A visit to President Lincoln's hometown to unveil new logo, new website, and "soft launch" the year of festivities... Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack on Wednesday unveiled a new logo and a new webpage for the upcoming 150th anniversary of the US Department of Agriculture, which will be celebrated throughout 2012. President Abraham Lincoln established the USDA in 1862 in the midst of the Civil War, and it is now the largest federal agency. Vilsack traveled to Springfield, Ill., hometown of President Lincoln, for the "soft launch" of the commemorative year. He was joined at the Old State Capitol by members of the Future Farmers of America, and Deputy Undersecretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs Ann Wright. (Above: Vilsack is at right of the new logo, and Wright is at left)
“Through our work on food, agriculture, economic development, science, natural resource conservation and a host of issues, USDA still fulfills President Lincoln's vision as ‘The People's Department’ — touching the lives of every American, every day," Vilsack said. "As we commemorate 150 years, we will look for lessons from the past that can help us strengthen USDA in the future to address the changing needs of agriculture and rural America."
Throughout 2012, USDA will mark important events, such as Lincoln signing the Department of Agriculture Organic Act on May, 15, of 1862, which established the Department, and the June signing of the Morrill Act to establish public land grant universities. The year-long commemoration will formally launch in February of 2012 at the USDA’s annual Agricultural Outlook Forum. Wednesday's party included a big cake with the new logo (above).
*Top photo by Lance Cheung/USDA, second by Bob Nichols/USDA
Agriculture Secretary says Food Stamp use declining, but newest government report shows an increase; working families depending on federal aid... The number of Americans using the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also called Food Stamps, has increased each month since President Obama entered office. Food Stamp use hit an all-time high in August, the latest month for which data is available, the US Department of Agriculture reported on Tuesday. 45.8 million Americans received Food Stamps, an increase of 1.1% from July. It's more than an 8.1% increase since August 2010. There were 31.9 million Americans on Food Stamps when President Obama was sworn into office in January of 2009. The Food Stamps program became a permanent federal component in 1964. (Above: President Obama with Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack)
Spending on Food Stamps also hit an all-time high in August: The government spent $6.13 billion on benefits. Texas was the #1 state for Food Stamp use in August, with 4.1 million beneficiaries, and California was #2, with 3.82 million citizens.
On Oct. 24, as he unveiled his priorities for the Farm Bill, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack noted the level of Food Stamp users at 44 million Americans, and said use is declining.
"That number's coming down from an all-time high earlier this year as more Americans are finding work with the creation of nearly 2 million private-sector jobs over the last 19 months," Vilsack said.
The last time the number of Food Stamps users was at 44 million was in December of 2010, according to USDA.
Working families use Food Stamps... The use of Food Stamps has set a record each month but one since December of 2008, and Vilsack in his remarks pointed out that the high unemployment rate, stuck now at about 9.1% for months, has contributed to the record levels.
"Over the last 20 years that program has transitioned from a welfare program to one that is primarily utilized by working families and seniors. Children of those working families are nearly half of all of the SNAP beneficiaries, and the elderly make up nearly 8 percent," Vilsack said.
In June of 2011, USDA began offering guidance on NON-citizen eligibility for Food Stamps. First Lady Obama's Let's Move! campaign has encouraged citizens to apply for Food Stamps. Faith-based and community organizations have been charged with signing citizens on to the program, under the rubric of the Let's Move Faith and Communities component of the anti-obesity campaign. The Food Stamps program allows users to purchase a wide variety of foods, including soda and sugary beverages, chips, cookies, ice cream, and cake.
In August of 2011, Vilsack hailed the SNAP program as an economic stimulus, a theory echoed by other top Administration officials.
"Every dollar of SNAP benefits generates $1.84 in the economy in terms of economic activity," Vilsack said. "If people are able to buy a little more in the grocery store, someone has to stock it, package it, shelve it, process it, ship it. All of those are jobs. It's the most direct stimulus you can get in the economy during these tough times."
$1.5 billion settlement from Claims Resolution Act of 2010 is certified in US District Court; Holder, Vilsack statements after the jump... President Obama on Friday afternoon issued a statement hailing Thursday's US District Court approval of the $1.5 billion Pigford II settlement as "another important step forward in addressing an unfortunate chapter in USDA’s civil rights history." The settlement for the longstanding, highly contentious racial bias case brought by black farmers against the US Department of Agriculture was included in the Claims Resolution Act of 2010, which President Obamasigned into law on Dec. 8, 2010. Before then, in 2009 and 2010, black farmers had held a series of rallies around the US demanding settlement, including in Washington, DC, where they gathered in front of the USDA headquarters and demanded justice. (Above: The President, surrounded by lawmakers and Cabinet Secretaries during the Oval Office signing ceremony for the Act)
Late on Thursday, Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a motion to certify and approve the settlement for Pigford II, writing in his decision that it is "fair, reasonable, and adequate" as a way to "further redress the historic discrimination against African-American farmers."
"This agreement will provide overdue relief and justice to African American farmers, and bring us closer to the ideals of freedom and equality that this country was founded on," President Obama said. "I especially want to recognize the efforts of Secretary Vilsack and Attorney General Holder, without whom this settlement would not have been reached."
In Pigford I, the original suit brought by black farmers against USDA, the farmers accused the Department of institutional racism, land grabbing, and denying them the same benefits offered to their white counterparts, especially in financial services. The suit was settled, but Pigford II was filed as a continuation of the cause, and created as a class action suit for farmers who had been "locked out" of Pigford I.
"This settlement is the product of extraordinary efforts by private litigants and their counsel, by the Congress, and by the executive branch," Friedman wrote. "The court joins all of those parties in hoping that it will bring class members the relief to which they are entitled."
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Attorney General Eric Holder today both issued statements about the settlement.
“This settlement allows the Department of Agriculture and African-American farmers to focus on the future, and brings us one step closer to giving these farmers a chance to have their claims heard,” Holder said. “Accomplishing this settlement has been a top priority of this Administration and I am pleased that the court has approved it.”
“President Obama, Attorney General Holder and I are thrilled by the court’s approval so we can continue turning the page on this sad chapter in USDA history," Vilsack said. “Court approval of the Pigford settlement is another important step to ensure some level of justice for black farmers and ranchers who faced discrimination when trying to obtain services from USDA."
"In the months and years ahead, we will not stop working to move the department into a new era as a model employer and premier service provider for all Americans regardless of race, ethnicity or gender.”
Under the Pigford II settlement, eligible black farmers will receive about $50,000 in compensation. Black farmer claimants must have farmed or attempted to farm between 1981 and 1986, have filed a discrimination complaint before July 1, 1987, and have filed a claim after the deadline in the original settlement, Pigford I.
Related:President Obama's condolence statement for Elouise Cobell, lead plaintiff in the Cobell suit, who passed away earlier this month. The settlement of the Cobell suit, for American Indian plaintiffs, was also included in the Claims Resolution Act of 2010.
First Lady Michelle Obama welcomed about 1,000 school officials from across the US to a White House reception on Monday afternoon to celebrate achieving her Let's Move! goal of doubling the number of schools enrolled in the HealthierUS School Challenge in a year. A full post about the event is here.
The original goal was 1,250 schools, but it has been exceeded: There are now 1,631 schools certified, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced. More background on the HUSC is here.
The Challenge, a cornerstone of the Let's Move! campaign, is a program run by USDA. It rewards schools participating in the National School Lunch Program for voluntarily adopting USDA standards for foods served in cafeterias, and for providing students with nutrition education and opportunities for physical activity. Prizes are cash grants and plaques.
The transcript:
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the First Lady ____________________________________
For Immediate Release October 17, 2011
REMARKS BY THE FIRST LADY AT HEALTHIERUS SCHOOL CHALLENGE CELEBRATION
South Lawn
3:38 P.M. EDT
MRS. OBAMA: Man, isn't that something? (Applause.) Hello everyone, and welcome to the White House. (Applause.) I am just thrilled that you all are here today. It's a beautiful day for a very special group of people. And we rolled out the red carpet for you all. Does it feel that way? Do you feel a little red-carpet-like? (Applause.)
Let me start by thanking Alex for that very kind and eloquent introduction. I mean, Alex, and the kids that we were -- that's the reason we are doing this. Just listening to his story, understanding that kids, when you teach them how to eat and how to exercise, they implement this stuff. We all know that. So we are so proud of Alex and the thousands of young people just like him that are improving their lives. They're changing the way they think about their health and they're trickling that information down to their families
We're just, Alex, so proud of you. Let’s give him a round of applause. (Applause.)
And of course, thank you to Becke for her remarks today and for the work that she's doing every day on behalf of our kids. She has the energy -- you can tell by just listening to her speak -- she could talk you into doing anything, pretty much. (Laughter.) But fortunately, she's used that power of persuasion and that passion to help improve the lives of the kids in her community. And for that we are grateful, Becke. Thank you so much. (Applause.)
And of course, I have to recognize our terrific Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary Vilsack. (Applause.) I love him dearly. He has been a tremendous partner on this effort. Everyone at the Department of Agriculture has stepped up. They were already doing the work, but they've just taken this and have run with it. We are proud of everything you have done, embracing this as you said you would. Secretary Vilsack, thank you. Thank you so much.
