Thank you, Mr. President. In your opening remarks, you talked about that if your plan works the way you want it to work, it's going to increase consumer spending. But isn't consumer spending or overspending how we got into this mess? And if people get money back into their pockets, do you not want them saving it or paying down debt first before they start spending money into the economy? THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, I don't think it's accurate to say that consumer spending got us into this mess. What got us into this mess initially were banks taking exorbitant, wild risks with other people's monies based on shaky assets. And because of the enormous leverage where they had $1 worth of assets and they were betting $30 on that $1, what we had was a crisis in the financial system. That led to a contraction of credit, which in turn meant businesses couldn't make payroll or make inventories, which meant that everybody became uncertain about the future of the economy, so people started making decisions accordingly -- reducing investment, initiated layoffs -- which in turn made things worse. Now, you are making a legitimate point, Chuck, about the fact that our savings rate has declined and this economy has been driven by consumer spending for a very long time -- and that's not going to be sustainable. You know, if all we're doing is spending and we're not making things, then over time other countries are going to get tired of lending us money and eventually the party is going to be over. Well, in fact, the party now is over. Economy | President Obama | Presidential Press Conference | Stimulus Package | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, President Obama, Presidential Press Conference, Stimulus Package, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:43:00 PM A Plan That Folks Agree On - Air Force One Press Gaggle by Robert Gibbs 2/9/09 — Monday, February 09, 2009 —  Q Axelrod pointed out that the President's approval ratings, when you talk about the stimulus, are higher than Congress. Why isn't the President taking more of a leadership role. You just said, the makeup of the bill should be up to the House and the Senate. Why not -- why doesn't the President say, okay, no, no, this is a provision, this is a provision?MR. GIBBS: Well, let me -- let me start by rejecting more or less the premise of your question, that the President isn't taking a leadership role. Q Well, I don't say he wasn't, I said "more of a." MR. GIBBS: Okay. Maybe I misunderstood the question. Q No, I didn't mean to suggest that he wasn't taking a leadership role. Like, why not -- why not exert more about the details of the plan than the House and the Senate? MR. GIBBS: I feel confident that by -- certainly through Tuesday and then hopefully by the end of the week, we can get a plan that folks agree on and get it to his desk. I think you'll see the President continue to exert the type of leadership that the American people are looking for; that you'll see the President highlight for all of Washington the problems that Americans are facing, particularly in Elkhart and next in Fort Myers, and then Thursday in Peoria where, you know, Caterpillar announced layoffs based on a faltering economy. Air Force One | Economy | Legislation | President Obama | Press Gaggle | Robert Gibbs | White House Press Corps Labels: Air Force One, Economy, Legislation, President Obama, Press Gaggle, Robert Gibbs, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 4:24:00 PM The Ways of Washington - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 1/29/09 — Thursday, January 29, 2009 —  MR. GIBBS: Sheryl.Q Robert, something you said earlier struck me. You said that it's going to take longer than 10 days to sort of change the ways of Washington. Does the President believe that the vote in the House was the result of sort of the deep ingrained patterns of the parties voting along party lines, or does he think that it was the result of philosophical differences over whether this bill would in fact work? MR. GIBBS: Well, I think that's in many ways a question to ask those that exercised that vote yesterday. Q Well, no, you're assessing the bill and the vote and the way -- MR. GIBBS: It's hard for me to speak to the mindset of -- either collectively or individually -- members of Congress. The President and his team formulated a proposal that they thought, and a framework and principles, that they thought would put money back in people's pockets and spend money to create jobs. That's what we endeavor to do, and what the process endeavors to do as it moves forward. Q Can I follow on that, though? Q Robert, you're the one that said, "changing the ways of Washington." What did you mean by that? MR. GIBBS: Well, I think there's any number of ways. I mean, obviously we've had a several-day discussion about bipartisanship. We've had -- we've talked about different vote counts. We've talked about nominations and confirmations. And we've seen somebody -- certainly some people in this room seem surprised at the lengths the President will go to to reach out to the other party, regardless of the results that happen on any given day. But that's not going to change the President's desire to do that reaching out, and to try, as I said earlier, figure out a way that even while we disagree we don't have to do it in a way that's disagreeable. Q Well, I guess the question is, doesn't your statement imply that it was politics as usual? If you say, there were no Republicans, it's going to take awhile to change the ways of Washington, doesn't that imply that it was a political move by the Republicans? MR. GIBBS: Again, I'd leave it some to them to figure out motivations. I think we all believe -- Democrat or Republican, Congress or the executive branch -- that we're going to be held accountable to the