Prez O Remarks on Debt Ceiling Talks

from the inbox:

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON THE STATUS OF EFFORTS TO FIND A BALANCED APPROACH
TO DEFICIT REDUCTION

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

1:02 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. I’m going to make a very brief statement.

I just completed a meeting with all the congressional leaders from both chambers, from both parties, and I have to say that I thought it was a very constructive meeting. People were frank. We discussed the various options available to us. Everybody reconfirmed the importance of completing our work and raising the debt limit ceiling so that the full faith and credit of the United States of America is not impaired.

What we decided was that staffs, as well as leadership, will be working during the weekend, and that I will reconvene congressional leaders here on Sunday with the expectation that, at that point, the parties will at least know where each other’s bottom lines are and will hopefully be in a position to then start engaging in the hard bargaining that’s necessary to get a deal done.

I want to emphasize that nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to. And the parties are still far apart on a wide range of issues. But, again, I thought that all the leaders here came in a spirit of compromise, in a spirit of wanting to solve problems on behalf of the American people. Everybody acknowledged that the issue of our debt and our deficit is something that needs to be tackled now. Everybody acknowledged that in order to do that, Democrats and Republicans are going to be required in each chamber. Everybody acknowledged that we have to get this done before the hard deadline of August 2nd to make sure that America does not default for the first time on its obligations. And everybody acknowledged that there’s going to be pain involved politically on all sides, but our biggest obligation is to make sure that we’re doing the right thing by the American people, creating an environment in which we can grow the economy and make sure that more and more people are being put back to work.

So I want to thank all the leaders. I thought it was a very constructive meeting. And I will be seeing them back here on Sunday. A lot of work will be done between now and then.

END 1:05 P.M. EDT

SEPTA Collects Nearly 18 Tons of Food

from the inbox:http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif

SEPTA’s generous customers and employees once again helped Philabundance fill its shelves with food staples by contributing almost 17.8 tons of food during the Authority’s third annual “Stop Hunger at Your Station” food drive.

“We cannot thank our passengers and employees enough for their continued support of the ‘Stop Hunger at Your Station’ food drive,” said SEPTA General Manager Joseph Casey. “The donations Philabundance receives from our food drive will make a difference to thousands of Delaware Valley residents, especially children.”

From June 6 through June 24, SEPTA collected donations of canned and boxed goods at more than 50 designated stations throughout the transit system. A specially wrapped “Stop Hunger at Your Station” SEPTA bus also toured the region throughout the food drive, collecting items such as peanut butter, jelly, canned pasta and tuna. Monetary donations received during the food drive also counted towards SEPTA’s overall collection total.

Since 2009, SEPTA customers and employees have donated over 46 tons of food to Philabundance. “The need for food assistance is rising across the nine counties we serve,” said Philabundance President and Executive Director Bill Clark. “Philabundances’s food donations are down 41 percent from this time last year, which makes meeting the mounting need for food more daunting than ever. SEPTA’s drive will help us get much-needed food to thousands of people struggling to put food on the table.”

Philabundance is the largest hunger-relief organization in the Delaware Valley. In 2010, Philabundance distributed 21 million pounds of food.

An Easy $4 Billion Annually

Here's a tax loophole that can surely be closed:

Closing the Hedge Fund Manager Loophole by Pat Garafalo, Think Progress, July 6:

One of the tax breaks upon which President Obama has focused is a provision that allows hedge fund managers — who make billions annually — to receive a substantial tax break. This particular tax break, known as the carried-interest loophole, allows hedge fund managers to treat the money they receive from investors as capital gains, subject to a 15 percent tax rate. Though this money is a paycheck received for services, just like a movie star receiving a bonus if her movie does well, it’s treated as investment income.

Garafalo says closing this loophole would save $4 billion a year.

A little over a year ago James Surowiecki wrote about this in the New Yorker ("Special Interest" March 15, 2010)

The Hedge Fund Law Blog presents the other side of the issue.

Prez O Changes Condolence Letter Rules

Several men and women in my extended family have served in the military in some form or another. One of these men was the son of one of my father's wives from a previous marriage(its a complicated genealogy). One morning, instead of putting on his Air Force uniform and going to work, he killed himself. I did not know him well but always admired him; we were the same age but he seemed smarter and savvier than I. His death still bothers me, 20 years later. We had lost touch several years before he died but I always thought that eventually our paths would cross again. I was wrong on that and very dismayed to find out, after his death, that at one point we had lived within an hour of each other.

It is fairly well known that the families of servicemen/women who die in combat receive a letter from the President. It is less well known that if a death is ruled a suicide the family does not receive such a letter. This strikes me as unnecessarily cruel. President Obama has changed that policy:

Statement by the President on Change of Condolence Letter Policy

As Commander in Chief, I am deeply grateful for the service of all our men and women in uniform, and grieve for the loss of those who suffer from the wounds of war - seen and unseen. Since taking office, I’ve been committed to removing the stigma associated with the unseen wounds of war, which is why I’ve worked to expand our mental health budgets, and ensure that all our men and women in uniform receive the care they need.

As a next step and in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the military chain of command, I have also decided to reverse a long-standing policy of not sending condolence letters to the families of service members who commit suicide while deployed to a combat zone. This decision was made after a difficult and exhaustive review of the former policy, and I did not make it lightly. This issue is emotional, painful, and complicated, but these Americans served our nation bravely. They didn’t die because they were weak. And the fact that they didn’t get the help they needed must change. Our men and women in uniform have borne the incredible burden of our wars, and we need to do everything in our power to honor their service, and to help them stay strong for themselves, for their families and for our nation.

The young man I referenced above died stateside so his mother would not have received a presidential letter regardless, but this new policy, or at least removing the stigma, may be a small comfort to families whose loved ones die in a combat zone, regardless of how they die.

Prez O's Twitter Town Hall

from the inbox:

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT IN TWITTER TOWN HALL

East Room
2:04 P.M. EDT

MR. DORSEY: Good afternoon and welcome to the White House. I am Jack Dorsey, from Twitter.

Through more than 200 million tweets per day, people around the world use Twitter to instantly connect to what's most meaningful to them. In every country -- Egypt and Japan, the UK and the United States -- much of this conversation is made up of everyday people engaging in spirited debate about the future of their countries.

Our partners at Salesforce Radian6 studied more than a million tweets, discussing our nation's politics over the recent weeks, and they found that America's financial security to be one of the most actively talked about topics on Twitter. They further found that President Obama's name comes up in more than half of these conversations.

And so today this vibrant discussion comes here to the White House and you get to ask the questions. To participate, just open your web browser and go to askObama.Twitter.com. Neither the President or I know the questions that will be asked today. That decision is driven entirely by the Twitter users.

And so let's get the conversation started. Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody! (Applause.) First of all, everybody can sit down. (Laughter.) It's much easier to tweet from a seated position. (Laughter.)

MR. DORSEY: And I understand you want to start the conversation off with a tweeter yourself.

THE PRESIDENT: I'm going to make history here as the first President to live tweet. So we've got a computer over here. (Types in tweet.)

MR. DORSEY: It's only 140 characters. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: All right, I think I have done this properly. But here's the test.

MR. DORSEY: And you tweeted.

THE PRESIDENT: How about that? Not bad. (Applause.) Thank you. So I think my question will be coming up at some point.

MR. DORSEY: So what was your question? Here it is.

THE PRESIDENT: Here's the question: "In order to reduce the deficit, what costs would you cut and what investments would you keep?"

And the reason I thought this was an important question is, as all of you know, we are going through a spirited debate here in Washington, but it's important to get the whole country involved, in making a determination about what are the programs that can help us grow, can create jobs, improve our education system, maintain our clean air and clean water, and what are those things that are a waste that we shouldn’t be investing in because they're not helping us grow or create jobs or creating new businesses. And that debate is going to be heating up over the next couple of weeks, so I'd love to hear from the American people, see what thoughts they have.

MR. DORSEY: Excellent. Well, first question comes from a curator in New Hampshire. And we have eight curators around the country helping us pick tweets from the crowd so that we can read them to the President.

And this one comes from William Smith: "What mistakes have you made in handling this recession and what would you do differently?"

THE PRESIDENT: That's a terrific question. When I first came into office we were facing the worst recession since the Great Depression. So, looking around this room, it's a pretty young room -- it's certainly the worst recession that we've faced in our lifetimes. And we had to act quickly and make some bold and sometimes difficult decisions.

It was absolutely the right thing to do to put forward a Recovery Act that cut taxes for middle-class folks so they had more money in their pocket to get through the recession. It was the right thing to do to provide assistance to states to make sure that they didn’t have to lay off teachers and cops and firefighters as quickly as they needed to. And it was the right thing to do to try to rebuild our infrastructure and put people back to work building roads and bridges and so forth.

It also was the right thing to do, although a tough decision, to save the auto industry, which is now profitable and gaining market share -- the U.S. auto industry -- for the first time in a very long time.

I think that -- probably two things that I would do differently. One would have been to explain to the American people that it was going to take a while for us to get out of this. I think even I did not realize the magnitude, because most economists didn’t realize the magnitude, of the recession until fairly far into it, maybe two or three months into my presidency where we started realizing that we had lost 4 million jobs before I was even sworn in.

And so I think people may not have been prepared for how long this was going to take and why we were going to have to make some very difficult decisions and choices. And I take responsibility for that, because setting people’s expectations is part of how you end up being able to respond well.