And I also have to recognize -- because we had some pretty good entertainment out here today, didn’t we? (Applause.) So much so that folks throughout the White House were calling up, asking, well, what country pop bands are out there playing? And I have to just say that, as usual, they are our very own. We have two wonderful bands -- the Marines' own Free Country, and the Navy's Country Current. You all fired it up. (Applause.) We love you. This is the -- one of the President's best perks of living in the White House -- (laughter) -- the bands that come and play. They can play anything. They've played with Paul McCartney. They've done tons of stuff. And you all did a fabulous job today, really setting the mood. And we are grateful.
But most of all, I want to thank all of you. This celebration is for you. We made it -- we said this before; we said we're going to set the challenge. And what we want to do is reward those who reached it by inviting them here. So this was something we had planned a long time ago. And it is just wonderful to see you all here and to celebrate this achievement. We are just so proud.
Because the fact is, in our movement to end the epidemic of childhood obesity in America, all of you -- our nation’s educators -- you are the unsung heroes. I get a lot of accolades and everybody is like, "First Lady, you're doing a great job." But you all are doing the real work on the ground. So much of what we’ve accomplished these past couple of years, so many of the victories that we’ve won for our kids have happened because of you.
They’ve happened because of your passion, because of your vision and, more importantly, because of your hard work. Because you all mobilized and organized, we passed historic legislation here in Washington to improve and provide more nutritious school meals to more of our children. We’re helping install salad bars in more than 800 schools, bringing fresh fruits and vegetables to hundreds of thousands of kids across this country. We created Chefs Move to Schools, signing up more than 3,000 chefs to help local schools improve their menus and to teach kids about healthy eating.
We’ve seen more than one million young people earn the President’s Active Lifestyle Award -- the PALA awards -- and that means they're exercising one hour a day, five days a week, for six consecutive weeks.
And now, because of all of you, we have met our goal to double the number of HealthierUS Schools within a year. Double the number. Excellent, you guys. (Applause.)
So what you all have accomplished here is very impressive, but, quite frankly, it is not at all surprising. It’s not surprising that folks like you are taking the lead on this issue. Because as educators, you see firsthand the impact that childhood obesity has on our children’s lives. You see it every day. Not just on their physical and emotional health, but on their academic success as well. You see this.
You know better than anyone that kids need time and space to run around before they can settle down and concentrate in a classroom. You know this. You know they need nutritious food in their stomachs before they can focus their brains on math and reading and science. You see it every day. And when many kids spend half of their waking hours and get up to half their daily calories at school, you know that with the food you serve and, more importantly, the lessons you teach that you're not just shaping their habits and preferences today, you’re affecting the choices they’re going to make for the rest of their lives.
That's why we start with kids -- right? We can affect who they will be forever. Alex is not going to forget what he's learned and he's going to pass that on to his kids. You’re affecting not just how these kids feed themselves, but how they’re going to feed their own children. So the beauty is, is that you’re not just making this generation of kids healthier, but the next generation as well. And that is truly, truly powerful stuff. (Applause.)
Now, I know that what you do isn’t easy. I mean, we're partying now but -- (laughter) -- it takes a lot of work to do what you do -- especially in these difficult economic times, when budgets are tight and you’re trying to do so much more with so much less. You're here without the extra money. You've accomplished these goals without the extra help. But you've done it because you've gotten pretty creative. And that's why we want to hold you up. You've done a lot with just a lot of creativity.
Let's take the Elsie Whitlow Stokes Community Freedom Public Charter School right here in D.C., right in our own backyard. Their chef and founder wrote, and this is a quote -- “We're not a rich school. Our funds are limited. So we asked for, and receive, a lot of help.” They work with a local non-profit and a supermarket chain to acquire donated equipment. They got money from the Recovery Act for a new refrigerator and some extra staff. They worked with a parent who owns a local farmer’s market. And today, their students empty out their salad bar every day at lunch. And that's something that people don't think will happen, right? Kids won't eat vegetables. Well, you see it. It's happened at this school. They're eating every last bit of broccoli and spinach and cauliflower in those salad bars.
And then there’s St. Tammany Parish, just outside of New Orleans, Louisiana -- (applause) -- where I had the privilege of visiting last year. Twenty-five of their elementary and middle schools have achieved the Gold Award of Distinction -- 25. (Applause.) And they’ve done it by doing a whole range of things. They set up student advisory councils that work with the food service staffs to help plan the menus -- so they're getting kids involved in the process. And students even help run nutrition education programs, teaching their peers about healthy eating.
And then there’s the Burlington Elementary School in North Dakota. This is happening all over the country. All over the country. They were the first school in that state to plant a school garden. And they've opened up their gym on the weekends, making an open gym for the families in their community. And the teachers eat breakfast and lunch with students every single day. Now, that's a sacrifice. (Laughter.) You know it. That's love. (Laughter.) They even send out a monthly newsletter called, “Nutrition Notes,” to provide healthy eating tips and recipes for the families.
And other schools have started running clubs and fitness competitions. You’ve engaged students in taste tests and recipe contests. You’ve incorporated nutrition education into subjects ranging from math and science and art. You’ve done it all.
So you’ve shown us that there is no one way to win this award. There's just no one silver bullet. You come from urban, suburban, rural communities. You come from schools that are big and small. Every school and every community is different. That we know. There is no one-size-fits-all solution here.
But there is one thing that all of you do have in common. And I think that Billy Reid, who is the director of Nutrition Services for the Salida Union School District in California -- he put it best. This is what he said. He said, “I find myself honored to wake up every morning…and go out and feed children.” It's as simple as that -- honored. The honor of feeding our children. (Applause.) And it's that commitment, it's that kind of commitment to our children’s promise -- right? This is our future. Our promise -- the determination to help them all succeed -- that’s something you all share. It's that passion.
And I've been out there visiting you, and it is real. You all are willing to do whatever it takes to help our kids. We love our kids -- all of them, every single one of them. And we want nothing but the very best. And this is the way we do it. And you all are doing it like nothing else.
So today, I just want to urge you to keep being the leaders that you are -- because you are truly leaders. That is why you're here. As Secretary Vilsack said, we want you to spread that love and that knowledge. We want you to share what you've learned. There are other schools who are just trying to figure out how they can be a part of this extraordinary club, and you all can do that. You can share your wealth. You can reach out, you can find the schools in your communities, in your states, and share what you've learned. Reach out and help other schools compete.
And I hope that you’ll also encourage one another. That's one of the reasons why bringing you all together here from all over the country -- pass out your cards, get some emails and some numbers. Because I know you get tired, right? I know sometimes it's frustrating. I know there's some things that can be better. You all can support one another.
And hopefully, today is the beginning of many, many excellent relationships that will continue to build. So get to know each other. Because this is a competition that every school in America can win. This isn't an exclusive club -- right? We want everyone involved. We want to double the double. We want every school in this country to be aiming for this kind of distinction. Because we know that when our schools win, our kids win. And when our kids win, our country wins. That's why we make this investment.
So thank you from the bottom of my heart. I'm so proud of you all, so excited. Just keep doing what you're doing, and we'll be right there with you every step of the way.
Thank you all. God bless you all. And God bless America. (Applause.) I'm going to come down and shake some hands.
¿Qué Hay en su Plato?: A new Spanish-language version of MyPlate, the "most delicious" effort from Lets Move!, says Kass...Video... October is Hispanic Heritage Month, and there was a foodie celebration on the White House campus this afternoon. Senior Policy Advisor for Healthy Food Initiatives Sam Kass joined Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, and Surgeon General Regina Benjamin to unveil MiPlato, the Spanish-language version of USDA's MyPlate food icon. They were joined at the 3:15 PM event by chef Marcela Valladolid and Chef Pepín, huge celebs on Hispanic food TV. (Above: Kass speaks as Salazar looks on)
MiPlato is a targeted edition of the colorful MyPlate icon, launched by First Lady Obama in June. It offers visual guidance for creating meals based on the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which encourages citizens to consume fruit or vegetables at every meal, including breakfast.
"Mi Plato is a quick, simple reminder for all of us to be more mindful of the foods that we're eating," Mrs. Obama said in a statement.
The First Lady noted that hardworking, busy parents don't have time be nutritionists, and that's where MiPlato comes in.
"We do have time to take a look at our kids' plates, and as long as they're eating proper portions, as long as half of their meal is fruits and vegetables alongside their lean proteins, whole grains and low-fat dairy, then we're good," Mrs. Obama said. "It's as simple as that."
Kass hailed Mrs. Obama's leadership as he praised the usefulness of MiPlato.
"MiPlato--the Myplate initiative--is a tremendous tool and resource for parents and chefs alike all over the country to have a framework in which to innovate and create," Kass said. "I am very excited about this. We are working with communties to help make this the most delicious effort to date coming out of Lets Move!."
Kass has appeared on network TV to demonstrate recipes that show how various cultures can incorporate MyPlate into their own their own culinary traditions.
"I am excited that our First Lady initiated this program, something that we Hispanics need especially," said Chef Pepín.
In their own remarks, Salazar and Vilsack also praised Mrs. Obama's leadership, and both pointed out the high rates of obesity and diet-related disease in Hispanic communities. (Above: Vilsack speaks surrounded from l by Benjamin, Salazar, Kass, Valladolid and Pepín)
More information is at ChooseMyPlate.gov and LetsMove.gov. Check the sidebar of this blog for White House MyPlate recipes.
The Obama Administration’s celebration of Hispanic Heritage Month has the theme “Renewing the American Dream," and this week focuses on the community’s well-being. The MiPlato tips are "part of a multi-year effort to raise awareness and educate consumers of every age on the importance of healthier eating and physical activity."