American people to get something done. Again, whether it's unemployment claims, whether it's GDP numbers, whether it's layoffs, we're in a crisis that requires us acting quickly to get something done. Bipartanship | Congress | Economy | Legislation | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | White House Press Corps Labels: Bipartisanship, Congress, Economy, Legislation, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:14:00 PM Animal House - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 1/27/09  Q At the meeting today Congressman Pence, among others, expressed concern that they had been shutout of this process when it comes to negotiation on Capitol Hill. Does the President think that Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Obey have been bipartisan the way he likes to hold out bipartisanship as a goal? MR. GIBBS: You know, Dick, I have not been in meetings about the stimulus bill. I can only talk most substantively about the viewpoint of the President and his involvement in this. And I think on any number of occasions -- whether it's going up there when he was President-elect, whether it's bringing a group down here last week, whether it's going back up there today -- that the President believes honestly that we can put something together with input from both parties that will most benefit the American people. Q But is he, for want of a better word, leaning on Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Obey and others to be more bipartisan? You're probably not going to get more than a dozen Republican votes tomorrow -- that's hardly bipartisan. MR. GIBBS: You know, I think we've all seen votes in this town where a few Republicans sometimes are hard to come by or a few Democrats are hard to come by. We'll take what we can get tomorrow. I think the most important thing about tomorrow is keeping this process going. Because again, the American people deserve a process that understands the severity of the crisis that they're involved in, not to get involved in some "Animal House"-type food fight on Capitol Hill about what's going to happen up there. I think what's most important is that we move this process along. The President was willing to go up there today and do what he can to help move that process along and get something quickly for the American people. Congress | Economy | Legislation | Press Briefing | Republicans | Robert Gibbs | Stimulus Package | White House Press Corps Labels: Congress, Economy, Legislation, Press Briefing, Republicans, Robert Gibbs, Stimulus Package, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 4:15:00 PM The War on the Economy - White House Press Briefing by Robert Gibbs 1/23/09 — Monday, January 26, 2009 —  Full 1/23/09 Press Briefing Transcript M. Garrett: [Major Garrett, FOX News] President Bush, after 9/11, said the United States and its government was engaged in a war on terror. Is that what this administration calls it, and if not, why? Secondarily, on your point about stimulative, the CBO has said that $219 billion of the $825 billion in the House bill cannot be spent and will not be spent until 2011 at the earliest. How is that…? Press Sec.: Is this the CBO report that came out earlier this week? M. Garrett: Yes. Press Sec.: Okay. M. Garrett: Yes. What is the President's appraisal of that CBO analysis, and what do you know here that the Congressional Budget Office, a neutral observer, doesn't know? Press Sec.: Well, let me outline what we know. M. Garrett: Don't forget the first question. Press Sec.: The first question I think I alluded to some yesterday. Look, I would point you to the words that the President said in his inaugural address about the challenges that we face. On the stimulus package – and I've got a letter that we'll make sure that each of you have that our OMB Director sent to the Senate Budget Committee Chairman, Kent Conrad – we believe, looking at the packages that exist, that 75 percent of the money will be spent out in an 18-month period of time, with great stimulative effect. The CBO report looked at a… only a portion of the legislation and looked at that portion of the legislation before it began the committee process that Jake was talking about – a snapshot in time that's long past. It doesn't reflect increased spend-out rates. The letter that Mr. Orszag sent to Conrad states that the administration will hold the line on ensuring that at least 75 percent of that money is spent out over an 18-month period. And there are things that can be done in the legislation to ensure that that happens. Let me give you an example, just so you know. There's a provision to speed the money that says if in -- I think in the CBO analysis was 120 days on some projects -- if the money is not spent, then that money is basically reshuffled to other projects. They found that the spend-out rate on 120 days was actually less than a spend-out rate on 180 days – right? So that legislation gets tweaked to 180 days, because the CBO determined that that reshuffling of money would delay its spend-out rates. So those tweaks can be made, and have – I think in some cases have been made, to ensure that three-quarters of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act are spent in the first year and a half. That will create jobs; that would get people working again; get the economy moving again. That's what the President set out to do, and that's what this bill does. M. Garrett: If I could follow up, since you mentioned Christine Romer. She has a very substantial body of written work as an economist, assessing what brought the United States out of recession and depression. And in each of those reports, she concluded it was monetary policy that was a driving force in lifting the U.S. economy, not direct government spending. She said that about the Depression and subsequent recessions. What