The other area is in the area of housing. I think that the continuing decline in the housing market is something that hasn’t bottomed out as quickly as we expected. And so that’s continued to be a big drag on the economy.

We’ve had to revamp our housing program several times to try to help people stay in their homes and try to start lifting home values up. But of all the things we’ve done, that’s probably been the area that’s been most stubborn to us trying to solve the problem.

MR. DORSEY: Mr. President, 27 percent of our questions are in the jobs category, as you can see from the screen over here. Our next question has to do about jobs and technology. It comes from David: "Tech and knowledge industries are thriving, yet jobs discussion always centers on manufacturing. Why not be realistic about jobs?"

THE PRESIDENT: Well, it’s not an either/or question; it’s a both/and question. We have to be successful at the cutting-edge industries of the future like Twitter. But we also have always been a country that makes stuff. And manufacturing jobs end up having both higher wages typically, and they also have bigger multiplier effects. So one manufacturing job can support a range of other jobs -- suppliers and the restaurant near the plant and so forth. So they end up having a substantial impact on the overall economy.

What we want to focus on is advanced manufacturing that combines new technology, so research and development to figure out how are we going to create the next Twitter, how are we going to create the next Google, how are we going to create the next big thing -- but make sure that production is here.

So it’s great that we have an Apple that’s creating iPods, iPads and designing them and creating the software, but it would be nice if we’re also making the iPads and the iPods here in the United States, because that's some more jobs that people can work at.

And there are going to be a series of decisions that we’ve got to make. Number one, are we investing in research and development in order to emphasize technology? And a lot of that has to come from government. That's how the Internet got formed. That's how GPS got formed. Companies on their own can’t always finance the basic research because they can’t be assured that they’re going to get a return on it.

Number two, we’ve got to drastically improve how we train our workforce and our kids around math and science and technology.

Number three, we’ve got to have a top-notch infrastructure to support advanced manufacturing, and we’ve got to look at sectors where we know this is going to be the future. Something like clean energy, for example. For us not to be the leaders in investing in clean energy manufacturing so that wind turbines and solar panels are not only designed here in the United States but made here in the United States makes absolutely no sense. We’ve got to invest in those areas for us to be successful.

So you can combine high-tech with manufacturing, and then you get the best of all worlds.

MR. DORSEY: You mentioned education. There's a lot of questions coming about education and its impact on the economy. This one in particular is from a curator who is pulling from a student in Ohio, named Dustin: "Higher ed is necessary for a stronger economy, but for some middle-class Americans it’s becoming too expensive. What can be done?"

THE PRESIDENT: Well, here is some good news. We’ve already done something that is very significant, and people may not know. As part of a higher education package that we passed last year, what we were able to do was to take away subsidies that were going to banks for serving as middlemen in the student loan program and funnel that to help young people, through Pell Grants and lower rates on student loans. And so there are millions of students who are getting more affordable student loans and grants as a consequence of the steps that we’ve already taken. This is about tens of billions of dollars' worth of additional federal dollars that were going to banks are now going to students directly.

In addition, what we’ve said is that starting in 2013, young people who are going to college will not have to pay more than 10 percent of their income in repayment. And that obviously helps to relieve the burden on a lot students -- because, look, I’m a guy who had about $60,000 worth of debt when I graduated from law school, and Michelle had $60,000. And so we were paying a bigger amount every month than our mortgage. And we did that for eight, 10 years. So I know how burdensome this can be.

I do think that the universities still have a role in trying to keep their costs down. And I think that it’s important -- even if we've got better student loan programs, more grants, if the costs keep on going up then we'll never have enough money, you'll never get enough help to avoid taking on these huge debts. And so working with university presidents to try to figure out, where can you cut costs -- of course, it may mean that the food in the cafeteria is a little worse and the gym is not as fancy. But I think all of us have to figure out a way to make sure that higher education is accessible for everybody.

One last point -- I know, Twitter, I’m supposed to be short. (Laughter.) But city -- community colleges is a huge, under-utilized resource, where what we want to do is set up a lifelong learning system where you may have gotten your four-year degree, but five years out you decide you want to go into another field or you want to brush up on new technologies that are going to help you advance. We need to create a system where you can conveniently access community colleges that are working with businesses to train for the jobs that actually exist. That’s a huge area where I think we can make a lot of progress.

MR. DORSEY: You mention debt a lot. That’s come up in conversation a lot recently, especially in some of our recent questions, specifically the debt ceiling. And this is formulated in our next question from RenegadeNerd out of Atlanta: "Mr. President, will you issue an executive order to raise the debt ceiling pursuant to Section 4 of the 14th Amendment?"

THE PRESIDENT: Can I just say, RenegadeNerd, that picture is -- captures it all there. (Laughter.) He's got his hand over there, he’s looking kind of confused. (Laughter.)

Let me, as quickly as I can, describe what’s at stake with respect to the debt ceiling. Historically, the United States, whenever it has a deficit, it finances that deficit through the sale of treasuries. And this is a very common practice. Over our lifetimes, typically the government is always running a modest deficit. And Congress is supposed to vote on the amount of debt that Treasury can essentially issue. It’s a pretty esoteric piece of business; typically has not been something that created a lot of controversy.

What’s happening now is, is that Congress is suggesting we may not vote to raise the debt ceiling. If we do not, then the Treasury will run out of money. It will not be able to pay the bills that are owing, and potentially the entire world capital markets could decide, you know what, the full faith and credit of the United States doesn’t mean anything. And so our credit could be downgraded, interest rates could go drastically up, and it could cause a whole new spiral into a second recession, or worse.

So this is something that we shouldn’t be toying with. What Dexter’s question referred to was there are some people who say that under the Constitution, it’s unconstitutional for Congress not to allow Treasury to pay its bills and are suggesting that this should be challenged under the Constitution.

I don’t think we should even get to the constitutional issue. Congress has a responsibility to make sure we pay our bills. We’ve always paid them in the past. The notion that the U.S. is going to default on its debt is just irresponsible. And my expectation is, is that over the next week to two weeks, that Congress, working with the White House, comes up with a deal that solves our deficit, solves our debt problems, and makes sure that our full faith and credit is protected.

MR. DORSEY: So back to jobs. We have a question from New York City about immigrant entrepreneurs: "Immigrant entrepreneurs can build companies and create jobs for U.S. workers. Will you support a startup visa program?"

THE PRESIDENT: What I want to do is make sure that talented people who come to this country to study, to get degrees, and are willing and interested in starting up businesses can do so, as opposed to going back home and starting those businesses over there to compete against the United States and take away U.S. jobs.

So we’re working with the business community as well as the entrepreneurial community to figure out are there ways that we can streamline the visa system so if you are studying here, you’ve got a PhD in computer science or you’ve got a PhD in engineering, and you say I’m ready to invest in the United States, create jobs in the United States, then we are able to say to you, we want you to stay here.

And I think that it is possible for us to deal with this problem. But it’s important for us to look at it more broadly. We’ve got an immigration system that’s broken right now, where too many folks are breaking the law but also our laws make it too hard for talented people to contribute and be part of our society. And we’ve always been a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. And so we need comprehensive immigration reform, part of which would allow entrepreneurs and high-skilled individuals to stay here -- because we want to be attracting that talent here. We don’t want that -- we don’t want to pay for training them here and then having them benefit other countries.

MR. DORSEY: Our next question was just -- was sent just an hour ago and touches on alternative energy and job creation: "Will you focus on promoting alternative energy industries in oil states like Louisiana and Texas?"

THE PRESIDENT: I want to promote alternative energy everywhere, including oil states like Louisiana and Texas. This is something that I’m very proud of and doesn’t get a lot of attention. We made the largest investment in clean energy in our history through the Recovery Act. And so we put forward a range of programs that provided credits and grants to startup companies in areas like creating wind turbines, solar panels.

A great example is advanced battery manufacturing. When I came into office, advanced batteries, which are used, for example, in electric cars, we only accounted for 2 percent of the world market in advanced batteries. And we have quintupled our market share, or even gone further, just over the last two years. And we’re projecting that we can get to 30 to 40 percent of that market. That’s creating jobs all across the Midwest, all across America.

And whoever wins this race on advanced battery manufacturing is probably going to win the race to produce the cars of the 21st century. China is investing in it. Germany is investing in it. We need to be investing in it as well.

MR. DORSEY: I wanted to take a moment and point out the map just behind you. These are tweets coming in, in real time, and these are questions being asked right now. And it flips between the various categories that we’ve determined and also just general askObama questions.

So our next question is coming up on the screen now, from Patrick: “Mr. President, in several states we have seen people lose their collective bargaining rights. Do you have a plan to rectify this?"

THE PRESIDENT: The first thing I want to emphasize is that collective bargaining is the reason why the vast majority of Americans enjoy a minimum wage, enjoy weekends, enjoy overtime. So many things that we take for granted are because workers came together to bargain with their employers.

Now, we live in a very competitive society in the 21st century. And that means in the private sector, labor has to take management into account. If labor is making demands that make management broke and they can’t compete, then that doesn’t do anybody any good.

In the public sector, what is true is that some of the pension plans that have been in place and the health benefits that are in place are so out of proportion with what’s happening in the private sector that a lot of taxpayers start feeling resentful. They say, well, if I don’t have health care where I only have to pay $1 for prescription drugs, why is it that the person whose salary I’m paying has a better deal?