USDA's Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion recently announced that more than 4,000 organizations, known as Community Partners, have now joined the Nutrition Communicators Network doubling the July number. Community Partners are organizations actively committed to promoting healthy eating in accordance with the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans as symbolized by the MyPlate and MiPlato food icons.
"Everyday I get my swipe on...Sandwiches, chips, Snickers, Twix; I'm eating good, potato chips; A big box of Oreos..." UPDATE, Sept. 24: YouTube removed the video after it received more than 300,000 views "My EBT" is a newish video by Rap artist Stanley Lafleur, 24, who calls himself @MrEBT (H Man). It'sgoing viral on YouTube, thanks in part to a headline appearing on Drudge Report on Monday. Mr EBT is one of the 45 million-plus Americans who use Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Food Stamps) benefits monthly. In the video, he wanders through supermarket aisles and a couple of restaurants while he describes, in rhyme, what he buys with his Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) card. It's mostly junk food--fully allowable under federal guidelines, something Mr EBT notes, in rhyme. And his benefits card is actually his sister's, Mr. EBT notes, also in rhyme, so he's committing fraud "to get my swipe on." @MrEBT has more than 16,500 followers on Twitter, he's on Facebook, and the video has been viewed more than 84,900 times on YouTube. Update, 8:00 PM:The video now has more than 185,600 views. (Top: A screengrab from the video; inset is Mr EBT's Twitter avatar)
"Sandwiches, chips, Snickers, Twix...I'm eating good...Potato chips...A big box of Oreos...Cereal, Kix...My EBT, My EBT...Walking down the Ave, there's food I got a hunger for...I just want some Jam...Walking down the aisle, cuz I just want some ham...Wham!," Mr EBT raps. "It's the EBT, it's not Food Stamps...Breakfast time the cheese is melted...if I don't have my card I use someone else's..."
Mr EBT's PIN number is included in the lyrics, as is the information that weed can't be purchased with Food Stamps, nor can Lysol, among other things. It's an instructional video.
"I wish I could buy some weed with my EBT but the drug dealer fronted me," Mr EBT raps:
"YouTube Hit Video: Song Celebrates Welfare Card!" was Drudge's headline.
Mr EBT visits a McDonald's onscreen, as well a bodega to "get his swipe on." According to a USDA spokesman, California, Arizona, and Michigan operate State administered restaurant programs serving the elderly, homeless, and disabled populations, which allow the use of EBT cards/funds. Rhode Island began a limited pilot restaurant program on August 1, 2011. In 2009, Florida began operating a pilot program in one county and has a total of 14 restaurants participating. Various major food service corporations--most notably Yum! brands, parent to KFC and Pizza Hut--are currently lobbying USDA and on the state level for an expansion of the practice of allowing Food Stamps use in restaurants.
The Food Stamps program costs taxpayers more than $6 billion monthly, and suffered no funding cuts under President Obama'snew deficit reduction plan. The program boosts the economy, according to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.
"Every dollar of SNAP benefits generates $1.84 in the economy in terms of economic activity," Vilsack saidin August. "If people are able to buy a little more in the grocery store, someone has to stock it, package it, shelve it, process it, ship it. All of those are jobs. It's the most direct stimulus you can get in the economy during these tough times."
USDA decided in August that it would not approve a pilot program in New York to remove sugary beverages from the Food Stamps program. USDA's summary of Food Stamp statistics: READ HERE. (Above: A screengrab of Mr EBT using his card at McDonald's)
Another video from the EBT oeuvre has been on YouTube for a while: "It's Free Swipe Yo EBT" by Chapter. The lyrics are explicit, and also include an informative list of what restaurants in Los Angeles, CA accept EBT cards.
As Republicans battle proposed farm dust regulations from the Obama Administration, an Illinois farmer becomes a political symbol for the GOP... Illinois farmer Rock Katschnig interacted with President Obama last month at a town hall in Atkinson, Illinois, and he has become a GOP symbol for all that is wrong with the Obama Administration's efforts to create jobs. House Speaker John Boehner invitedKatschnig, a fourth generation corn and soy farmer, to sit with his dozen-plus guests in the House Gallery on Thursday evening to watch President Obama unveil the American Jobs Act. Boehner identified Katschnig and his other guests as "private-sector job creators" who are "American employers being hampered by excessive regulations from Washington." (Above: Boehner met with his guests before the President's speech; Katschnig is seated beside Boehner, in the blue tie)
In Illinois, Katschnig told President Obama that he was worried that proposed federal regulations for dust management, water run off and noise would "hinder" his farming business. The President essentially dismissed Katschnig's concerns, calling them "unfounded," and said "don't believe everything you hear." Of course Boehner has now adopted the farmer: He was ripe for the plucking, since he's from the President's homestate.
Boehner now features the farmer in a video on his website, in which Katschnig amplifies his dusty concerns. And the proposed "farm dust regulation" from the Environmental Protection Agency is getting major play from the GOP: It is number five on Majority Leader Eric Cantor's list of Top Ten Job Destroying Regulations.
In August, Cantor announced that he plans to add a vote on a dust bill in the House later this year, as part of the GOP's jobs agenda. Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb) and Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) have introduced a companion measure in the Senate.
Katschnig makes an appearance in Lucas' letter to EPA... On Thursday, House Agriculture Committee Chair Frank D. Lucas (R-OK-3) also got in on the dust-up, sending a letter to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson, requesting "a response to a list of questions from a bipartisan group of lawmakers that was submitted to her agency nearly six months ago." The letter includes a request for a statement on EPA's position on rural dust and other regulations--and also mentions the President's exchange with Katschnig.
"Our constituents are concerned that regulations under consideration on a variety of issues ranging from dust to gypsum will be costly, difficult to implement, and unworkable for farmers and ranchers," Lucas wrote to Jackson. "On a recent trip to Illinois, President Obama called these concerns “unfounded.” In testimony at our March 10, 2011 hearing on EPA regulations and agriculture, you mentioned “myths” about EPA’s intentions and said that mischaracterizations of your agency’s actions prevent 'real dialogue to address our greatest problems.'"
The EPA currently has more than 300 regulations under consideration, which could affect issues ranging from farm dust to federal jurisdiction over small streams and ponds, according to Lucas. He claims that by 2014, EPA regulations will cost Americans anywhere from $47 billion to $141 billion, and eliminate between 476 thousand and 1.4 million jobs.
Lucas asked Jackson for an immediate response to his query. The letter is here[PDF].
Grassley also issued a press release on farm dust.
“In each of my most recent town hall meetings, the excessive amount of regulations coming out of Washington, D.C. and the impact on small businesses and rural communities was a top issue,” Grassley said. “The dust rule is a perfect example. It makes no sense to regulate the dust coming out of a combine harvesting soybeans or the dust off a gravel road of a pick-up truck traveling into town. If the administration were to decide to revise the standard, farmers and livestock producers will likely be unable to attain the standard levels and the rural economy would be devastated.”
Meantime, Rep. Kristi Noem (R-S.D.) said in a press release that a bill she has introduced with Rep. Robert Hurt (R-VA), to stop EPA from implementing stricter dust standards, is gaining momentum, thanks to Cantor and Grassley.
“These developments are a clear indication that we’re gaining momentum for the commonsense idea that rural America, including South Dakota, doesn’t need any more dust regulation at this point,” Noem said.
Dust regulations are covered under EPA's Clean Air Act, which is reviewed every five years. EPA has issued no decision on what it plans to do with farm dust, urban dust, or other regulatory issues that Lucas and the rest of the GOP are focused on. It's a complicated calculation.
In a post todayon the White house blog, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack hailed the American Jobs Act as a boon for farmers and rural Americans. There was no mention of farm dust or any other kind of agriculture regulations.
How Katschnig became Joe the Farmer... At the Atkinson town hall, President Obama was well meaning but a bit blithe as he answered Katschnig's query. Katschnig told the President he had "heard" that the Administration is planning new regulations for farming operations, and said he wasn't thrilled about this. (Above: President Obama speaking in Atkinson)
"Mother Nature has really challenged us this growing season -- moisture, drought, whatever," Katschnig said. "Please don’t challenge us with more rules and regulations from Washington, D.C., that hinder us from doing that. We would prefer to start our day in a tractor cab or combine cab rather than filling out forms and permits to do what we’d like to do."
"If you hear something is happening, but it hasn’t happened, don’t always believe what you hear," President Obama told Katschnig, and advised him to call USDA to get a response to his concerns.
Problem is, the regulations Katschnig was asking about are not questions USDA typically addresses, since they are under the rubric of EPA. The exchange between the farmer and the President made national headlines when a reporter from Politico took Mr. Obama's advice, and called USDA, It resulted in a ping-pong game of referrals to different offices--and no answer to the question.
Three days later, USDA spokesman Justin DeJong told the subscription-only The Hagstrom Report that the Department would be changing how it responds to farmers' queries--including those regarding EPA regulations. But DeJong declined to give specifics on what this would entail. When Obama Foodorama asked DeJong for further details, he again declined to elaborate.
So Katschnig was a ball ready to be played by the GOP. He could well become the Joe the Farmer for Campaign 2012, this election's version of Joe the Plumber, who is Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher of Ohio. Wurzelbacher achieved national status after he queried Candidate Obama about small business tax policy during a 2008 campaign stop in Ohio. The McCain-Palin Campaign subsequently adopted the plumbing contractor as a metaphor for struggling middle-class Americans.
Katschnig’s video:
"One proposed regulation on “particulate matter” (dust) would devastate Katschnig’s industry and destroy many farming jobs," notes the blurb that accompanies Katschnig's video on Boehner's website.