is it about this circumstance that gives you greater confidence than she found, looking at all of those economic circumstances that direct spending can turn the tide? Press Sec.: Well, I'm not an economist and I don't play one on TV, and I won't play one on TV today. Obviously, the Fed and a number of other places have taken a lot of monetary steps that I think many have commented – we have very few of those left. The report that she prepared for the President, based on the package that we were putting together, did show that the plan would create jobs, would stimulate the economy, would make important and necessary investments for our long-term growth. She's confident, the economic team is confident, and most importantly, the President is confident, that this is a package that will help turn our economy around. Things will likely get worse before they get better. But I believe, and the President believes, that Congress has to act quickly to ensure that this package gets on his desk by President's Day recess, so that we can begin turning the economy around. Congressional Budget Office | Economy | Major Garrett | Press Briefing | Robert Gibbs | Stimulus Package | War on Terror | White House Press Corps Labels: Congressional Budget Office, Economy, Major Garrett, Press Briefing, Robert Gibbs, Stimulus Package, War on Terror, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 5:33:00 PM Asking the Tough Questions in Troubled Times - White House Press Briefing by Dana Perino 1/6/09 — Tuesday, January 06, 2009 —  MS. PERINO: Ann. Q Hi. According to a release from Laura Bush's office this morning, there's going to be a set of George W. Bush state china. Any idea why it's being delivered two weeks before he leaves office? MS. PERINO: No time like the present. (Laughter.) I think that it just took a while for them to figure out the design that they wanted. Then it was produced and it has arrived at the White House. And so Mrs. Bush will be happy to share that with everybody soon. Q Do you know anything about it or why they're doing -- because not every President does this kind of thing. MS. PERINO: I haven't seen it yet and I'll let her talk about that. I'll see if I can get some more information. I just know that it has arrived. Q Is it a good expenditure for an administration when the economy is in the kind of state it is? MS. PERINO: I think that it was probably done within the White House budget, but we'll check for you. Q Got pictures of them? What does it look like? MS. PERINO: I'll check with Mrs. Bush's office. I just -- I haven't had the pleasure of seeing it yet. Q Do you know those Obama plates you see on television? (Laughter.) Q Yes, I know, I'm wondering. (Laughter.) Dana Perino | Economy | First Lady | President-Elect Obama | Press Briefing | White House Press Corps Labels: Dana Perino, Economy, First Lady, President-Elect Obama, Press Briefing, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 9:34:00 PM Joe "Absolutely Tanking" Biden - White House Press Briefing by Tony Fratto 12/22/08 — Monday, December 22, 2008 —  MR. FRATTO: Yes, John. Q Joe Biden said yesterday that -- a couple things on the economy. He said the Obama administration will probably inherit the largest deficit in American history, probably more than a trillion dollars, and that's why we need a second stimulus package in the range of $600 billion to $700 billion -- some people are saying more than $700 billion, as you know. Two questions -- MR. FRATTO: I'm sorry, he said that we need a -- Q He said that's why we need a second stimulus package. MR. FRATTO: Because of the size of the deficit? Q Because in the long run, it would bring the deficit down because -- it's sort of Republican thinking, actually. (Laughter.) Do you agree that by January 20th, the deficit could bust a trillion dollars? And secondly, what's the latest thinking on a second stimulus package -- in the administration? MR. FRATTO: Well, I don't think there's any chance of a second stimulus package at the end of this administration in the days that we have remaining. I know that the next administration and congressional leaders are discussing what they intend to do and what their plans are, but it's not something we'll be doing. Look, the size of the budget deficit, whatever the number is, I can't predict whether it's going to be $1 trillion or something less than that. It's going to be large. And it's going to be a very significant number. And I think it's going to reflect two things. One, is the downturn in the economy, and the slowing of receipts coming into the federal government. It's also going to reflect the large increase in spending over the short term to deal with the financial crisis. And on the front end, the $350 billion that have been committed so far, and other funds for the financial crisis are -- they show up on the books as straight expenditures, money going out the door to financial institutions. As we've said, these funds are actually investments in these institutions. Some of them are equity positions and other ways of holding assets in some form that will return back to the taxpayer. So over time, we believe that if it works, and if the financial institutions are as successful as we hope they'll be over time, that it should be, at worst, a wash for the taxpayers and those deficit numbers will come down. Economy | Press Briefing | Tony Fratto | Vice President-Elect Biden | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, Press Briefing, Tony Fratto, Vice President-Elect Biden, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 6:21:00 PM Facing Economic Facts - White House Press Briefing by Scott Stanzel — Friday, December 05, 2008 —  MR. STANZEL: Jim. Q Scott, when you enter a laundry list of things that the President had to deal with, it sounds like you're claiming victimhood, that the