What this means is, is that all of us are going to have to make some adjustments. But the principle of collective bargaining, making sure that people can exercise their rights to be able to join together with other workers and to negotiate and kind of even the bargaining power on either side, that’s something that has to be protected. And we can make these adjustments in a way that are equitable but preserve people’s collective bargaining rights.

So, typically, the challenges against bargaining rights have been taking place at the state level. I don't have direct control over that. But what I can do is to speak out forcefully for the principle that we can make these adjustments that are necessary during these difficult fiscal times, but do it in a way that preserves collective bargaining rights. And certainly at the federal level where I do have influence, I can make sure that we make these adjustments without affecting people’s collective bargaining rights.

I'll give you just one example. We froze federal pay for federal workers for two years. Now, that wasn’t real popular, as you might imagine, among federal workers. On the other hand, we were able to do that precisely because we wanted to prevent layoffs and we wanted to make sure that we sent a signal that everybody is going to have to make some sacrifices, including federal workers.

By the way, people who work in the White House, they’ve had their pay frozen since I came in, our high-wage folks. So they haven’t had a raise in two and a half years, and that's appropriate, because a lot of ordinary folks out there haven’t, either. In fact, they’ve seen their pay cut in some cases.

MR. DORSEY: Mr. President, 6 percent of our questions are coming in about housing, which you can see in the graph behind me. And this one in particular has to do with personal debt and housing: “How will admin work to help underwater homeowners who aren’t behind in payments but are trapped in homes they can’t sell?” From Robin.

THE PRESIDENT: This is a great question. And remember, I mentioned one of our biggest challenges during the course of the last two and a half years has been dealing with a huge burst of the housing bubble.

What's happened is a lot of folks are underwater, meaning their home values went down so steeply and so rapidly that now their mortgage, the amount they owe, is a lot more than the assessed worth of their home. And that obviously burdens a lot of folks. It means if they’re selling, they’ve got to sell at a massive loss that they can’t afford. It means that they don’t feel like they have any assets because the single biggest asset of most Americans is their home.

So what we’ve been trying to do is to work with the issuers of the mortgages, the banks or the service companies, to convince them to work with homeowners who are paying, trying to do the right thing, trying to stay in their homes, to see if they can modify the loans so that their payments are lower, and in some cases, maybe even modify their principal, so that they don’t feel burdened by these huge debts and feel tempted to walk away from homes that actually they love and where they’re raising their families.

We’ve made some progress. We have, through the programs that we set up here, have probably seen several million home modifications either directly because we had control of the loan process, or because the private sector followed suit. But it’s not enough. And so we’re going back to the drawing board, talking to banks, try to put some pressure on them to work with people who have mortgages to see if we can make further adjustments, modify loans more quickly, and also see if there may be circumstances where reducing principal is appropriate.

MR. DORSEY: And our next question comes from someone you may know. This is Speaker Boehner.

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, there you go. (Laughter.)

MR. DORSEY: “After embarking on a record spending binge that left us deeper in debt, where are the jobs?” And I want to note that these characters are his fault. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: First of all --

MR. DORSEY: Not his fault, not his fault.

THE PRESIDENT: -- John obviously needs to work on his typing skills. (Laughter.) Well, look, obviously John is the Speaker of the House, he’s a Republican, and so this is a slightly skewed question. (Laughter.) But what he’s right about is that we have not seen fast enough job growth relative to the need. I mean, we lost, as I said, 4 million jobs before I took office, before I was sworn in. About 4 million jobs were lost in the few months right after I took office before our economic policies had a chance to take any effect.

And over the last 15 months, we’ve actually seen two million jobs created in the private sector. And so we’re each month seeing growth in jobs, But when you’ve got a 8 million dollar -- 8-million-job hole and you’re only filling it 100,000-200,000 jobs at a time each month, obviously that’s way too long for a lot of folks who are still out of work.

There are a couple of things that we can continue to do. I actually worked with Speaker Boehner to pass a payroll tax cut in December that put an extra $1,000 in the pockets of almost every single American. That means they’re spending money. That means that businesses have customers. And that has helped improve overall growth.

We have provided at least 16 tax cuts to small businesses who have needed a lot of help and have been struggling, including, for example, saying zero capital gains taxes on startups -- because our attitude is we want to encourage new companies, young entrepreneurs, to get out there, start their business, without feeling like if they’re successful in the first couple of years that somehow they have to pay taxes, as opposed to putting that money back into their business.

So we’ve been able to cooperate with Republicans on a range of these issues. There are some areas where the Republicans have been more resistant in cooperating, even though I think most objective observers think it’s the right thing to do. I’ll give you a specific example.

It’s estimated that we have about $2 trillion worth of infrastructure that needs to be rebuilt. Roads, bridges, sewer lines, water mains; our air traffic control system doesn’t make sense. We don’t have the kind of electric grid that’s smart, meaning it doesn’t waste a lot of energy in transmission. Our broadband system is slower than a lot of other countries.

For us to move forward on a major infrastructure initiative where we’re putting people to work right now -- including construction workers who were disproportionately unemployed when the housing bubble went bust -- to put them to work rebuilding America at a time when interest rates are very low, contractors are looking for work, and the need is there, that is something that could make a huge, positive impact on the economy overall. And it’s an example of making an investment now that ends up having huge payoffs down the road.

We haven’t gotten the kind of cooperation that I’d like to see on some of those ideas and initiatives. But I’m just going to keep on trying and eventually I’m sure the Speaker will see the light. (Laughter.)

MR. DORSEY: Speaking of startups, there’s a ton of questions about small businesses and how they affect job creation. This one comes from Neal: “Small biz create jobs. What incentives are you willing to support to improve small business growth?”

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I just mentioned some of the tax breaks that we’ve provided not only to small businesses, but also in some cases were provided big businesses. For example, if they’re making investments in plants and equipment this year, they can fully write down those costs, take -- essentially depreciate all those costs this year and that saves them a pretty big tax bill. So we’re already initiating a bunch of steps.

The biggest challenge that I hear from small businesses right now actually has to do with financing, because a lot of small businesses got their financing from community banks. Typically, they’re not getting them from the big Wall Street banks, but they’re getting them from their various regional banks in their communities. A lot of those banks were pretty over-extended in the commercial real estate market, which has been hammered. A lot of them are still digging themselves out of bad loans that they made that were shown to be bad during the recession.

And so, what we’ve tried to do is get the Small Business Administration, the federal agency that helps small businesses, to step in and to provide more financing -- waiving fees, seeing if we can lower interest rates in some cases, making sure that the threshold for companies that qualify for loans are more generous. And that’s helped a lot of small businesses all across the country. And this is another example of where, working with Congress, my hope is, is that we can continue to provide these tax incentives and maybe do even a little bit more.

Q Our next question was tweeted less than five minutes ago and comes to us from Craig: “My question is, can you give companies a tax break if they hire an honorable discharged veteran?”

THE PRESIDENT: This is something that I’ve been talking a lot about internally. We’ve got all these young people coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan; have made incredible sacrifices; have taken on incredible responsibilities. You see some 23-year-old who's leading a platoon in hugely dangerous circumstances, making decisions, operating complex technologies. These are folks who can perform. But, unfortunately, what we’re seeing is that a lot of these young veterans have a higher unemployment rate than people who didn’t serve. And that makes no sense.

So what we’d like to do is potentially combine a tax credit for a company that hires veterans with a campaign to have private companies step up and do the right thing and hire more veterans. And one of the things that we’ve done is internally in the federal government we have made a huge emphasis on ramping up our outreach to veterans and the hiring of veterans, and this has been a top priority of mine. The notion that these guys who are sacrificing for our freedom and our security end up coming home and not being able to find a job I think is unacceptable.

MR. DORSEY: Mr. President, this next question comes from someone else you may recognize. And what's interesting about this question, it was heavily retweeted and voted up by our userbase. This comes from NickKristof: “Was it a mistake to fail to get Republicans to commit to raise the debt ceiling at the same time tax cuts were extended?”

THE PRESIDENT: Nicholas is a great columnist. But I have to tell you the assumption of the question is, is that I was going to be able to get them to commit to raising the debt ceiling.

In December, we were in what was called the lame duck session. The Republicans knew that they were going to be coming in as the majority. We only had a few short weeks to deal with a lot of complicated issues, including repealing "don't ask, don't tell," dealing with a START treaty to reduce nuclear weapons, and come to terms with a budget. And what we were able to do was negotiate a package where we agreed to do something that we didn’t like but that the Republicans badly wanted, which is to extend the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy for another two years.

In exchange, we were able to get this payroll tax that put $1,000 -- tax cut that put $1,000 in the pockets of every American, which would help economic growth and jobs. We were also able to get unemployment insurance extended for the millions of Americans out there who are still out of work and whose benefits were about to run out. And that was a much better deal than I think a lot of people expected.

It would have been great if we were able to also settle this issue of the debt ceiling at that time. That wasn’t the deal that was available. But here’s the more basic point: Never in our history has the United States defaulted on its debt. The debt ceiling should not be something that is used as a gun against the heads of the American people to extract tax breaks for corporate jet owners, or oil and gas companies that are making billions of dollars because the price of gasoline has gone up so high.

I’m happy to have those debates. I think the American people are on my side on this. What we need to do is to have a balanced approach where everything is on the table. We need to reduce corporate loopholes. We need to reduce discretionary spending on programs that aren’t working. We need to reduce defense spending. Everything has -- we need to look at entitlements, and we have to say, how do we protect and preserve Medicare and Social Security for not just this generation but also future generations. And that’s going to require some modifications, even as we maintain its basic structure.