UPDATE, Sept. 17, 2011: Katschnig story in GOP's Weekly Address, given by Rep. Peter Roskam
Rep. Peter Roskam (R-ILL-6) House Chief Deputy Whip, repeats Katschnig’s story at 2:48 in this video, in which he calls Washington "a red tape factory" producing regulations enforced by "unelected" "faceless" bureaucrats that will cost business owners millions in profits and inhibit job creation.
"One Illinois farmer stood up at a town hall meeting last month and pleaded with the president," Roskam says. "He said, 'please don't challenge us with more rules and regulations from Washington.' I couldn't have said it better myself. That farmer was one of several job creators who attended [the] president's speech to the Congress as guests of House Speaker John Boehner."
Roskam has also come out swinging against the Obama Administration for the proposed FTC voluntary principles for marketing foods to children, which he also claims will destroy jobs. A post about the issue IS HERE.
*Photo of Boehner from the Speaker's Office; photo of President Obama by Pete Souza/White House. Video from Speaker Boehner.
President Obama made only a single specific reference to rural issues and agriculture as he unveiled the American Jobs Act during his address to a Joint Session of Congress on Thursday evening, despite the fact that he spent three days in August on a bus tour through Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois to promote rural job creation. But today on the White House blog, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack explains that the President's $450 billion measure is good for the heartland. The President's proposal includes a major rebuild for America's transportation infrastructure, and this is terrific news for rural America, Vilsack says.
As for the President's mention of agriculture? Mr. Obama cited President Abraham Lincoln at the end of his speech, as an example of bipartisanship that should be replicated today. He didn't note that Lincoln founded the Department of Agriculture in 1862, but rather pointed to the educational institutions that are part of that legacy.
“We all remember Abraham Lincoln as the leader who saved our union,” President Obama said. “But in the middle of a civil war, he was also a leader who looked to the future — a Republican president who mobilized government to build the transcontinental railroad; launch the National Academy of Sciences; and set up the first land grant colleges. And leaders of both parties have followed the example he set.”
The Secretary's blogpost:
Last night, I went to the Capitol to hear the President address Congress about the way forward to grow the economy and create jobs.
There is no doubt that these have been tough times. And it’s very tough for the many Americans who are looking for work. So we’ve got to keep finding ways to help the unemployed in the short term and rebuild the middle class over the long term.
The American Jobs Act that President Obama laid out this evening will have an immediate impact. It will create jobs now. And it is based on bipartisan ideas that both Democrats and Republicans have supported in the past.
Americans living in rural communities know well that the specific ideas in the bill work. Too many of rural areas are dealing with crumbling infrastructure. They know the benefits of rebuilding local roads, or of improving their water system. And our rural construction workers are ready to get back on the job.
The small businesses that employee most rural Americans know that the tax cuts in the bill will mean more work, so they can expand and hire. And every working rural family will benefit from money back in their pockets.
Small rural governments know they can use the support to keep folks on payroll. Teachers, firefighters and other first responders need to be kept on the job preparing our children for a better future and keeping our families safe.
Most importantly, folks in rural America know that in difficult times, we need to come together to hammer out a solution that benefits everyone. And elected leaders in Washington need to do the same as they work to support job growth and build a stronger future for all Americans. ## *Photo of President Obama during his remarks on Thursday by Getty
Coalition of lawyers says no; White House declines to comment on letter sent to Administration... A coalition of 36 lawyers is defending the Obama Administration's proposed preliminary voluntary principles for limiting the kinds of food products that can be advertised to children. Issued in April by the Federal Trade Commission's Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children, the proposal supports the massive government effort to combat childhood obesity that's coordinated by First Lady Obama's Let's Move! campaign. The principles do not violate the First Amendment right to free speech, the legal eagles said today in an open letter sent to the top Administration officials at FDA, CDC, USDA, and FTC, as well as relevant parties at the White House, including Senior Policy Advisor for Healthy Food Initiatives Sam Kass and newly mintedLet's Move! Executive Director Dr. Judith Palfrey.
The proposal has not yet been adopted in final form. Some of the lawyers who signed the letter are the top US experts in First Amendment law, according to Jeffrey Chester of Washington, DC's Center for Digital Democracy, a spokesman for the group.* The lawyers contend that because all food and beverage companies are entirely free to ignore the proposed federal guidelines, the draft principles “do not restrain or compel anyone’s speech."
"They are not, in fact, government regulations at all," the lawyers noted, and likened them to other voluntary federal guidelines, such as USDA’s MyPlate dietary recommendations.
The letter is scholarly pushback against the efforts of the Sensible Food Policy Coalition, a food/media corporate front group created in July to launch an aggressive attack against the FTC proposal. As reported here, the coalition includes PepsiCo, Viacom, Kellogg's, General Mills, Time Warner, with powerful lobbying group the Grocery Manufacturers Association on board as an "honorary member." They've hired Anita Dunn, who served in 2009 as President Obama's White House Communications Director, to create a multi-pronged PR campaign.
Of counsel to the Coalition is attorney Jim Davidson, chair of thepublic policy group at Washington, DC's Polsinelli Shughart law firm, who told Obama Foodorama that the principles are "de facto legislation," and the group's goal is to have them "completely withdrawn." The group has posted a "White Paper" on its website, claiming the principles violate the First Amendment.
"Attorneys retained by industry have invoked a variety of First Amendment arguments, a tactic with the potential effect of diverting policymakers’ attention from the substance of the draft nutrition principles," the lawyers' letter notes. "Nothing in the cases cited by these commenters bears on the IWG principles. The doctrines of “informal censorship,” “unconstitutional conditions,” and “de facto coercion” are completely inapt."
"The food and ad lobby are using the First Amendment argument as a political weapon designed to undermine public health," Chester said. "Today's letter says that the food marketing lobby is on very shaky legal ground."
David Vladeck, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, responded to some of the claims the food/ad industry is making in a July post on FTC's blog, calling many of these "myths."
"At the risk of being redundant, a report to Congress containing recommended nutrition principles can’t violate the Constitution," Vladeck wrote. "A report is not a law, a regulation, or an order, and it can’t be enforced. While we hope companies voluntarily choose to adopt the principles (when finalized), there’s no legal consequence if they don’t. So there’s no effect on their free speech rights."
Meantime, in mid-July, food industry giants proposed their own set of standards for marketing foods to children. These were laxer than those proposed by the Obama Administration, of course.
Lawmakers have joined the fray... Members of the GOP over the summer spoke out against the FTC proposal, using the arguments created by the Sustainable Food Policy Coalition. Its opening salvo was an "economic impact report" that claimed that if adopted, the guidelines will lead to a 20% reduction in advertising expenditures, which will cause a multi-billion dollar "ripple effect" through the commerce chain, translating to at least 74,000 lost jobs for Americans in 2011.
Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Illinois) is the most recent lawmaker to take this particular bait. On August 30th, he published an op-ed piece in the Chicago Sun-Times, blasting the Obama Administration for proposing "regulations" that are bad for business.
"Illinois-based food producer Sara Lee could soon face lower sales and higher costs and provide fewer jobs if the administration goes through with a particularly overreaching food regulation that would dramatically restrict their ability to advertise many food products — in the name of fighting childhood obesity," Roskam wrote, adding that Sara Lee would no longer be able to sell foods such as hot dogs at sporting events where children under age 18 are present.
Letter recipients...and no comment from the White House The letter from the legal scholars was sent to FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz; FDA Commissioner Dr. Margaret Hamburg; CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden; and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. According to Chester, in addition to Kass and Palfrey at the White House, two members of the Domestic Policy Council, Judith Moreno and Raquel S. Russell, were also sent the letter.
An East Wing spokesman declined to comment on whether the letter had been received.
The First Amendment experts included in the group that signed the letter are Tamara Piety, Vincent Blasi, Erwin Chemerinsky, Michael Dorf, Steven Heyman, Steven Shiffrin, David Strauss, and Mark Tushnet, according to Chester.
*The letter writing effort was organized by Public Health Law & Policy, an advocacy group in California.
*Obama O's cereal image created during Mr. Obama's 2008 election campaign
$6,039,935,392 federal expenditure for June... If Food Food Stamps are an economic stimulus, as Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsacksaid last month, the US economy got less of a boost in June from the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. According to preliminary USDA estimates released today, in June the number of people receiving Food Stamps went down for the first time during President Obama's term, a reduction of 0.5% from May's all-time historic high of citizen use.
45,183,931 people received Food Stamps in June, down 226,752 from May's 45,410,683. That equals about 41,510 fewer households; June's household use number is 21,394,405. But the numbers are also 9.5% higher than June of 2010.
The total monthly federal expenditure for June was $6,039,935,392, down from $6,121,532,495 in May, a difference of $81,597,103.
Participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program had been growing steadily since before President Obama entered office; the program had previously set records for increased enrollment every month since December of 2008. In January of 2009, when President Obama entered office, 31,983,716 Americans or 14,499,693 households used Food Stamps, at a federal cost of $3,633,188,682.00, according to USDA.
"Every dollar of SNAP benefits generates $1.84 in the economy in terms of economic activity," Vilsack said in an interview in August. "If people are able to buy a little more in the grocery store, someone has to stock it, package it, shelve it, process it, ship it. All of those are jobs. It's the most direct stimulus you can get in the economy during these tough times."
He credited the record rates of enrollment in the SNAP program to better coordination between USDA and state agencies.
49 advocacy groups question USDA decision to schedule public comment period during Fall harvest and record-breaking drought; ask for new deadline in Jan. 2012...