administration has had nothing to do with the blowup of our economy. Is that what you're trying to say, or do you admit that -- MR. STANZEL: I said nothing of the sort. It is a statement of fact that those are the challenges that this President has faced. We have faced the largest terrorist attack on our economy ever. We have faced the largest natural disaster in the last hundred years. We have faced the largest crisis in our financial markets in a hundred years. That's statement of fact. The President has taken on those big challenges and taken swift action to address them. So I don't think you can dispute any one of those facts, that they're -- they simply happened. Q But what did the President do that contributed to the current economic blowup? Nothing? MR. STANZEL: Well, the President has been working to address the economic situation for years. The President, I will remind you, put in place tax relief when he inherited a recession at the beginning of his first term. He put in place tax relief, the largest tax relief in a generation, that spurred 52 straight months of job growth. That is a record. That's a statement of fact, as well. The President has put in place policies to try to get our economy moving and try to make sure that people who want to find a job can find a job. So the President has worked hard to make sure that we can take action to keep our economy moving, but many of these problems that we have seen -- in the financial markets, in the housing markets -- are many, many years in the making. Bush Administration | Economy | President Bush | Press Briefing | Scott Stanzel | White House Press Corps Labels: Bush Administration, Economy, President Bush, Press Briefing, Scott Stanzel, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:29:00 PM Banks vs. Automakers - White House Press Briefing by Tony Fratto 11/24/08 — Monday, November 24, 2008 —  MR. FRATTO: Yes, Mark.Q Tony, in Lima over the weekend, President Bush spoke at length about the importance of free markets. Why don't all these bailouts undermine free markets by keeping troubled, distressed companies from failing? MR. FRATTO: Well, not at all. I mean, what these efforts are doing are to prevent the financial system from failing. It's never been about any one particular company. We let thousands of companies fail in this economy every year. It's a -- actually, an important part of a healthy company is to have companies competing against each other, and some of them fail, and the winners win, and that's good. But when you have systemically large companies that can bring down not just the entire U.S. financial system but the global financial system, and have a devastating effect on our broader economy, the government has to step in. And so we have an obligation to preserve that very important part of our economy, and that supports the free market system. Our firms can't get out there and do trade if they don't have trade financing. Firms can't get out there and distribute funds to their -- to companies who distribute products here and around the world if they don't have overnight credit financing. So that part of our economy is critical. We need to keep it in place; we need it to be strong; we need it to fill all of the holes in our economy that need financing in order to be able to do their business in a free and open economy. Q What guarantees do you have that they will do that, in terms of lending? MR. FRATTO: That they will lend? That's the business they're in, and the banks have no -- Q That may be, but they're not doing it. MR. FRATTO: Well, look, I think we're pretty confident in the guidance that we've given to banks to get out there and lend. They actually have been lending. They've had to shore up their balance sheets to make sure that they're in a good position. But banks only make money one way, and that's to be out there lending and making loans. Now, it's a very difficult economy we're in right now, so there's a question of the demand side of people requesting loans from banks also and whether there are good bets out there. We want them to make good business decisions. But banks are only in the business of lending, so they can't be profitable companies going forward unless they are looking for opportunities to lend. Q Why don't we help the automakers? MR. FRATTO: We are helping the automakers -- or at least we have a plan to help the automakers. We had a bipartisan agreement on the floor of Congress -- well, actually, it never made it to the floor because the Democratic leadership decided not to bring it to the floor. But we had a bipartisan agreement that we believe would get bipartisan support. It was for $25 billion in the loan program that would have freed up that money in a way that would support the automakers in their efforts -- to help to support them as they become viable firms, because these are important parts of our manufacturing base. We want to see the automakers succeed. There seems to be some misconception out there that we don't want to help the automakers. We do want to help the automakers. We had a bipartisan agreement to do just that, and we believe that's where those funds should come from. And by the way, the news overnight where -- this was a relatively unexpected effort by Treasury and the Fed. If you had said two weeks ago that they were going to have to take this action for Citibank, I think that would have seemed unlikely. This is a very dynamic situation we're dealing with, and the financial system is still fragile. But that also speaks to the need to preserve the funds in the TARP for their intended purpose. We don't need to be taking funds out of the TARP program for other purposes -- and with respect to the automakers, especially when we have a $25 billion loan program that was specifically set up for their use. Q Well, what's the hang-up? Is it because the