So what I’m hoping to see over the next couple of weeks is people put their dogmas aside, their sacred cows aside; they come together and they say, here’s a sensible approach that reduces our deficit, makes sure that government is spending within its means, but also continues to make investments in education, in clean energy, and basic research that are going to preserve our competitive advantage going forward.

MR. DORSEY: So speaking of taxes, our next question is coming from us -- from Alabama, from Lane: "What changes to the tax system do you think are necessary to help solve the deficit problem and for the system to be fair?"

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that, first of all, it’s important for people to realize that since I’ve been in office I’ve cut taxes for middle-class families, repeatedly. The Recovery Act cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. The payroll tax cut that we passed in December put an extra thousand dollars in the pockets of every family in America.

And so we actually now have the lowest tax rates since the 1950s. Our tax rates are lower now than they were under Ronald Reagan. They’re lower than they were under George Bush -- senior or George Bush, junior. They’re lower than they were under Bill Clinton.

The question is how do we pay for the things that we all think are important and how do we make sure that the tax system is equitable? And what I’ve said is that in addition to eliminating a whole bunch of corporate loopholes that are just not fair -- the notion that corporate jets should get a better deal than commercial jets, or the notion that oil and gas companies that made tens of billions of dollars per quarter need an additional break to give them an incentive to go drill for oil -- that doesn’t make sense.

But what I’ve also said is people like me who have been incredibly fortunate, mainly because a lot of folks bought my book -- (laughter) -- for me to be able to go back to the tax rate that existed under Bill Clinton, to pay a couple of extra percentage points so that I can make sure that seniors still have Medicare or kids still have Head Start, that makes sense to me. And, Jack, we haven’t talked about this before, but I’m assuming it makes sense to you, given Twitter has done pretty well. (Laughter.)

I think that for us to say that millionaires and billionaires can go back to the tax rate that existed when Bill Clinton was President, that doesn’t affect middle-class families who are having a tough time and haven’t seen their incomes go up. It does mean that those who are in the top 1-2 percent, who have seen their incomes go up much more quickly than anybody else, pays a little bit more in order to make sure that we can make the basic investments that grow this country -- that’s not an unreasonable position to take. And the vast majority of Americans agree with me on that.

That doesn’t mean that we can just continue spending anything we want. We’re still going to have to make some tough decisions about defense spending, or even some programs that I like but we may not need. But we can’t close the deficit and debt just by cutting things like Head Start or Medicare. That can’t be an equitable solution to solving the problem. And then, we say to millionaires and billionaires, you don’t have to do anything. I don’t want a $200,000 tax break if it means that some senior is going to have to pay $6,000 more for their Medicare that they don’t have, or a bunch of kids are going to be kicked off of Head Start and aren’t going to get the basics that they need in order to succeed in our society. I don’t think that’s good for me; I don’t think it’s good for the country.

MR. DORSEY: So we have a follow-up question to your answer about homeowners being underwater. And this one came in under 10 minutes ago from Shnaps: "Is free-market an option? Obama on homeowners underwater: have made some progress, but plus needed looking at options."

THE PRESIDENT: Well, when Shnaps -- (laughter) -- when Shnaps talks about free market options, I mean, keep in mind that most of this is going to be a function of the market slowly improving because people start having more confidence in the economy; more people decide, you know what, the housing market has kind of bottomed out, now is the time to buy. They start buying. That starts slowly lifting up prices, and you get a virtuous cycle going on.

So a lot of this is going to be determined by how well the overall economy does: Do people feel more confident about jobs? Do they feel more confident that they’re going to be able to make their mortgage? And given the size of the housing market, no federal program is going to be able to solve the housing problem. Most of this is going to be free market.

The one thing that we can do it make sure that for homeowners who have been responsible, didn’t buy more house than they could afford, had some tough luck because they happened to buy at the top of the market, can afford to continue to pay for that house, can afford their current mortgage, but need some relief, given the drop in value -- that we try to match them up with bankers so that each side ends up winning. The banker says, you know, I’m going to be better off than if this house is foreclosed upon and I have to sell it at a fire sale. The mortgage owner is able to stay in their home, but still pay what’s owed.

And I think that that kind of adjustment and negotiation process is tough. It’s difficult partly because a lot of banks these days don’t hold mortgages. They were all sold to Wall Street and were sliced and diced in these complex financial transactions. So sorting through who owns what can be very complicated. And as you know, some of the banks didn’t do a very good job on filing some of their papers on these foreclosure actions, and so there’s been litigation around that.

But the bottom line is we should be able to make some progress on helping some people, understanding that some folks just bought more home than they could afford and probably they’re going to be better off renting.

MR. DORSEY: So 10 percent of our questions now are about education, and this one was surfaced from our curator in California by Marcia: “Public education here in California is falling apart, not graduating enough skilled workers or smart citizens. Privatization looming?”

THE PRESIDENT: Look, when America was making a transition from an agricultural society to an industrial society, we as a country made a decision that we were going to have public high schools that would upgrade the skills of young people as they were leaving the farms and start participating in a more complex industrial economy. When my grandfather’s generation came back from World War II, we made a decision that we were going to have a GI Bill that would send these young people to college because we figured that would help advance our economy.

Every time we’ve made a public investment in education, it has paid off many times over. For us now to give short shrift to education when the world is more complex than ever, and it’s a knowledge-based society and companies locate based on whether they’ve got skilled workforces or not, that makes no sense.

And so we’ve got to get our priorities straight here. It is important for us to have a healthy business climate, to try to keep taxes low, to make sure that we’re not spending on things that don’t work. It’s important that we get a good bang for the buck in education. And so my administration has pushed more reform more vigorously across the country through things like Race to the Top than most previous administrations have been able to accomplish. So we don’t just need more money; we need more reform.

But we do have to pay for good teachers. Young, talented people aren’t going to go into teaching if they’re getting paid a poverty wage. We do have to make sure that buildings aren’t crumbling. It's pretty hard for kids to concentrate if there are leaks and it’s cold and there are rats running around in their schools. And that’s true in a lot of schools around the country.

We do have to make sure that there are computers in a computer age inside classrooms, and that they work and that there’s Internets that are actually -- there are Internet connections that actually function.

And I think that those states that are going to do well and those countries that do well are the ones that are going to continue to be committed to making education a priority.

MR. DORSEY: We have another follow-up sent about 10 minutes ago in response to your answer on Vietnam vets. From Brendan: “We definitely need to get more vets into jobs, but when are we going to support the troops by cutting oil dependence?”

THE PRESIDENT: Reducing our dependence on oil is good for our economy, it’s good for our security, and it’s good for our planet -- so it’s a "three-fer." And we have not had a serious energy policy for decades. Every President talks about it; we don’t get it done.

Now, I’d like to see robust legislation in Congress that actually took some steps to reduce oil dependency. We’re not going to be able to replace oil overnight. Even if we are going full-throttle on clean energy solutions like solar and wind and biodiesel, we’re going to need oil for some time. But if we had a goal where we’re just reducing our dependence on oil each year in a staggered set of steps, it would save consumers in their pocketbook; it would make our businesses more efficient and less subject to the whims of the spot oil market; it would make us less vulnerable to the kinds of disruptions that have occurred because of what happened in the Middle East this spring; and it would drastically cut down on our carbon resources.

So what I -- unfortunately, we have not seen a sense of urgency coming out of Congress over the last several months on this issue. Most of the rhetoric has been about, let’s produce more. Well, we can produce more, and I’m committed to that, but the fact is, we only have 2 to 3 percent of the world’s oil reserves; we use 25 percent of the world’s oil. We can’t drill our way out of this problem.

What we can do that we’ve already done administratively is increase fuel-efficiency standards on cars, just to take one example. That will save us millions of barrels of oil, just by using existing technologies and saying to car companies, you can do better than 10 miles a gallon or 15 miles a gallon. And you’re starting to see Detroit respond. U.S. car companies have figured out, you know what, if we produce high-quality electric vehicles, if we produce high-quality low gas -- or high gas mileage vehicles, those will sell.

And we’re actually starting to see market share increase for American cars in subcompact and compact cars for the first time in many years. And that’s partly because we increased fuel-efficiency standards through an administrative agreement. It’s also because, as part of the deal to bail out the oil companies, we said to them, start focusing on the cars of the future instead of looking at big gas guzzlers of the past.

MR. DORSEY: So all of our questions now are coming in real time -- this one less than 10 minutes ago, and surfaced from a curator: "So will you raise taxes on the middle class at least to President George W. Bush levels?"

THE PRESIDENT: No, what we’ve said is let’s make permanent the Bush tax cuts for low and moderate income folks -- people in -- for the 98 percent of people who, frankly, have not seen their wages go up or their incomes go up over the last decade. They don’t have a lot of room; they’re already struggling to meet the rising cost of health care and education and gas prices and food prices.

If all we do is just go back to the pre-Bush tax cut rates for the top income brackets, for millionaires and billionaires, that would raise hundreds of billions of dollars. And if you combine it with the cuts we’ve already proposed, we could solve our deficit and our debt problems.

This is not something that requires radical solutions. It requires some smart, common-sense, balanced approaches. I think that’s what the American people are looking for and that’s what I’ve proposed. And that’s what I’m going to keep on trying to bring the parties together to agree to, is a balanced approach that has more cuts than revenue, but has some revenue, and that revenue should come from the people who can most afford it.