Citing drought, bad timing, and a lack of internet access, forty-nine advocacy groups representing family farmers, ranchers, and consumers from across the US have sent a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack requesting an extension for the public comment period for the “Traceability for Livestock Moving Interstate” proposal. The comment period opened in August and is scheduled to end on November 9, 2011, but the groups say they need an additional sixty days to lodge their opinions, and want the Department to immediately announce an extension to January 8, 2012. (Above: President Obamamet with livestock owners on Aug. 17th during his Rural Bus Tour)
The USDA proposal calls for IDing animals with brands, ear tags, and other "low tech" devices, and keeping complicated records for livestock moving across state lines in order to trace disease outbreaks. Stakeholders have criticized it as burdensome from both privacy and economic standpoints, and they need more time to understand the full ramifications of the current proposal, the letter says.
"No traceability program can succeed without the cooperation of animal owners," the Aug. 26th letter warned. "Failure to provide this time will both further alienate animal owners and deprive the agency of useful input."
The groups have good reason for calling for the extension of the comment period.
"The period for public comment coincides with the fall harvest and comes during the worst drought ever recorded in some major livestock production regions,” Judith McGeary, Executive Director of the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance and vice-chair of the USDA Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Animal Health, said in a statement.
Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas have been hardest hit by the drought, which has caused crop losses, a spike in prices, and devastating wildfires.
“Our farmers and ranchers are struggling to get their crops in and save their animals, and they need more time to assess the impacts of the proposed rule,” McGeary said.
The letter to Vilsack also points out something USDA is well aware of: Many farmers and ranchers are not online, which makes commenting difficult. “According to the 2007 Census of Agriculture, more than 40% of farms do not have internet access,” the groups wrote. The Secretary touted USDA's ongoing efforts to bring broadband to rural America during President Obama's recent three-day bus tour through Minnesota, Iowa, and Illinois, but this is a long-term project.
Many Menonnite and Amish farmers, who will be impacted by USDA proposal--and who have long opposed it--do not use the internet at all, and their comments must come by mail.
The current proposal comes after after USDA held public meetings over the last two years in which Vilsack and other officials were beset by outraged livestock owners and other stakeholders. The proposed rule also creates new requirements for businesses associated with livestock; veterinarians and auction barns will be required to keep records on every tagged animal for a minimum of five years.
"I am not surprised" President would devote three days to rural issues, Agriculture Secretary says...
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has a post the White House blog today, discussing President Obama'sthree-day rural bus tour through Minnesota, Iowa, and Illinois, Aug. 15-17. In the photo, above, the President and Vilsack speak with rural leaders during a breakout session at the White House Rural Economic Forum at Northeast Iowa Community College in Peosta, Iowa. Vilsack made national headlines during the trip when he said in an interview that Food Stamps are a job-creating economic stimulus.
"From investments in rural broadband to efforts to support small-business innovation, the President talked about his commitment to rural America – and he listened to what local residents had to say," Vilsack writes in his blog post, adding "I am not surprised" that the President would spend three full days in rural America.
The Secretary's post:
Today, I am hosting a forum focused on the rural economy at the Iowa State Fair. But, Rural America has been in the spotlight all this week as I joined President Obama to travel across parts of Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois, visiting rural communities to discuss his Administration’s efforts to create jobs and drive economic growth. From investments in rural broadband to efforts to support small-business innovation, the President talked about his commitment to rural America – and he listened to what local residents had to say.
The centerpiece of his trip was the Rural Economic Forum, held Tuesday at Northeast Iowa Community College in Peosta. There, 200 small business owners, farmers, retirees, elected officials and others came together to discuss their ideas for a revitalized rural economy. I was pleased to participate in that forum, along with my Cabinet colleagues Housing and Urban Development Secretary Donovan, Transportation Secretary LaHood, and Administrator Mills of the Small Business Administration. Ed. note: The White House released no list of invitees.
After opening remarks by the President, the participants broke into a series of small discussion groups – with topics ranging from agricultural innovation and energy opportunities to small business to infrastructure. Each group developed a series of ideas and recommendations, which will become part of a larger report to the White House Rural Council that I chair.
I had the opportunity to facilitate the Ag Innovation and Energy breakout session with about 20 farmers, ranchers, and other officials. Our discussion – which the President joined for a few minutes – touched on the importance of the renewable energy sector and new markets, as well as particular barriers to growing the rural economy through agricultural innovation.
Some in the audience expressed amazement that the President of the United States would spend an entire day – let alone a three-day bus trip – focusing on the needs of rural America. I am not surprised.
This president has repeatedly shown his commitment to the continued strength of small towns and rural areas. He is focused on innovation and small business development that will create jobs in rural areas and strengthen the middle class. And, he was enthusiastic about the opportunity to hear ideas and insights from the people who live in rural America.
The President's parting words in Peosta said it all:
Sometimes there are days in Washington that will drive you crazy. But getting out of Washington and meeting all of you, and seeing how hard you're working, how creative you are, how resourceful you are, how determined you are, that just makes me that much more determined to serve you as best I can as President of the United States.
...And don't bet on Grandpa's corn ethanol operation, President tells boy at Atkinson town hall... *An update at bottom of post "Nobody is more interested in seeing our agricultural sector successful than I am," President Obama declared on Wednesday in Atkinson, Illinois, during the third town hall of his rural bus tour. He was speaking at Wyffels Hybrids, a family-owned hybrid corn seed operation that does a big regional business. The President bounded into Wyffels to a standing ovation, and his formal remarks were interrupted by frequent bursts of applause. All the same, he got some tough Ag questions during the brief Q & A that followed.
The President's adopted home state is the fifth largest corn producer in the nation, and he received a hero's welcome in Atkinson. The streets of the tiny town, population about 1,100, were decorated with 1,000 flags donated by one excited local citizen. An upgrade in the local highway and the town's shiny new fire station were paid for with Recovery funding, the White House noted on its blog, adding that the cash flow also "kept jobs going." Still, locals weren't afraid to take on their President.
Don't believe what you hear... The very first question, from Rock Katschnig, a farmer who identified himself as a corn and soybean grower, was not so much a question as a flat-out complaint. Katschnig said he had "heard" that the Administration is planning new regulations for farming operations for dust, for water run-off, for noise.
"Mother Nature has really challenged us this growing season -- moisture, drought, whatever," Katschnig said. "Please don’t challenge us with more rules and regulations from Washington, D.C., that hinder us from doing that. We would prefer to start our day in a tractor cab or combine cab rather than filling out forms and permits to do what we’d like to do."
President Obama first said that Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack was in the audience and could better answer a regulatory question, but then gave the farmer some advice.
"If you hear something is happening, but it hasn’t happened, don’t always believe what you hear," President Obama said. He got laughter and applause, then continued.
"I’m serious about that. Because a lot of times, what will happen is the folks in Washington -- there may be some staff person somewhere that wrote some article or said maybe we should look into something," President Obama said. "And I’m being perfectly honest, the lobbyists and the associations in Washington, they’ll get all ginned up and they’ll start sending out notices to everybody saying, look what’s coming down the pike."
The President said the Administration would be "applying common sense" to regulatory issues.
"And if somebody has an idea -- if we don’t think it’s a good idea, if we don’t think that there’s more benefit than cost to it, we’re not going to do it," the President said.
He advised the worried Katschnig to query USDA with his concerns about what are proposed EPA regulations. Later in the day, at the town hall held in Alpha, Illinois, the President got the exact same question from another farmer, and repeated what he'd said the first time, adding "we're looking for creative solutions."
"Nobody is more interested in seeing our agricultural sector successful than I am, partly because I come from a farm state," the President said at the Alpha town hall.
UPDATE, Aug. 18: A reporter from Politico took President Obama's advice to query USDA about the regulations, and made calls to USDA to get an answer to the farmers' questions. After being bounced from local to state to federal outlets as well as to non governmental agencies, the reporter finally got an answer from a spokesman in USDA's media relations department. This was USDA's statement, via e-mail:
“Secretary Vilsack continues to work closely with members of the Cabinet to help them engage with the agricultural community to ensure that we are separating fact from fiction on regulations because the administration is committed to providing greater certainty for farmers and ranchers. Because the question that was posed did not fall within USDA jurisdiction, it does not provide a fair representation of USDA’s robust efforts to get the right information to our producers throughout the country.”
USDA spokesman Justin DeJong later told The Hagstrom Report that USDA would be changing how it responds to farmers' queries, but declined to give specifics on what this would entail when Obama Foodorama asked for further details. __________________ End update
Can you save Grandpa's corn ethanol business? On Tuesday, the President unveiled a $510 million initiative to boost rural industries that create advanced biofuels for military and commercial use, which will focus on all kinds of fuels--except for corn ethanol. The President made the audacious move of unveiling his package in Iowa, the largest corn producing state in the nation. In Atkinson, 11-year-old Alex McAvoy stared the President down, and asked how the Commander in Chief planned to save Grandpa's corn ethanol operation. The boy's mom sat beside him in the audience, encouraging him.
"My grandpa is a farmer, and he owns -- well, yes, he owns part of the local ethanol plant. I was wondering, what are you going to do to keep the ethanol plant running?" Alex asked.
The President didn't really flinch as he explained, albeit slightly confusingly, that alternative biofuels have a brighter future than corn ethanol, and Grandpa needs to basically get out of the corn ethanol industry.
"I will say that the more we see the science, the more we want to find ways to diversify our biofuels so that we’re not just reliant on corn-based ethanol," President Obama said. "Now, we can do more to make corn-based ethanol more efficient than it is, and that’s where the research comes in."