money is coming out of the -- MR. FRATTO: That's a question for Congress, Helen. The money is there; we tried to work on both sides of the aisle to design it in a way that the automakers could access it and to help them move forward and be viable. So I would put that question to the Democratic leadership of the Congress. Automobile Industry | Economy | Press Briefing | TARP | Tony Fratto | White House Press Corps Labels: Automobile Industry, Economy, Press Briefing, TARP, Tony Fratto, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 6:33:00 PM TARP Cover for the Auto Industry - White House Press Briefing by Dana Perino 11/17/08 — Monday, November 17, 2008 —  Q You've repeated over the last 10 days your opposition to funding anything for the auto industry out of the TARP program. Are you opposed to Congress amending that so that monies in that program could go to the auto industry? MS. PERINO: I don't think we think it would be necessary to do so when we already have a program with monies, $25 billion, appropriated specifically for the auto industry. The TARP funding is there for financial institutions. It was -- Congress never intended for individual industries to be able to come forward to -- Q And what if they change their mind? MS. PERINO: Well, I think that what they should be able to do is -- look, there's not an appetite in Congress, or in the administration, to open up the TARP funding for individual industries, because once you start down that road, it's a slippery slope to other industries that might say that they need help. But we do have an entire pot of money, $25 billion, that the auto -- that is specifically for the automakers. And we also know that opening up the TARP will not get through the Senate. Therefore, to avoid partisan gridlock, what we are recommending is to work hand in hand on a program that would simply amend the 136 program and help companies that can show long-term viability and a willingness to restructure. Q Would you guys veto? MS. PERINO: I think it's too early to say since we haven't even seen their legislation. It's too early to say. Q Dana, on that viability point, regardless of where the money comes from, whether it's TARP or the Department of Energy, it's still taxpayer money. Is that a good investment? Are the automakers a good investment? MS. PERINO: Well, I think that's another thing to remember, which is that the TARP program was specifically designed to help taxpayers get a return on their investment. This is monies that we are investing into companies. We are providing capital. And it has to be paid back. There is no direct subsidy that we are suggesting in the TARP. The Treasury Department has been making decisions based on what they think will at least make the taxpayers whole, if not help us get a return on that investment. When we're talking about the auto industry, and while we haven't seen the Democrats' proposal yet, it doesn't seem that would be the case, that the taxpayers would actually be paid back. But when we're talking about viability, what we mean is that a company needs to be able to show that they have long-term plans, so that they will be on -- have sound financing, and not have a vicious cycle of getting back into this situation again. One of the reasons that we agreed to go forward with the 136 program was to allow the companies to have access to a stream of funds to help them retool their factories so that they could build more fuel-efficient cars, which is what consumers of today are looking for. But in addition to that, the automakers have over time made some decisions based on their needs for their employees, and some of those decisions might have to be reworked, going forward. So they're going to have to be able to show how they can survive. If you look at their ability to compete worldwide -- we think that our companies can compete, but they're not going to be able to do so unless they make some of these really tough decisions. Q So are you saying they should get rid of pensions or health care provisions? MS. PERINO: It's going to be up to the companies to decide how best to -- how they can best compete in the world and show viability. We're not going to get into dictating that. Q But are you willing to let one or all of these three big automakers go under? MS. PERINO: Our position is that we want these companies to succeed. We have figured out a way to provide them funds so that they are able to do that. And we think that there is a bipartisan path that we could get this done very quickly this week and avoid that. Q But at the same time that you say that, you also are saying that they don't measure up to the viability standard, which -- MS. PERINO: But they might, and they might -- and if they can show that they can have a long-term -- that they have a long-term plan so that they are viable, then that would be taken into consideration. Q And so what is the next move for the administration to, you know, close the gap between you guys and the Democrats? MS. PERINO: Well, we're waiting for them to get back in town. We're waiting -- we haven't even seen their proposal. They've talked sort of around a proposal this week, but until we see it, it's really hard to react to it. And then we'll continue to work with our Republican colleagues as well to see if we can forge an agreement and get something done early this week. Automobile Industry | Congress | Dana Perino | Economy | Press Briefing | TARP | White House Press Corps Labels: Automobile Industry, Congress, Dana Perino, Economy, Press Briefing, TARP, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 6:55:00 PM Helen has a question - White House Press Briefing by Dana Perino 11/12/08 — Wednesday, November 12, 2008 —  Q I think Helen had a question. MS. PERINO: Helen has a question. Q Yes, I do. You say the President is not at fault for the auto