Q So a slight deviation from the economy -- we have a lot of questions, and this will be our last before we start reading some responses to your question -- about the space program. And this one from Ron: "Now that the space shuttle is gone, where does America stand in space exploration?"

THE PRESIDENT: We are still a leader in space exploration. But, frankly, I have been pushing NASA to revamp its vision. The shuttle did some extraordinary work in low-orbit experiments, the International Space Station, moving cargo. It was an extraordinary accomplishment and we’re very proud of the work that it did. But now what we need is that next technological breakthrough.

We’re still using the same models for space travel that we used with the Apollo program 30, 40 years ago. And so what we’ve said is, rather than keep on doing the same thing, let’s invest in basic research around new technologies that can get us places faster, allow human space flight to last longer.

And what you’re seeing now is NASA I think redefining its mission. And we’ve set a goal to let’s ultimately get to Mars. A good pit stop is an asteroid. I haven’t actually -- we haven’t identified the actual asteroid yet, in case people are wondering. (Laughter.) But the point is, let’s start stretching the boundaries so we’re not doing the same thing over and over again, but rather let’s start thinking about what’s the next horizon, what’s the next frontier out there.

But in order to do that, we’re actually going to need some technological breakthroughs that we don’t have yet. And what we can do is for some of this low-orbit stuff, some of the more routine space travel -- obviously no space travel is routine, but it could become more routine over time -- let’s allow the private sector to get in so that they can, for example, send these low-Earth orbit vehicles into space and we may be able to achieve a point in time where those of you who are just dying to go into space, you can buy a ticket, and a private carrier can potentially take you up there, while the government focuses on the big breakthroughs that require much larger investments and involve much greater risk.

MR. DORSEY: So, Mr. President, we received a lot of responses to your question over the last hour. And we wanted to go through seven of them that we picked out and just spend some time giving feedback on each. This one from Brian: "Cut defense contracting, end war on drugs, eliminate agribiz and big oil subsidies, invest in public campaign financing."

THE PRESIDENT: Well, that’s not a bad list. (Laughter.) The defense contracting is something we’re already making progress on.

I think with respect to the war on drugs, what we’ve always said is that investing in prevention, reducing demand, is going to be the most cost-effective thing that we can do. We still have to interdict the big drug kingpins and we still have to enforce our drug laws. But making sure that we’re spending more on prevention and treatment can make a huge difference.

With respect to some of these big agribusiness and big oil subsidies, those are the examples of the kinds of loopholes we can close. And public campaign financing is something that I’ve supported in the past. There is no doubt that money has an impact on what happens here in Washington. And the more we can reduce money’s impact on Washington, the better off we’re going to be.

MR. DORSEY: Our next response from Elizabeth in Chicago: “Stop giving money to countries that waste it -- Pakistan. Keep military, share the wealth between branches, and don’t cut education.”

THE PRESIDENT: You know, the one thing I would say is, on the notion of giving money to countries that waste it -- and Pakistan is listed there -- I think it’s important for people to know that foreign aid accounts for less than 2 percent of our budget. And if you defined it just narrowly as the kind of foreign aid to help feed people and what we think of classically as foreign aid, it’s probably closer to 1 percent.

So sometimes people have an exaggerated sense that we spend 25 percent of the federal budget on foreign aid. It’s a tiny amount that has a big impact. And I think America, to be a leader in the world, to have influence, to help stabilize countries and create opportunity for people so that they don’t breed terrorists or create huge refugee flows and so forth, it’s smart for us to make a very modest investment in foreign aid. It’s a force multiplier and it’s something that even in tough fiscal times America needs to continue to do as part of our role as a global leader.

MR. DORSEY: This next one is pretty simple, from Daniel: “We need to raise taxes, period.” (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: As I said before, if wealthy individuals are willing to simply go back to the rates that existed back in the 1990s when rich people were doing very well -- it’s not like they were poor -- and by the way, that’s when we saw the highest job growth rates and that’s when we saw the highest -- the greatest reduction in poverty, and that’s when we saw businesses very profitable -- if the wealthiest among us -- and I include myself in this category -- are willing to give up a little bit more, then we can solve this problem. It does not take a lot.

And I just have to say, when people say, job-killing tax increases, that’s what Obama is proposing, we’re not going to -- you’re entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. And the facts are that a modest increase for wealthy individuals is not shown to have an adverse impact on job growth.

I mean, we can test the two theories. You had what happened during the ‘90s -- right? Taxes for wealthy individuals were somewhat higher, businesses boomed, the economy boomed, great job growth. And then the 2000s, when taxes were cut on wealthy individuals, jobs didn’t grow as fast, businesses didn’t grow as fast. I mean, it’s not like we haven’t tried what these other folks are pitching. It didn’t work. And we should go with what works.

MR. DORSEY: So our next response -- we have about nine minutes left and four more responses -- this one from Tammy: “Cut military spending on oil subsidies and keep education investments.”

THE PRESIDENT: I agree with this. The one thing I’ll say about military spending -- we’ve ended the war in Iraq, our combat mission there, and our -- all our troops are slated to be out by the end of this year. We’ve already removed 100,000. I announced that we were going to begin drawing down troops in Afghanistan and pivot to a transition process where Afghans are taking more responsibility for their defense.

But we have to do all of this in a fairly gradual way. We can’t simply lop off 25 percent off the defense budget overnight. We have to think about all the obligations we have to our current troops who are in the field, and making sure they’re properly equipped and safe. We’ve got to make sure that we are meeting our commitments for those veterans who are coming home. We’ve got to make sure that -- in some cases, we’ve got outdated equipment that needs to be replaced.

And so I’m committed to reducing the defense budget, but as Commander-in-Chief, one of the things that we have to do is make sure that we do it in a thoughtful way that’s guided by our security and our strategic needs. And I think we can accomplish that. And the nice thing about the defense budget is it’s so big, it’s so huge, that a 1 percent reduction is the equivalent of the education budget. Not -- I’m exaggerating, but it’s so big that you can make relatively modest changes to defense that end up giving you a lot of head room to fund things like basic research or student loans or things like that.

Q Our next response from southwest Ohio, Mostlymoderate: “Cut subsidies to industries which are no longer in crisis or are unsuccessful, cotton, oil, corn subsidies from ethanol.”

THE PRESIDENT: Well, there’s been a interesting debate taking place in Congress recently. I’m a big supporter of biofuels. But one of the things that's become clear is, is that we need to accelerate our basic research in ethanol and other biofuels that are made from things like woodchips and algae as opposed to just focusing on corn, which is probably the least efficient energy producer of these various other approaches.

And so I think that it’s important for even those folks in farm states who traditionally have been strong supporters of ethanol to examine are we, in fact, going after the cutting-edge biodiesel and ethanol approaches that allow, for example, Brazil to run about a third of its transportation system on biofuels. Now, they get it from sugar cane and it’s a more efficient conversion process than corn-based ethanol. And so us doing more basic research in finding better ways to do the same concept I think is the right way to go.

Q I believe you addressed this next one, so we’re going to skip past it.

THE PRESIDENT: I did.

Q But from Ryan: “I would cut defense spending.”

Q And James: “I’d cut costs by cutting some welfare programs. People will never try harder when they are handed everything.”

THE PRESIDENT: Well, here’s what I would say. I think we should acknowledge that some welfare programs in the past were not well-designed and in some cases did encourage dependency. And as somebody who worked in low-income neighborhoods, I’ve seen it, where people weren’t encouraged to work, weren’t encouraged to upgrade their skills, were just getting a check, and over time their motivation started to diminish. And I think even if you’re progressive, you’ve got to acknowledge that some of these things have not been well-designed.

I will say that today, welfare payments are not the big driver of our deficit or our debt. There are work obligations attached to welfare, that the vast majority of folks who are getting welfare want to work but can’t find jobs. And what we should be doing is in all our social programs evaluating what are upgrading people’s skills, giving them the tools they need to get into the workforce, nudging them into the workforce but letting them know that we’re there to support you and encourage you as long as you’re showing the kind of responsibility for being willing to work that every American should be expected to show.

And I’m somebody who believes that we can constantly improve any program, whether it’s a defense program -- those who say that we can’t cut military at all, they haven’t spent a lot of time looking at military budgets. Those who say that we can’t make any changes to our social welfare programs or else you’re being mean to poor people, that’s not true. There are some programs that can always be improved. And some programs, if they don’t work, we should have the courage to eliminate them, and then use that money to put it into the programs that do work.
But the bottom line is that our core values of responsibility, opportunity, making sure that the American Dream is alive and well so that anybody who is willing to put in the time and the effort and the energy are able to get a good education in this society, find a job that pays a living wage, that they’re able to send their kids to college without going broke, that they’ve got basic health care, they’re going to be able to retire with some dignity and some respect, that that opportunity is open to anybody regardless of race or religion or sexual orientation -- that that basic principle, that’s what holds us together. That’s what makes us Americans.

We’re not all tied together by ethnicity or a single religion. What ties us together is this idea that everybody has got a shot. As long as you carry out your responsibilities, you can make it. You can get into the middle class and beyond. And you can start a company and suddenly help bring the whole world together. That’s what makes this country outstanding.

But in order to do that, it requires us to both have a commitment to our individualism and our freedom and our creativity and our idiosyncrasies. But it also requires us to have a commitment to each other, and recognize that I would not be President if somebody hadn’t helped provide some scholarships for my school, and you would not have Twitter if the Department of Defense, at some point, and a bunch of universities hadn’t made some investments in something that ended up being the Internet. And those were public goods that were invested in.