The President said "the key going forward" is creating biofuels out of "switchgrass and wood chips and other materials that right now are considered waste materials."
The next part of the President's answer made loose sense, in terms of answering the child's question:
"And part of the reason that's important is because, as I think most farmers here know, particularly if you’re in livestock farming, right now the costs of feed keep on going up and the costs of food as a consequence are also going up," President Obama said. "Only about 4 percent of that is accounted for by corn being diverted into ethanol, but as you see more and more demand placed on our food supplies around the world -- as folks in China and folks in India start wanting to eat more meat and commodity prices start going up, it’s going to be important for us to figure out how can we make biofuels out of things that don’t involve our food chain."
Then came the real answer:
"Hopefully your grandfather, with his ethanol plant, is starting to work with our Department of Agriculture to find new approaches to the biofuel industry," President Obama said.
The President took eight other questions unrelated to agriculture, then hit the road in his big black bus for his next town hall, stopping off for a visit at a high school on the way.
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, Atkinson! (Applause.) Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Thank you so much. Thank you. Everybody have a seat.
It is good to be back -- back home. (Applause.) It is good to be back in Atkinson, good to be back in Henry County. I just came from the Whiteside County Fair. (Applause.) Got some Whiteside folks here. Spent some time with some cows. (Laughter.)
I want to acknowledge a few people who are with us today -- wonderful, wonderful folks. First of all, our Secretary of Transportation, Peoria’s own Ray LaHood is in the house. (Applause.) Our outstanding Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack is here. (Applause.) Mayor Gus Junior is in the house. (Applause.) I told Gus that I didn’t have any gray hair either when I took office. (Laughter.) So I just want you to know what you have ahead in store for you right here. (Laughter.) But everybody tells me he’s doing a great job.
I want to thank the Waffles family for -- (laughter) -- Wyffels, rather, excuse me. I haven’t had lunch. (Laughter.) I want to thank -- I want to thank the Wyffels family for hosting us here today. Please give them a big round of applause. (Applause.)
I want to thank Lisa of Lisa’s Place. Where’s Lisa? (Applause.) Is that Lisa? Because Secret Service had to shut down the road and do all this stuff, I know some of you guys have not been able to enjoy her outstanding food. So as a consequence, my staff has been I think trying to eat up as much as possible. (Laughter.) My understanding is I’ve got a pie coming. Is that correct? (Applause.) What kind of pie? Coconut cream and a cinnamon roll? (Applause.) I’m very excited about that. (Laughter.) Coconut cream is one of my favorite pies. So thank you.
And we also have here -- Congressman Bobby Schilling is here. (Applause.)
Now, it is absolutely terrific to be back home. And I just want to first of all say to so many of you -- I had a chance when I was still running for the United States Senate, and a lot of people did not know my name -- this young lady, she’s still got -- she’s got, like, a picture from the -- I will sign it, of course I will. (Applause.)
And so as we’ve been traveling through the back roads of Iowa and now Illinois, it is such a reminder of why I decided to get involved in public service in the first place.
We’ve obviously been going through a tough time over these last two and a half years. And we went through the worst recession since the Great Depression. We saw 8 million jobs lost, 4 million before I took office, and then another 4 million the first few months of 2009. A lot of small businesses got hit.
And so I think a lot of times there have been folks who said -- who wonder whether our best days are still ahead of us or are they behind us. But I will tell you, when I travel through downstate Illinois, when I travel through Iowa, when I travel through the Midwest, I am absolutely confident about this country. And the reason is because of you. The reason is because of the American people, because, as tough of a time as we’ve had, there is not a country on Earth that would not readily change places with us right now. (Applause.)
We’ve still got the best workers in the world. We’ve got the best entrepreneurs in the world. We’ve got the best scientists, the best universities. We have so much going for us, and you see it at a company like this one. I was talking to the Wyffel brothers and they were telling me that they’re now expanding; they’ve hired some new folks, they’re starting to go into new markets around this region.
So we’ve got so much going for us. There’s nothing wrong with our country right now. There is something wrong with our politics. There is something wrong with our politics. (Applause.)
When you look at this debacle we had with the debt ceiling and raising it, what you realize is, is that our politics -- engaging in partisan brinksmanship and potentially seeing the first default of the United States of America -- that that has no place in how we move forward together. When this country is operating off a common ground, nobody can stop us. But when we’re divided, then we end up having a whole lot of self-inflicted problems.
Now, the fact of the matter is, is the economy has gotten better than it was when I first took office. I mean, we’ve seen over the last 17 months 2 million -- over 2 million private sector jobs created. But everybody here knows we’ve still got a long way to go, and it is urgent for us to make sure that we are joining together and not thinking about party first, not thinking about elections first, but thinking about country first. That’s the message that we need to send to Washington. (Applause.)
There are some things that we could be doing right now to put our neighbors and our friends, some family members back to work. And over the last not just two days but over the last several weeks, I’ve been talking about some additional things we need to do. There is no reason why we should not extend a payroll tax cut that put $1,000 into the pockets of every single family out there. That means they’ve got more money to spend, that means businesses have more customers, that means the economy grows and more people get hired. And we could renew it right now to give businesses certainty that they’re going to have customers, not just this year but next year as well.
The only thing holding us back is our politics. It’s traditionally a bipartisan idea; there’s no reason why we shouldn’t pass it. There’s no reason why we shouldn’t put Americans back to work all across the country rebuilding America. As I was driving in here -- (applause) -- as I was driving in here, I saw that a new fire station is being built, right -- (applause) -- thanks to the Recovery Act. Well, we need roads and bridges and schools all across the country that could be rebuilt. And all those folks who got laid off from construction because the economy went south or the housing bubble burst, they’re dying for work. Contractors are willing to come in under budget and on time.
And interest rates are low, so we could finance right now the rebuilding of infrastructure all across America that drove not only unemployment in the construction industry down, but drove unemployment down across the board. And traditionally that hasn’t been a Democratic or a Republic issue. That’s been an American issue. We’ve taken pride in rebuilding America.
The only thing that’s holding us back right now is our politics. We should be passing trade deals right now because, look, the Koreans, they can sell Kias and Hyundais here in the United States; I think that’s great. I want to be selling Fords and Chryslers and Chevys in Korea. (Applause.) And I want products all across the world stamped with three words: “Made in America.” That’s something that we could be doing right now. (Applause.)
There’s a bill pending in Congress right now that’s called the America Invents bill. It basically says entrepreneurs who are coming up with good ideas -- let’s say if the Wyffel brothers came up with a new strain and they wanted to patent it in some way, make it easier for them so that they can market it and make money off it and hire people for it.
We could do that right now. The only thing that’s holding us back is our politics. Look, over the last six months, even though the economy has been growing, even though the economy has been recovering, it has not recovered as fast as it could.
And some of those things are not in our control. We couldn’t control the tsunami in Japan that disrupted supply chains. We could not control what happened in the Middle East that drove up gas prices. We don’t have complete control over what happens in Europe with their problems. And all those things have affected our economy, but there are so many things that we’ve got control over right now that we could be doing to put people back to work.
And by the way, there’s no reason to think that putting people back to work is somehow in conflict with us getting our fiscal house in order. You know, this downgrade that happened, they didn’t downgrade us because America couldn’t pay its bills. They downgraded it because they felt that our political system couldn’t seem to make good decisions in order to deal with our budget the same way families deal with their budgets.
And so, the fact of the matter is, is that we came close to a grand bargain, which would have said, we’re going to cut spending we don’t need in order to pay for the things we do. We’re going to eliminate unnecessary programs so we can pay for student loans, so they can go to the University of Illinois or University of Iowa. (Applause.) We know that we’ve got to invest in basic research; that’s part of what made us the most productive agricultural powerhouse in the world. (Applause.) So we don’t want to cut back agricultural research in order to pay for it; we got to get rid of some things.
But what we’ve also said is we’ve got to do it in a balanced way. We’ve got to do it in a balanced way. A couple days ago, Warren Buffett wrote a op-ed piece in which he said, “It’s time to stop coddling billionaires.” (Applause.) And he pointed out that he pays a lower tax rate than anybody in his office, including his secretary. That doesn’t make any sense. (Applause.)
If everybody took an attitude of shared sacrifice, that we’re not going to put the burden on any single person, we can solve our deficit and debt problem next week. And it wouldn’t require radical changes, but it does have to be balanced. I don’t want a tax break, as lucky as I’ve been, if that tax break means that a senior citizen is going to have to pay an extra $6,000 for their Medicare. That’s not fair.
I think it makes sense before we ask that student to pay a little more for their student loan, we should ask those oil and gas companies to get rid of some corporate tax loophole that they don’t need because they’ve been making record profits. (Applause.)
A lot of this is common sense. I was saying -- I was at a town hall in a Minnesota -- I pointed out, you know, when -- there have been times in my life -- Michelle and I, things were a little tight, when we were just starting a family and had all these new expenses, and we had to make some choices. We didn’t say to ourselves, well, we’re not going to put any money into the college fund so we can keep on eating fancy dinners anytime we want. We didn’t say to ourselves -- I didn’t say to Michelle, honey, you got to stop buying clothes but I’m going to keep my gold clubs. (Laughter.) What we said was, well, let’s figure out what are the things that are going to be important to our family to make sure it succeeds not just now but in the long term; let’s invest in those things and let’s stop investing in the things that don’t work. And the same approach has to be taken for the American family.