industry problem. Do you think he's responsible for a solution? MS. PERINO: Well, I think that he -- Q And also, is there a quid pro quo on the Colombia trade agreement? MS. PERINO: There is absolutely no quid pro quo for that. And I was able to clarify that yesterday, and I was pleased that the President-elect's team clarified that as well. But I think that the President of the United States believes that companies are responsible for finding solutions. However, this is an industry, as I've said before, that's very important to the American people. And there are a lot of regulations that the government has tried to place on these companies over the years. And so Congress and the administration and the companies have an obligation to put their best minds towards trying to find out -- figure out what we can do to the greatest extent possible to try to keep these companies viable. And if we can do that, we certainly will. Q Is he aware that Michigan has 9 percent unemployment? MS. PERINO: Very well aware of it. And he's been very concerned about it. It's one of the reasons that he agreed to the UI extension from -- unemployment insurance extension that we provided in August. And we'll see what the Congress puts forward on that if they come back for a lame duck. Q Is he aware that Detroit won World War II by retooling in a matter of days to a wartime condition? MS. PERINO: He knows how important Detroit is, how -- its history, the industry, and how many people it supports, not just in Detroit, but all across our country, and the people all around the world who work for those corporations. He's very mindful of it. Automobile Industry | Dana Perino | Economy | Helen | President Bush | President-Elect Obama | Press Briefing | Unemployment | White House Press Corps Labels: Automobile Industry, Dana Perino, Economy, Helen, President Bush, President-Elect Obama, Press Briefing, Unemployment, White House Press Secretary >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:56:00 PM Favorability and Power - White House Press Briefing by Dana Perino 10/14/08 — Tuesday, October 14, 2008 —  Q According to some of those who were a part of the banking meeting yesterday, they were not all enthusiastic about signing off on this initially. In the President's dealings with banks, with the allies, with Congress, has he felt any impact related to his relatively low -- historic low job approval rating in the country? Has that had any impact, or been any disadvantage to him?MS. PERINO: The President is focused on leading; he doesn't focus on the approval ratings. And yet -- I wasn't in the meetings yesterday, but I would imagine that there was probably some reluctance to move forward with this, but a willingness to do it, because everyone recognizes that we have to do it in order to protect everybody and to get this economy moving again. So, sure, there's not a soul that wanted to have to do this. But if we're going to do it, we better do it right. And we better implement the legislation in a way that gets it done appropriately. This legislation got passed; this legislation is being implemented. The banks are going to participate in this program, and they have an incentive to get the government out of their business. We'll have a quarterly dividend that comes back to the American taxpayer at a 5 percent rate for the first three years. That jumps to 9 percent after those first three years. And so they have every incentive to work very hard to get their businesses back up to par, and return to normalcy. Q Has the President felt any impact from the poll numbers that are out this week giving him a historically low job approval rating? It hasn't had any impact on his dealing with foreign leaders or with Congress? MS. PERINO: Well, I think that if anybody who saw the statements yesterday by Prime Minister Berlusconi and others, all the conversations he's had, the United States is the one helping to provide the leadership necessary to steer this ship, so that we can all save our economies. That's what this President is focused on. He's not focused on the approval ratings as a lot of the media are. Dana Perino | Economy | Legislation | Polls | President Bush | Press Briefing | White House Press Corps Labels: Dana Perino, Economy, Legislation, Polls, President Bush, Press Briefing, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 7:53:00 PM G7 Pileup - Air Force One Press Gaggle by Dana Perino 10/10/08 — Friday, October 10, 2008 —  Q What is -- what's the President hoping to achieve with the ministers' meeting tomorrow, with the G7 meeting?MS. PERINO: Well, we have been keeping you regularly updated on all the calls and coordination amongst the G7 countries and beyond, because as we said this morning, the President spoke to Prime Minister Rudd, I expect he spoke to President Lula earlier this week, amongst others. The G7 has been working together on a variety of things: sharing information, finding common areas where they can work together on instituting rescues that will address their individual nation's needs, as well as what we need to do as a whole, since we are all so interconnected. So today's meeting at the Treasury Department will allow them to meet face to face, maybe dot some "I's," cross some "T's," and then tomorrow morning the President will have a chance to meet with them. I'm going to let that meeting take place, but I will tell you that the goal of the meeting overall is to continue the good communication and cooperative spirit of trying to find common solutions, while respecting the fact that each nation has individual problems and challenges and needs and ways to address them. Q Dana, has anyone at the White House spoken to Berlusconi or any of his aides about his proposal to close global markets? MS. PERINO: I don't know if you saw an update, but it was retracted. Q Did you