So you and I are sitting here because somebody, somewhere, made an investment in our futures. We’ve got the same obligation for the folks who are coming up behind us. We’ve got to make sure that we’re looking out for them, just like the previous generations looked out for us. And that’s what I think will help us get through what are some difficult times and make sure that America’s future is even brighter than the past.

MR. DORSEY: And on that note, thank you very much, Mr. President. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. I appreciate it. (Applause.) All right, thank you, guys. Thanks. (Applause.)

END 3:12 P.M. EDT

WSJ Writer on a Child's Military Service

It has been noted that in our most recent wars the effects of actual combat, and the burden of actually serving in the military, falls on a comparatively small percentage of the population. Those who do now have any family or friends who have served in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan might find it illuminating to read "While my son serves" by Dave Shiflett, in Saturday's WSJ.

Remember those in uniform when donating to charities or planning service projects or simply saying prayers.

PSFC on the State Budget

from our friends at PSFC:

The Pennsylvania School Funding Campaign (PSFC) expressed dismay today over the final $27 . 15 billion budget for fiscal year 2011-12 . The budget includes cuts of nearly $930 million for public education and significantly hurts children and their opportunities for academic achievement, although it restores about $254 million to the Governor’s original budget proposal .

The budget adopted today restores some funding to the Governor’s proposals for the basic education subsidy and accountability block grants . But the budget still slashes hundreds of millions of dollars from those programs and completely eliminates funding for tutoring services for students who are struggling, high school reform, college tuition for high school students, the state’s largest science education program, and reimbursement of school district charter school costs .

“Although the legislature has voted to restore some of Governor Corbett’s original $1 . 1 billion in funding cuts to public schools, it is important to remember that a significant cut to education remains . Many children will struggle as a result,” said Ron Cowell, president of The Education Policy and Leadership Center and PSFC spokesman . PSFC comprises over 30 statewide and regional education and advocacy organizations .

“These cuts threaten to halt and even reverse the strong improvements in academic achievement we have seen in the last several years . In the fall, our children will return to school facing larger class sizes, fewer full-day kindergarten opportunities, less tutoring, and fewer elective courses in high school,” Cowell added .

Despite the state’s more than half billion dollar surplus this year and a like amount expected next year, many of the state's school districts, particularly the poorest ones, must resort to drastic measures to absorb cuts in state aid . These include raising local taxes, cutting instructional programs, laying off teachers and other staff, closing buildings and, in some cases, even considering a four-day school week .

“With a state revenue surplus already above a half billion dollars, the state should be funding K-12 education at levels that will continue the academic progress of every student,” said Jim Buckheit, executive director of the Pennsylvania Association of School Administrators . “A reduced investment in public education will affect the future of the entire state for years to come . A strong education system is required to prepare an educated, skilled workforce and to prevent social ills in the future . ”

“We know how to ensure that all children achieve at high levels,” said Beth Olanoff, executive director of the Pennsylvania League of Urban Schools . “The improvements in academic achievement of Pennsylvania students over the past eight years prove that . Those who say that investment in education doesn’t matter are fooling themselves . ” Olanoff noted that in the past several years student proficiency has increased from 57 . 6 percent to 76 . 3 percent in math and from 65 . 6 percent to 72 . 0 percent in reading . She stressed that these improvements were distributed across all grade levels and student groups.

The budget abandons a funding formula established by the General Assembly three years ago. During that time, the formula has begun to provide adequate funding for students in the lowest-spending districts . Students supported by adequate funding perform better on state tests than those with insufficient resources .

“This year’s education budget cuts represent a horrible precedent—setting our investment in schools backwards,” said Joe Bard, executive director of the Pennsylvania Association of Rural and Small Schools . “They will damage our children’s education in the fall and severely weaken it for years to come if the funding is not fully restored in next year’s budget . ”

In addition to the harmful impact on the academic success of Pennsylvania children, the budget will increase school district dependency on local property taxes to support schools. Pennsylvania homeowners already pay relatively high property taxes because state government contributes a smaller share of education costs than almost all other states. This local tax burden disproportionately affects children and taxpayers in the poorest school districts .

“The bottom line is that our children – all of our children – are Pennsylvania ’s future . To skimp on our investment in their education is to shortchange their prospects for success and our own as citizens of the state,” said Olanoff . “That is short-sighted, irresponsible, and misguided public policy . ”

Allyson Schwartz COS Highlighted on PoliticsPA

PoliticsPA has been running a periodic series on Pennsylvania congressional representatives' chiefs of staff. The latest is on Rachel Magnuson, chief of staff for Rep. Allyson Schwartz. Prior to serving as chief of staff Magnuson was Schwartz's communications person, which sometimes included blogger duty. In 2007 I went down to DC to watch some of the swearing in ceremonies. It was my first (and really only) official visit to Congress. Magnuson was very willing to take the time to answer my "what do people wear to this sort of thing?" questions. I really appreciate her kindness in this and other matters.

Data Dump

I've been traveling a little more than usual lately and had a chance over the holiday to sort through a pile of accumulated "to blog about" clippings and old magazines. Here are the choicest parts:


While Gov. Corbett was cutting public welfare and education, he decided to continue funding some capital development projects. This is outlined in “Amid Pa. cuts, $437M to private projects” by Joseph N. DiStefano in the 6/30 Inky. Some are university related or things like the zoo or Children’s Hospital of Pennsylvania but others are purely private, such as $10M for a new headquarters for stock broker Janney Montgomery Scott and $12M for apartments on Chestnut Street, seem exorbitant. How can we ask people to pay for private company’s building when we are telling schools to cut full day kindergarten? I know where I’d rather have my money go.


This is an interesting note on international scouting:

Near Ras Lanuf, I had seen teenagers with kerchiefs around their necks helping doctors rush wounded men into the overwhelmed emergency ward, but it didn’t occur to me that they might be actual Boy Scouts. Osama, explained that Qaddafi had once banned the Scouts as an insidious Western influence but later allowed them to reemerge. After the uprising, most police disappeared from the streets, and tens of thousands of migrant workers fled the country. Scouts stepped in to fill public-service jobs, helping at the hospitals, sorting out aid supplies, even directing traffic.

(“Letter from Libya: Sons of the Revolution,” by Jon Lee Anderson, New Yorker 5/09/2011


“Can this man save this girl?” by Ellen McGirt Fast Company July/August 2011
Another great article from Fast Company on water usage. While this article focuses on the third world I never cease to be amazed that the developed world squanders potable water by using it to flush toilets and fracture rocks for natural gas.


From the May 2011 Fast Company, “The Cure,” by Russ Mitchell on an Oakland hospital turnaround. Lots to be learned here for our local folks. One note, he told workers and unions that he would look at layoffs last if they would help him find any and all other places to save money. They did.


In “The Gulf War,” by Raffi Khatchadourian, New Yorker 3/14/2011we read this:

Rather than create an organizational structure from scratch, the Coast Guard borrowed one from forestry. In 1970, firestorms in California ravaged more than half a million acres, and at one point more than nineteen thousand people from five hundred agencies were trying to put out the flames. Equipment and manpower were marshaled in haphazard ways, and amid the confusion the fires grew worse. The Forest Service, along with other agencies, spent four years working out a solution to such problems, called the Incident Command Systems, or I.C.S. At its most basic level, I.C.S. divides labor into four groups: Command, Planning, Operations, and Logistics. Each team can grow rapidly as more people arrive. If the system is working well, a responder from New York can walk into an incident in Texas, be assigned to Logistics, and know what to do. “There is an elegance about it,” Ed Owens told me. The 9/11 Commission advised that I.C.S. be used in all domestic catastrophes, and in 2003 President George W. Bush made the recommendation law.

While middle class workers, especially public sector workers have been living on flat or lower wages, a Monday, May 9 WSJ headline read “CEO pay in 2010 jumped 11%,” by Joann S. Lublin. If we are going to judge teachers by accountability, can we assume all those company$68.6 million, CBS $53.9 million, Jarden $45.2 million. I’m sure those guys couldn’t possibly afford to pay more in taxes or Social Security. And if we end the Bush tax breaks they’ll be in the poor house. These are not small businesses whose executives would be personally hurt by ending tax cuts. And, honestly, what on earth to they do that is worth that much money?

Leslie Richards & Nina Garcia: Separated at Birth?

Over the holidays we visited with family. One is a Project Runway fan and as I watched a few episodes with her I noticed the one of the celebrity judges, Marie Claire fashion editor Nina Garcia, looked a lot like Leslie Richards, one of the two Democratic candidates for Montgomery County commissioner.

Richards, the only non-lawyer running for the office, is a Whitemarsh Township supervisor and an environmental, community, and long-range planner.

Separated at birth?

Schwartz on Independence Day

from the inbox, a note from Allyson Schwartz:

On July 4th 1776, right here in Philadelphia, our nation's forefathers put ink quill to parchment and signed the Declaration of Independence.

For 235 years this document has served as a living testament to the rights, the beliefs, and the values of our nation. It has guided us through times of war and of times of prosperity, and now today it is more important than ever.

As a Member of Congress, and as an American, I am often humbled by the wisdom our forefathers displayed in leaving us such an important legacy.

In honor of America, please join with me to take a moment to read the Declaration of Independence.


Thank you for the privilege of representing you in the U.S. House of Representatives. It is an honor to be your voice in Congress.