Now, what’s been striking as I’ve been traveling through over the last few days -- you guys, you’re all fulfilling your responsibilities. You’re working hard, you’re looking after your families, you’re volunteering at church, you’re coaching Little League -- you’re doing everything right. And all you’re asking for, if I’m not mistaken, is that your political representatives take their responsibilities just as seriously. (Applause.)
And part of that means that you have to put politics aside sometimes to do what’s right for the country. People have been asking me, well, why didn’t you call Congress back after this whole debt ceiling thing? Why’d you let them leave town? I say, well, I don’t think it would be good for business confidence and certainty just to see members of Congress arguing all over again. I figured it was time for them to spend a little time back in their districts, hear your frustrations, hear your expectations.
As I’ve been driving on this bus, just seeing all those flags on the way in, seeing folks waving, little kids ready to go back to school, and grandparents in their lawn chairs, and folks out in front of the machine shop and out in front of the fire stations -- you go through small towns all throughout America, and it reminds you how strong we are and how resilient we are and how decent we are. And that should be reflected in our politics; that should be reflected in our government. (Applause.)
And that’s why I’m enlisting you -- that’s why I’ve got to enlist you in this fight we have for our future. I need you to send a message. I need you to send a message to folks in Washington: Stop drawing lines in the sand; stop engaging in rhetoric instead of actually getting things done. It’s time to put country ahead of party; it’s time to worry more about the next generation than the next election. (Applause.) If we do that, I guarantee you nobody can stop us, Atkinson. Nobody can stop the United States of America.
God bless you. Thank you. (Applause.)
So what I want to do is -- now, I just want to take some questions. And it’s not very formal -- you just raise your hand. We got folks with microphones. I’m going to go boy, girl, boy, girl, so it’s fair. (Laughter.) And I’m going to try to get in as many questions as I can. So do stand up and introduce yourself, though. I want to know who I’m talking to.
All right? I’ll start with this gentleman right here since he’s right next to the mic.
Q Is it on?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, there you go.
Q Rod Catchdig (ph). Welcome to Atkinson, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, sir.
Q I farm north of here. We enjoy growing corn and soybeans, and we feel we do it as safely and efficiently as we possibly can. And Mother Nature has really challenged us this growing season -- moisture, drought, whatever. Please don’t challenge us with more rules and regulations from Washington, D.C., that hinder us from doing that. We would prefer to start our day in a tractor cab or combine cab rather than filling out forms and permits to do what we’d like to do. (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we’ve got the Secretary of Agriculture right now, so is there a particular -- is there a particular rule that you’re worried about?
Q We hear what’s coming down about noise pollution, dust pollution, water runoff. Sometimes the best approach is just common sense, and we are already using that.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Here’s what I’d suggest is, the -- if you hear something is happening, but it hasn’t happened, don’t always believe what you hear. (Laughter and applause.) No -- and I’m serious about that. Because a lot of times, what will happen is the folks in Washington -- there may be some staff person somewhere that wrote some article or said maybe we should look into something. And I’m being perfectly honest, the lobbyists and the associations in Washington, they’ll get all ginned up and they’ll start sending out notices to everybody saying, look what’s coming down the pike. And a lot of times we are going to be applying common sense. And if somebody has an idea -- if we don’t think it’s a good idea, if we don’t think that there’s more benefit than cost to it, we’re not going to do it.
And so, I want to make sure that everybody gets accurate information. If you ever have a question as to whether we’re putting something in place that’s going to make it harder for you to farm, contact USDA. Talk to them directly. Find out what it is that you’re concerned about. My suspicion is a lot of times they’re going to be able to answer your questions and it will turn out that some of your fears are unfounded.
But nobody is more interested in seeing our agricultural sector successful than I am, partly because I come from a farm state. And I spent a lot of time thinking about downstate issues as a United States senator. And I’m very proud of the track record that we’ve developed. If you look at what’s been happening in terms of agricultural exports -- what’s been happening in terms of agricultural income during the time that I’ve been President of the United States -- I think we’ve got a great story to tell. And I want to continue to work with you and other farmers to make sure that we’re doing it in the right way that’s not inhibiting you from being successful.
Q Thank you. We appreciate that.
THE PRESIDENT: Appreciate you, sir. (Applause.) Young lady right back there with the glasses on. There she is.
Q Welcome, Mr. President, to Henry County. My name is Luanne Levine (ph), and I own a local real estate company here in Henry County, over in Geneseo. So you know we’re I’m headed: housing. Every week I sit around the kitchen table of families that are here today and I listen to the stories of a lost job, upside down in their house. And they ask, Luanne, how can you help? What programs are out there?
I have to say I saw a turnaround come May and June. My phone was ringing. I was busier than all get-out. I could see that the country -- yes, we are in rehab. People have made adjustments and I saw progress.
Since the debt ceiling fiasco in Washington, the phones have stopped. We have no consumer confidence after what has just happened. Interest rates are a record low. I should be out working 14 hours a day, and I am not. What are your future plans in helping middle-class America -- Generation X and Y and middle-class America will get the country out of where we are, and I want to know what are your contingent plans?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, you’re absolutely right that housing has been at the key -- at the core of a lot of the hardships we’ve been going through over the last two and a half years. And that’s why we’ve made it such a priority to try to help families stay in their homes the last two and a half years. And that’s why we’ve made it such a priority to try to help families stay in their homes if they can still afford the home. There were some folks who couldn’t -- who bought homes they couldn’t afford, but there were a lot of folks who just had a run of bad luck because somebody lost a job or lost a shift. And so what we’ve been trying to do is push the banks, push the servicers to do loan modifications that will allow people to stay in their homes and will try to buck up housing prices generally.
Q Can I -- Can I please say --
THE PRESIDENT: Sure, go ahead.
Q -- the loan modification system has been a nightmare. Short sales are a nightmare. And the lenders are so tight and you have to be so perfect, and it’s not a perfect world.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, what we’ve been trying to do is make sure that -- we’ve probably had a couple of million loan modifications that have been taking place. The problem is, is that the housing market is so big. And so a lot of families have just had to work down their debts, and they’ve been successful -- and as you said, we were starting to see things bottom out and confidence start picking up.
Now, I can’t excuse the self-inflicted wound that was that whole debt debate. It shouldn’t have happened the way it did. We shouldn’t have gotten that close to the brink. It was inexcusable. But moving forward, I think a lot of this has to do with confidence, as you said.
Q A hundred percent.
THE PRESIDENT: Companies have never been more profitable. They’re seeing record profits; it’s just they’re hoarding their cash, they’re not investing it. A lot of banks have now recovered, but they’re not lending the way they used to. Now, they need to have slightly tighter lending criteria than they used to have, obviously, because that was part of the reason that we had that housing bubble. But one of the things we’ve talked about is, can we encourage banks now to take a look at customers who are good credit risks, but are being unfairly punished as a consequence of what happened overall?
There are some other ideas that we’re looking at on the housing front. But I’ll be honest with you, when you’ve got many trillions of dollars’ worth of housing stock out there, the federal government is not going to be able to do this all by itself. It’s going to require consumers and banks and the private sector working alongside government to make sure that we can actually get the housing moving back again. And it will probably take this year and next year for us to see a slow appreciation again in the housing market.
What we can do is make sure we don’t do any damage. And that’s what happened in this last month. That’s why I was so frustrated by it, and I suspect that’s why you were so frustrated by it as well.
Q Very much.
THE PRESIDENT: The last thing I’ll say, though, is if we get the overall economy moving, if we pass this payroll tax cut, if we get some of these tax credits for businesses that we passed back in December extended into next year so that we’re giving incentives for folks to invest in plants and equipment now -- if the overall economy is doing well, that means consumers are doing better; it also means that housing will start doing better as well.
All right? Thank you so much for your great question. (Applause.)
Q Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Gentleman in the glasses, right there. Yes, sir.
Q Hi, Mr. President. My name is Larry Floriani (ph) and I work at the Rock Island Arsenal. And thanks a lot for coming to our town. We’re really happy to have you here so we can talk to you.
THE PRESIDENT: You bet.
Q Okay, my question is, what do you think the Simpson-Bowles commission contributed to the deficit and debt discussion, and what do you expect will be accomplished by the new super congressional committee?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, let me thank everybody who does work at the arsenal, because you guys are out there and you’ve been saving lives and making sure our troops are well equipped for generations now. (Applause.) So thank you.
The Bowles-Simpson committee, this is a committee that I set up to look at our current fiscal situation to see what could be done. And it was a bipartisan committee; it was chaired by a well-known Republican, Alan Simpson, former senator, and Erskine Bowles, who used to be the chief of staff for Bill Clinton. And it had equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans, as well as business sector and private sector leaders.
And basically what they recommended was what I’ve been talking about, which is a balanced approach in which we’re making some modifications to what’s called discretionary spending -- that’s the spending we do every year on everything from farm programs to student loan programs to food stamps to you name it -- that we cut defense spending in a sensible way, that we look at how we can make modifications that strengthen Social Security and Medicare for the next generation, and how we raise additional revenue so that we bring the overall budget into a sustainable place.
And the truth of the matter is, is that the commission recommendations are ones that not only I, but the so-called Gang of Six, these senators in the United States Senate, agreed to as well. And that was bipartisan; you had Democrats and Republicans.
It was that kind of balanced package that I proposed to Speaker John Boehner that we move forward on. And, frankly, we came pretty close. And I’ll tell you, I think Speaker Boehner was prepared to do it. But he got some resistance in his caucus, because they said, we’re not going to vote for anything that has revenue in it.