guys talk to him about retracting -- MS. PERINO: No, I don't think so. I think that it all happened so fast it was -- Q It wasn't like the White House asked him to retract that or anything like that? MS. PERINO: Not that I'm aware of. I just saw a news report as it came across. I don't know of any of us -- I wasn't involved at all. Q What about the idea of guaranteeing some of the bad debt at the banks? MS. PERINO: This is one of the ideas that Gordon Brown has put forward. What we have said is that with any proposal that's put forward by one of our global partners, that we'll take a look at it and we will review it, but beyond that I don't have any comment on it. Q What about insuring all deposits temporarily at U.S. banks? MS. PERINO: All of those things are questions that the policymakers can take up and think about, discuss. And then once we have -- if we have a decision about moving forward on any of those issues, it will either come out of the Treasury Department or we'll keep you updated. Air Force One | Dana Perino | Economy | G7 | President Bush | Press Gaggle | Treasury Department | Wall Street | White House Press Corps Labels: Air Force One, Dana Perino, Economy, G7, President Bush, Press Gaggle, Treasury Department, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 5:13:00 PM Hit Me Baby One More Time - White House Press Briefing by Dana Perino 10/9/08 — Thursday, October 09, 2008 —  Q Thanks. Does the idea of the federal government taking part ownership in a number of U.S. banks fit with the President's philosophy of free enterprise?MS. PERINO: As the President has said, the radical and bold aggressive steps that we are taking on the economy are not ones that were part of his natural instincts. But when presented with the evidence that the financial crisis about to hit the United States would affect every single America up and down the economic food chain, this President decided that it was important that the government take robust action. That's why we worked with Congress to establish the rescue package. Part of that package includes a broad range of authorities for the Treasury Secretary. What you're referring to, I believe, is capital injections that would actually be investing in banks but not taking them over. Q Not taking them over, but doesn't this idea envision that the government would have part ownership in a number of banks? MS. PERINO: It would include an equity stake, yes. Q And how far along is that idea? MS. PERINO: I would refer you to the Treasury Department for that, but it is a part of the range of authorities that they were given, and this is a dynamic situation. We still have a volatile stock market, and Secretary Paulson is looking at all the different tools to figure out which one should be used at what time and how robustly, and how much money to put into each. He said it's going to take a little bit of time, though, as they implement these -- the rules and regulations that Neel Kashkari is now involved in. So let me refer you over there on specifics for that. Q But that's an idea that the President would be okay with? MS. PERINO: It was a part of the rescue package that the President supported, and it gives the Treasury Secretary a range of possibilities, and investing in banks directly was one of those authorities. And Secretary Paulson can use that authority as he sees fit. Q But given the fact that the markets have not reacted positively so far, or at least not very, wouldn't the President like to see that kind of authority used sooner than later? MS. PERINO: Well, one of the things that the President wants is to make sure that these new authorities are used in the most effective and efficient way possible. They are moving at lightning speed for government-type work in trying to establish how quickly people can get in those positions so that they can work on the reverse auctions that were also a part of the authority. This -- these capital injections are something that Secretary Paulson is actively considering, but I'd have to refer you to him as to when he thinks he'd be able to make the first move. Q And the President -- back over this ground again -- the President doesn't object to this in spite of his free market stance? MS. PERINO: As I -- the President's natural instincts when first presented with these issues was not to have government involvement, but when he realized that it wasn't just a few executives on Wall Street who were going to lose their shirts, but it was possibly everyone in America, and now if you look around the world, everybody is suffering -- the President said the government has the tools and the ability to be able to step in and stem this crisis, and there was no way he was going to stand by and let everyone be hurt by the bad decisions of a few. Dana Perino | Economy | President Bush | Press Briefing | Treasury Department | Wall Street | White House Press Corps Labels: Dana Perino, Economy, President Bush, Press Briefing, Treasury Department, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 5:29:00 PM A Day at the Spa with AIG - White House Press Briefing by Dana Perino 10/8/08 — Wednesday, October 08, 2008 —  Q Is the President following any of the financial hearings that are going on, on the Hill, specifically at AIG executives? When the White House hears about these executives taking a spa vacation, spending thousands of dollars on massages and treatments -- I mean, do they think that there should be any kind of action taken against these executives, considering how much taxpayer money was put into that company to rescue it? MS. PERINO: I don't know how much he's been able to actually watch those. As you know, yesterday we were traveling out to Chantilly, Virginia. But certainly we've seen coverage of it. And I understand why the American people would be outraged -- I am. It's pretty despicable