Philadelphia Vendy Awards

The Vendy Awards started in New York City and are expanding to Philadelphia this year. The contest among streetside food vendors benefits The Food Trust, a nonprofit that strives to make health food available to all. The winner will be announced on July 9th from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. at Piazza at Schmidts. Finalists were announced today:

Philadelphia- The Philadelphia Vendy Awards are proud to announce that the finalists for the inaugural event are:

Name of business: Cucina Zapata
Chef/Owner(s): Robert and Ruk Zapata
How long have you been in business: Two and a half months
Where are you from: Rob, South Jersey & Ruk- Khon Kaen, Thailand
What kind of food do you serve?: An amalgamation of Thai and Mexican.
Specialties: Thai Sweet Potato Chicken Curry, Thai Short-Rib Taco, Chicken Satay Taco
Tell us something about you or your business that you want the world to know: We hope to one day import organic chilies from our small farm in Thailand and use them in our sauces and food. We are always looking for different ways to serve healthy, quality food to our customers.
Why do you deserve to win the Vendy Award?: Because we do what we loves and we loves what we do.

Name of business: Gigi and Big R Caribbean/American Soul Food
Chef/Owner(s): Elukene Rene & Thomas Bacon
Years in business: 10 Years
Where are you from: Rene, Haiti & Thomas, Philly
What kind of food do you serve?: Caribbean/American Soul Food
Specialties: BBQ Jerk From The Smoking Grill and Our Fried Whiting Fish With Rene's Special Seasonings
Tell us something about you or your business that you want the world to know: We serve our soul food to please the soul but also want our customers to have a spiritual filling as well. That’s why our platters run over with food. We aim to please.
Why do you deserve to win the Vendy Award?: In our working class society we have a busy schedule with the family first, then the job, then back to the family. These vital hours of interaction with family/job doesn't leave us with a lot of wholesome food prep time. This is why we serve our customers nutritious and tasty food. We love to hear our customers say "I got a large fish platter and had enough to share with my children and reheat for later." We fill in the gap for time, health and flavor. Home away from home. We aim to please.

Name of business: Guapos Tacos
Chef/Owner(s): Jose Garces & Jun Aizak
Years in business: Established in 2010
Where are you (owners/chefs) from: Jose Garces, Chicago & Jun Aizak, Japan
What kind of food do you serve?: Tacos
Specialties: Mexican Sodas, House made guacamole, esquites (sweet corn, queso fresco, chipotle, and lime)
Tell us something about you or your business that you want the world to know: The truck is owned by an Iron Chef.
Why do you deserve to win the Vendy Award?: I will send you this answer shortly.

Name of business: King of Falafel
Chef/Owner(s): Nabil & Hined Akkeh
Years in business: 1989, 22 years
Where are you from: Syria
What kind of food do you serve?: Middle Eastern Food
Specialties: Falafel.
Tell us something about you or your business that you want the world to know: We were both electrical engineers back in Syria.
Why do you deserve to win the Vendy Award?: We helped introduce Philadelphia to Middle Eastern food. When we started we were one of the very few serving this kind of food, now it is everywhere—on the streets and in restaurants—but our customers keep coming back to us. They come back because we serve healthy and affordable food made from good ingredients. We soak and grind our chickpeas to make our falafel and hummus—we don’t use mixes or pre-made food, everything is made by us from high quality, fresh ingredients—that is our tradition and you can taste the difference.

Name of business: La Copine
Chef/Owner(s): Nikki Hill (chef/owner) and Claire Wadsworth (owner)
Years in business: Four months
Where are you from: Nikki grew up in Salt Lake City, Utah. Claire grew up in Houston, Texas and Summit, New Jersey.
What kind of food do you serve?: Brunch. Home-made style favorites.
Specialties: Cooking with locally sourced naturally raised food, keeping it simple and tasteful.
Tell us something about you or your business that you want the world to know: We are grateful for Garden Variety. They have allowed us a jumping off point for our business. This is only the beginning for La Copine.
Why do you deserve to win the Vendy Award?: For most people brunch is a weekend luxury, and La Copine makes it affordable while using farm-fresh, well sourced food. La Copine deserves to win because we have a unique concept and genuinely we care about the quality and experience for the people in our community.

Name of business: Magic Carpet Foods
Chef/Owner(s): Dean Varvoutis, president / Deborah Carson, executive chef
Years in business: Since 1984, 27 years +
Where are you from: Born and raised in Philadelphia area
What kind of food do you serve?: Whole world vegetarian cuisine
Specialties: Middle Eastern and Mediterranean influence, solid vegetarian staples
Tell us something about you or your business that you want the world to know: We provide the gateway to vegetarian eating for the common person. People should know that you don’t need to be vegetarian to enjoy vegetarian food. That’s our claim to fame.
Why do you deserve to win the Vendy Award?: It is nice to be recognized for something you worked hard at for so long.

Name of business: Sugar Philly
Chef/Owner(s): John Suh, Franklin Shen, Dan Tang (chef)
Years in business: 1.5 years
Where are you from: Philadelphia
What kind of food do you serve?: Desserts ("Gourmet")
Specialties: French Macarons
Tell us something about you or your business that you want the world to know: Our food truck Sheila was once a mail postal truck outside the World Trade Center
Why do you deserve to win the Vendy Award?: French Macarons > Cupcakes......

Name of business: Sweet Box
Chef/Owner(s): Pastry chef and owner, Gretchen Fantini
Years in business: Three months
Where are you from: Philadelphia
What kind of food do you serve?: Premium ingredient cupcakes...and more.
Specialties: Every single cupcake is special because they truly are Made with Love, but the favorite is my Southern Red Velvet. It is a cocoa buttermilk cake made with a Madagascar bourbon vanilla cream cheese frosting.
Tell us something about you or your business that you want the world to know: Before starting my sweets-to-the-streets business, my previous profession was in the legal field. Don't wait any longer, follow your heart and make it a reality.
Why do you deserve to win the Vendy Award?: I might not be able to win us the Super Bowl but I can make Philadelphians happy by creating modern desserts that not only look good but taste just as good. I am committed to bring that high standard that they look for in every single dessert that I make.

Summer White House Interns

The White House Internship Program announced today the incoming participants for the summer 2011 session. Additional information about the White House Internship Program is available here: www.whitehouse.gov/internships. The application for the Spring 2012 program is now on the website, and the deadline is September 11, 2011.

Summer interns with Pennsylvania connections are:

Backal-Balik, Justin Hometown: Philadelphia, PA; Northeastern University, MA
Feenstra, Emily Hometown: Pittsburgh, PA; Carnegie Mellon University, PA
Hitt, Lauren Hometown: Baltimore, MD; University of Pennsylvania, PA
Kronthal, Alexandra Hometown: Harrison, NY; University of Pennsylvania, PA
Long, Jenna Hometown: Longmont, CO; Dickinson College, PA
Lubetsky, Lauren Hometown: Chappaqua, NY; University of Pennsylvania, PA
May, Robby Hometown: Westernport, MD; Drexel University, PA
Stein, Jared Hometown: Hewlett, NY; University of Pennsylvania Law School, PA

Prez O's Remarks in Philly

June 30, 2011
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT AT DNC EVENT

Hyatt at the Bellevue
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

5:25 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Hello, Philly! (Applause.) Thank you. Thank you, Philadelphia! (Applause.) It is good to be back -- (applause) -- good to be back in the great state of Pennsylvania. (Applause.) Congratulations, Phillies fans. (Applause.) That is quite a rotation.

There are a couple of people I want to acknowledge. First of all, you just heard from somebody who I consider just a dear, dear friend. This is a guy who stood with me when nobody was sure whether I was going to win or not. And he didn’t have to do it, but he was just a terrific, terrific supporter, a great friend. He is a great senator. Please give it up for Bob Casey. (Applause.)

Two other outstanding members of your congressional delegation who have been with me and supportive of everything we've been trying to do -- I could not be prouder of the work they do on behalf of their constituents -- Congressman Brady and Congressman Fattah are here. (Applause.) Thank you.

Your outstanding mayor, Mayor Nutter is in the house. (Applause.) And one of the great legislators in Congress who also happens to be a pretty good political mind, and that is why we are so proud to have her as the chairwoman of the DNC -- Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Please give her a big round of applause. (Applause.)

Now, I see a lot of new faces out here. And then I see a few faces I've known for a long time. (Applause.) Some of you who are here knew me before I had gray hair. (Laughter.)

AUDIENCE MEMBER: You're looking good, though! (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you. (Laughter.) Malia and Sasha say that it makes me look distinguished. (Laughter.) Michelle says it just makes me look old. (Laughter.) No, she loves me, but she just says it makes me look old. (Laughter.)

Now, being here with all of you, I can't help but think back to the election two and a half years ago, and that night in Grant Park. It was the culmination of an extraordinary campaign that drew on the hard work and the support of people all across America. Men and women -- and some children -- I did very well with the eight and under demographic. (Laughter.) Men and women who believed that change was possible, who believed that we didn’t have to accept politics as usual, who believed that we could have a country that once again lived up to its finest ideals and its highest aspirations. And it was a beautiful night. Everybody was feeling pretty good.

But what I said that night -- some of you remember this -- I said this is not the end; this is just the beginning; that the road we were on was going to be difficult, that the climb was going to be steep. We didn’t know how steep it was going to be. We didn’t realize the magnitude of the recession we were facing and the financial crisis. We didn’t realize we had already lost 4 million jobs by the time I was sworn in. But we knew it was going to be tough.

And that was okay -- because I did not run for President to do easy things. I ran for President to do hard things. (Applause.) I ran for President because it was time to do big things. (Applause.) That we couldn’t keep kicking the can down the road anymore, too much was at stake, and that we had to get started tackling the tough issues that families face each and every day. Even if it would take time -- (audience disruption.)

THE PRESIDENT: So -- listen --

AUDIENCE: We love you!

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, guys. (Applause.) Now, let me tell you why I thought it was so important to run -- even though Michelle, she wasn’t so sure. (Laughter.) And why you guys got involved. I just want everybody to remember. We ran because we believed in an economy that didn’t just work for those at the top, but worked for everybody -- where prosperity was shared, from the machinist on the line, to the manager on the floor, to the CEO in the boardroom.

We ran because we believed our success isn’t just determined by stock prices and corporate profits, but by whether ordinary folks can find a good job that pays for a middle-class life -- where they can pay the mortgage, and take care of their kids, and send their kids to college, and save for retirement, and maybe have a little left over to go to a movie and go to dinner once in a while. (Laughter and applause.)

We ran because for a decade, wages and incomes had flatlined, and costs kept on going up for everybody even though they didn’t have any more income. That was before the economic crisis hit. And obviously once the economic crisis did hit, we had to take a series of emergency steps to save this economy from collapse -- not because we wanted to help banks or make sure that the auto companies’ CEOs were making good bonuses, but we did it because we wanted to make sure that families who needed help could still take out a loan to buy a house or start a new business. We wanted to make sure that the millions of people who depended on the auto industry, that they would still have jobs.

And so some of those decisions were tough. And you remember, we got criticized a lot. But you take a look at what’s happened. Some folks didn’t want us getting involved in the auto industry -- I didn’t expect to be the CEO of a car company when I ran for President. (Laughter.) But as a consequence of what we did, we saved jobs. We saved American manufacturing. (Applause.) We cut taxes for middle-class families. We ended subsidies to the banks for student loans, to make college more affordable. (Applause.) We made sure -- that’s why I signed a bill to make sure there was equal pay for equal work, because I’ve got two daughters and I want to make sure they’re treated just the same as the boys are. (Applause.) That’s why we’re promoting manufacturing and homegrown American energy -- because that’s what will lead to jobs that pay a decent salary. I want the wind turbines and the solar panels and the electric cars to be built right here in America. (Applause.)

That’s why, with the help of these outstanding members of Congress, we’re standing up a new consumer bureau with just one responsibility: looking out for ordinary people in the financial system so folks aren’t cheated. Whether you’re getting a credit card or getting a mortgage, you need to know that you’re getting a fair deal. (Applause.)

And that’s why we passed health reform, so that nobody in the richest nation on Earth goes bankrupt when they get sick. (Applause.)

We also had a long campaign in 2008 because we believed it was time to end the war in Iraq. And that’s what we’re doing. We’ve removed 100,000 troops from Iraq. We’ve ended combat missions. We are on track to remove the rest of the troops, bring them home by the end of this year. (Applause.)

I ran for President because I believed we needed to refocus our efforts and our energy in Afghanistan and going after al Qaeda. And we are going after al Qaeda and we’ve taken out their leadership. (Applause.) And because of our progress and the extraordinary sacrifices of our troops, we are fulfilling the commitment I made at the start to reduce our troops, starting this month, so that Afghans can start taking responsibility for their own security -- (applause) -- and we can start rebuilding right here at home. (Applause.) It's time to start rebuilding here at home -- time for nation-building right here.

We live in a world where America is facing stiff competition for good jobs from rapidly growing nations, like China and India and Brazil. For a long time we were told the best way to win that competition is just to undermine consumer protections and undermine clean air laws and clean water laws and hand out tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires. That was the idea that held sway for close to a decade. And let's face it, it didn’t work out very well.

In fact, if you look at our history, you'll see that philosophy has never worked out very well -- where people are just asking, "What's in it for me?" America was built on the hard work and ingenuity of our people and our businesses. But we also set up a free system of public schools and a generation was sent to college on the G.I. Bill. (Applause.) And we constructed roads and highways that spanned a continent. And through investments and research and technology, we sent a man to the moon. And we discovered lifesaving medicine. And we launched the information age and created the Internet and created millions of jobs along the way. (Applause.) That's how you build a strong nation. That's how you build a strong middle class -- by making the investments that are needed and always looking out over the horizon. (Applause.)

So we believe in business and we believe in free markets. But we also believe in making sure that every kid in this country has a chance. (Applause.) And we believe that our seniors deserve to retire with dignity and respect and have some semblance of security. (Applause.) And we believe in making investments in science and technology. (Applause.) And we believe in having the best infrastructure in the world. And so the same things that worked for us in the past, that's what we need to be doing today.

There's an important debate in Washington right now about how to cut the deficit. And let me say it is absolutely critical that we get a handle on our finances. We've spent a lot of money that we don't have. And we've made a lot of commitments that are going to be hard to keep if we do nothing. And like families all across America, government has to live within its means.

So I'm prepared to bring our deficit down by trillions of dollars. That's with a "t" -- trillions. (Laughter.) But I will not reduce our deficit by sacrificing our kids' education. (Applause.) I'm not going to reduce our deficit by eliminating medical research being done by our scientists. (Applause.) I won't sacrifice rebuilding our roads and our bridges and our railways and our airports -- I want Philadelphia to have the best, not the worst.

Not just roads and bridges and sewer mains and water systems; I want us to have the best broadband -- (applause) -- the best electric grid. I’m not going to sacrifice clean energy at a time when our dependence on foreign oil is causing so many Americans pain at the pump. (Applause.) That’s sacrificing America’s future.

And that’s what I want to say to all of you, Philadelphia. There’s more than one way to mortgage our future. It would be irresponsible, we would be mortgaging our future, if we don’t do anything about the deficit. But we will also be mortgaging our future and it will be irresponsible if, in the process of reducing our deficit, we sacrifice those very things that allow us to grow and create jobs and succeed and compete in the future.

What makes America great is not just the height of our skyscrapers or the might of our military or the size of our GDP. What makes us great is the character of our people. (Applause.) And we are rugged individualists -- that’s part of what makes us American; we like to make up our own minds and we don’t like other people to tell us what to do. But what also makes us who we are is our faith in the future and our recognition that our future is shared.

It’s the belief I am my brother’s keeper and my sister’s keeper; that my life is richer and our country is stronger when everybody participates and everybody has a measure of security and everybody has got a fair shot at the American Dream. (Applause.) That’s our vision for America. Not a vision of a small America, but a vision of a big America and a compassionate America and an optimistic America, and a bold America. And that’s what we’re fighting for. (Applause.)

And the good news is that America is possible -- an America where we’re living within our means, but we’re still investing in the future. That’s possible. Where everybody is making sacrifices, but nobody bears all the burden by themselves. The idea that no matter what we look like or who we are, no matter whether our ancestors came from Ellis Island or on a slave ship, or across the Rio Grande, that we are all connected to one another, and that we rise and fall together. (Applause.)

That’s the idea at the heart of America. That’s the idea at the heart of our last campaign. That’s the idea at the heart of this campaign. That’s why I’m going to need your help more than ever. (Applause.)

This campaign is at its early stages. I’ve got a day job. I’ve got other things to do. (Laughter.) But while I’m working, there are going to be candidates parading around the country. (Laughter and applause.) And they’re going to do what they do, which is they’re going to attack -- here in Philadelphia, they’re going to attack. They won’t have a plan -- (laughter) -- but they will attack. And I understand that; that’s politics as we’ve come to know it.

But what I also understand is, is the American people are a lot less interested in us attacking each other; they’re more interested in us attacking the country’s problems. (Applause.) They’re less interested in hearing us exchange insults about the past; they want us to exchange ideas about the future. (Applause.) That’s the contest I’m looking forward to, because I know that’s the contest that America needs. And by the way, that’s the contest that we will win. (Applause.)

And, Philadelphia, I know there are some of you who are frustrated because we haven’t gotten everything done that we said we were going to do in two and a half years. It’s only been two and a half years. I got five and a half years more to go. (Applause.) And there are -- look, there are times where I feel frustrated. But we knew this wasn’t going to be easy. We knew a journey like this one, there were going to be setbacks, like there were setbacks during the first campaign. There are going to be times where we stumble, just we stumbled sometimes during the first campaign.

But we also knew that at each and every juncture in our history when our future was on the line -- (audience interruption.)

AUDIENCE: Obama! Obama! Obama! Obama! Obama! (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: What we also knew was that whenever the country has been at a crossroads, we’ve always come together to keep the American Dream alive for the next generation. And now is the time for us to do it again. Now is the time to finish what we started and keep the dream alive.

And I just to want to remind everybody here, this campaign is not about me. It’s about us. (Applause.) It’s about students who are working their way through college, workers heading to factories to build American cars again, small business owners testing new ideas, construction crews laying down roads, families who faced hardship and setbacks but who haven’t stopped believing in this country, and who believe that we can emerge from this challenge stronger than before.

That’s the story of progress in America -- the stubborn refusal to accept anything less than the best that this country can be. And with your help, if you’re willing to keep fighting with me, if you’re willing to knock on doors with me, if you are going to get as much energy going as you got in 2008, then together we are going to write another chapter in that story and leave a new generation a brighter future.

God bless you, Philadelphia. God bless you, Pennsylvania. Yes, we can. May God bless you, and God bless America. (Applause.)

END 5:46 P.M. EDT