to realize how callous somebody might be as they go through this -- as some might be reacting to this crisis. And the President did not want to move forward on this rescue package to help anybody in the top positions in Wall Street. He was concerned about everybody -- everyday people like you and me in America and people all across this country who have worked so hard to put money into their retirement accounts, to pay their mortgages on time, who have been responsible in the loans that they've taken out. Not everybody has, and there were risky lenders -- lenders who gave people loans that they knew they weren't going to be able to pay, and borrowers who took out loans that they probably knew they didn't have the income in order to pay but thought maybe that eventually that they would. Now, Americans are not the type of people who fault success. When people succeed we like that, we think that that's good, and we aspire to be successful ourselves. But rewarding failure is something that we have a very hard time swallowing. And President Bush has said that his first instinct was absolutely not to go down this road. What he wanted was to make sure that we were asking all the right questions to prevent this financial market collapse and that we take the actions necessary on Capitol Hill, or anywhere else -- at the Fed, or the SEC, wherever we could independently -- to help save the system. But he didn't do that to help top executives and certainly not to help executives go to a spa. President Bush did that in order to try to help everybody save their accounts. Q Should some of that money be taken back from those individuals? Is there a way to do that? MS. PERINO: I don't know how it was all paid for or anything. I just know that I can understand that people would question the judgment of executives who would take that kind of action. AIG | Congressional Hearings | Dana Perino | Economy | President Bush | Press Briefing | Wall Street | White House Press Corps Labels: AIG, Congressional Hearings, Dana Perino, Economy, President Bush, Press Briefing, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 5:10:00 PM Wow, could've had a G8 - White House Press Briefing by Dana Perino 10/7/08 — Tuesday, October 07, 2008 —  MS. PERINO: Wendell. Q As we've dealt with this crisis over the past month and a half or so, the talks -- the international talks have involved the G7, not the G8. Is Moscow, in this regard, paying the price for its overreaction to the Georgia incursion? MS. PERINO: I've not heard that come up, because -- and I don't know all the details; I'd refer you to Treasury about the G7 and the makeup. But usually when they're talking the finance ministers meeting, those have been held at the G7 level, though I think there is some observance or participation at the Russian level, and that will be true this weekend, as well. Q That will be true this weekend as -- because Russia's stock market has lost about half its value this year. They are also suffering in this thing. Do we feel we need them, given they're a huge energy provider for Europe? MS. PERINO: Well, I think that you should go back and -- well, you have to ask Europe that. And I think that obviously energy is an issue. They've been working to try to diversify and develop more supply and different types of supply there in their own hemisphere. But the Russian stock market -- and I'm not an expert in this -- but you could go back -- they didn't just lose value over the past two weeks. They've been losing value since about -- since May -- Q All year. MS. PERINO: -- or maybe all year, but I know that a precipitous drop since May. Again, I don't comment on the daily market movements here, and I can't do it in terms of the Russian ones. But clearly, if you look back in August, if you want to try to make a parallel, when we were dealing with the situation when Russia invaded Georgia, yes, I think that they did -- the world did react negatively to that. Q But I just want to make sure that the -- in the current financial situation, I want to -- the question remains whether Russia is being punished, in effect. MS. PERINO: As I said, I'll have you check with Treasury for the exact list of who all will be here. But it's usually -- when the G7 meets, it's usually just the finance ministers. And that's been the way it's been -- I think we inherited that policy for a while. But I think that the Russian -- I can't remember -- Q So the G8 meets on political matters, the G7 on financial matters? MS. PERINO: I believe so. I don't want to say for sure. But the G7 -- I'm sorry, Treasury will have the list today. But I do think that they send an observer. Dana Perino | Economy | G7 | G8 | Press Briefing | Treasury Department | Wendell Goler | White House Press Corps Labels: Dana Perino, Economy, G7, G8, Press Briefing, Russia, Treasury Department, Wendell Goler, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 3:48:00 PM The Press and Body Language - Press Gaggle by Scott Stanzel 10/6/08 — Monday, October 06, 2008 —  Q If there's any -- going to be any change or update in whether [the President] might speak on the economy today, can you give us a heads up?Q -- we might hear from him when he gets back -- I mean, that's the body language I took from you. MR. STANZEL: You guys are all great at reading body language. Q Is that true? MR. STANZEL: No, it's not. But I think you're all very adept at reading body language. But my body shifting and walking back and forth here was not meant to indicate anything whatsoever, other than I read out this President's schedule as it stands right now. Economy | President Bush | Press Gaggle | Scott Stanzel | White House Press Corps Labels: Economy, President Bush, Press Gaggle, Scott Stanzel, Wall Street, White House Press Corps >> Full Story
Posted by White House Press Corps @ 4:26:00 PM
|
|