And so instead of doing this big package that got our debt and our deficit sustainable, what we got was this $1 trillion worth of cuts where we needed $4 trillion to close the deficit and the debt, and we got this commission to come up with another $1.5 trillion.
Now, I continue to believe that we need a balanced approach. So when this committee comes forward, I’m going to be making a presentation that has more deficit reduction than the $1.5 trillion that they have been assigned to obtain. Because I don’t think it’s good enough for us to just do it partway. If we’re going to do it, let’s go ahead and fix it. And if we’re going to fix it, the only way, I believe, to do it in a sensible way is you’ve got to have everything on the table. You can’t take things off the table.
And I’ve been concerned that Speaker Boehner has already said that the folks he assigned, none of them can vote to increase revenues. That’s a concern of mine. I was concerned when I saw the Republican presidential candidates -- somebody asked them, well, if you got $10 of spending cuts for every $1 in additional revenue, would you be willing to accept it, and all of them said no.
Now, that’s just not common sense. I can’t imagine that’s how Atkinson runs its operations, right? I mean, if the mayor had to deal with a situation in which we’re not going to pay for anything -- we’re not going to pay for roads, we’re not going to pay for schools, we’re not going to pay for garbage pickup -- you name it, we’re not going to pay for it -- but we still expect you to provide those services, the mayor would be in a pretty tough spot. There’s no reason why we would expect the federal government to operate in the same way.
So the bottom line is this: I will be presenting, as I’ve already presented -- I did back earlier this year -- a plan that says we’re going to have spending cuts and we’re going to have revenue. We’ll have more spending cuts than we have revenue, but we’re going to have to take a balanced approach and everything is going to be on the table, including our long-term obligations, because the thing that is driving the deficit, if you look at -- we had a balanced budget back in 2000. Here’s what happened. Number one is we decided that we would cut taxes without paying for it. So we had huge tax cuts in 2001, 2003. Then we had two wars. And for the first time in our history, we didn’t pay for our wars. When our grandparents fought in World War II, the entire country paid for the wars that it fought. They didn’t pass it onto the next generation, didn’t put it on a credit card. We were the first generation not to pay for the wars that we fought.
And then we had a big prescription drug plan that was added to Medicare, and that wasn’t paid for. Then the recession hits, which means less money is coming in but more money is going out in terms of helping the unemployed or helping states and local governments not lay off teachers and firefighters and so on.
You combine all those things, we’ve got a big debt and a big deficit. The good news is this is not -- it doesn’t require radical surgery for us to fix it. It just requires us all taking an approach that says we’re a family and all of us are going to share a little bit in the burden. And those of us who are most fortunate, we can do a little bit more. (Applause.)
And corporations, they can afford to close some loopholes and simplify the tax code to get it done. All right? Thank you.
All right, this young lady in the pink right here. Yes.
Q Hello. I’m Jan Lowhouse (ph). I’m from Tiskilwa, Illinois.
THE PRESIDENT: Good to see you, Jan.
Q Thanks. It’s about 30 miles east of here. It’s a rural community based on farming. My question is about jobs. I think you have done some improvement in jobs, but what can you do without Congress today to make a change in jobs and so we can see a growth in job opportunities?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, there are some things that we can do without Congress, and we’re trying to do them. So, for example, I set up a jobs council made up of a lot of employers, both small businesses but also some of the biggest companies in the world, and asked them what can we be doing to encourage job growth. And they’ve come up with a series of recommendations, some of which don’t involve Congress at all, and we’re trying to implement them.
So a while back I announced we’ve got a lot of vets coming back from Afghanistan and Iraq who have incredible experience -- 25-year-olds who were leading platoons into battle; 26-year-olds who were handling $100 million pieces of equipment. But the problem is, is that we’re not doing as good of a job helping them market the skills and experience and leadership that they have to employers and we’re not linking them to employers who may be able to use their talents.
And so we just announced a couple weeks ago a whole new initiative where the Department of Defense is going to have a reverse boot camp. Just like you train folks to come into the military, you train them going out to figure out how they’re going to get jobs. (Applause.) And we got commitments from local -- from employers all across the country to say, we are going to hire veterans.
And in some cases, what we want to do is to change certifications, for example -- I’ll give you a good example. I had lunch with a group of veterans in Minnesota a couple days ago. One was an emergency medic who had been in theater. And you can imagine what that must be like.
And he had come back -- he wanted to be a nurse. He was having to take the whole nursing program from scratch. And here he had been dealing with young men and young women in uniform who had had the worst kinds of medical emergency. He’s patching them up under the most extraordinary strain. He’s having to go back as if he’d never been in the medical field at all. Well, that’s a waste of money. That doesn’t make sense.
So those are examples of things that we can do administratively. The other thing -- this gentleman here asked me about regulations. Well, one of the things we’re doing is we’re saying, show us particular regulations that may be getting in the way of you hiring. And there are going to be some that are important. We want clean air. We want clean water. But if there’s a bunch of bureaucratic red tape and it’s not actually improving the situation, let’s figure out how to get rid of some existing rules and let’s review every rule that comes in for its cost and its benefits. Again, that’s something that we can do administratively.
So there are some things that we can help on. But, frankly, we could do a lot more if we got Congress’s cooperation. And every proposal that I talked about previously, those are proposals that historically have had support from Republicans and Democrats. These aren’t radical ideas. I mean, building roads, when did that become a partisan issue, putting folks back to work? (Applause.) Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System -- Dwight Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System; last time I checked, he was a very popular Republican.
But this is what I mean about politics getting in the way sometimes. You can’t bring an attitude that says, I’d rather see my opponent lose than America win. You can’t have that attitude. (Applause.)
This gentleman right here with the goatee there. There you go. Mic’s right there.
Q Thank you Mr. President. My name is Justin Hubbs (ph). My question was just about revenue. I see a lot of the Republican presidential nominees signing pledges not to raise taxes. I was wondering if you could make a pledge that any deal will have a revenue increase.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, here’s -- it’s just math. If you have a deal that does not have revenue in it and you still want to close the deficit by, say, $4 trillion, which is what the experts say is required in order to stabilize our debt and our deficit -- and this is over a 10-year period -- if you have no revenue, then the only way to do that is you’ve got to drastically cut things like Medicare. You have to -- there’s no two ways about it. You’ve got to drastically cut Medicare; you’ve got to drastically cut Medicaid; you’ve got to cut back on education support in significant ways that affect schoolkids right here in Atkinson and all across the country.
So since I’m in Wyffels Hybrids, it’s like eating your seed corn. You are cutting back on the things that are going to help you grow and help this country succeed over the long term. It’s just not a smart thing to do. It’s not how you would run your own family business. And so I think it’s also important to understand that we can raise the kind of revenues we’re talking about without having an impact on middle-class families who are already struggling and haven’t seen their wages and their incomes go up in over a decade now. It can be done. (Applause.) The tax code is full of loopholes. Close those loopholes. (Applause.)
When it comes to the corporate tax rate, we could actually lower the overall corporate tax rate, which would make us more competitive, if we closed up a whole bunch of these loopholes that special interests and lobbyists have been able to get into the tax code. It might put some lawyers out of business -- (applause) -- but it would be the right thing to do.
And when it comes to upper-income folks -- I talked about Warren Buffett -- but the truth is -- I’ll just give you one example. The reason Warren Buffett’s taxes are so low is because he typically gets his income from capital gains. Capital gains are taxed at 15 percent. Now, your income taxes, you’re not being taxed at 15 percent, most of you. And as a consequence, these days the richer you are the lower your tax rate. Now, that can’t be something that is defensible regardless of party. I don’t care whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, an independent. That can’t be the way it is. (Applause.)
One last point I want to make, though, about these pledges -- I take an oath. My pledge is to make sure that every day I’m waking up looking out for you, for the American people. (Applause.) And so I don’t go around signing -- I don’t go around signing pledges because I want to make sure that every single day, whatever it is that’s going to be best for the American people, that’s what I’m focused on, that’s what I’m committed to. And that’s how I think every representative in Congress should be thinking, not about some pledge that they signed for some special interest group or some lobbyist or some association somewhere. They should be waking up thinking what’s best for the country. (Applause.)
All right. This young lady has been very patient right here. Yes, you.
Q Hi, I’m Kelly Wyffels -- relation to Bob and Bill -- and I’m a student at Western Illinois University.
THE PRESIDENT: What are you studying?
Q I’m a supply chain management major and a French major. And I’m wondering what you think is one of the best majors to major in, in order to get a job. Our professor seems to think that supply chain you get -- there’s a lot of job opportunities out there, but I wonder what other majors you think that are good for students to study.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, I can tell you’re going to be good, whatever you do. (Laughter and applause.) So when you finish, you let me know. We’ll talk to LaHood or Vilsack and we may hire you -- because you seem very impressive.
Look, the -- you’re already ahead of the curve because what you understand is that the economy is changing, and the days when just because you’re willing to work hard, you could automatically find a job -- those days are over. The truth of the matter is, is that everything requires an education. I don’t have to tell the farmers here. You guys are looking at GPS and have all kinds of equipment; you’re studying markets around the world. And it is a complicated piece of business that you’re engaged in. It’s not just a matter of going out with a plow in a field.
And that’s happened to every industry. When I go into factories these days, what’s amazing is how clean and how quiet they are, because what used to take 1,000 folks to do now only takes 100 folks to do. And one of the challenges in terms of rebuilding our economy is businesses have gotten so efficient that -- when was the last time somebody went to a bank teller instead of using the ATM, or used a travel agent instead of just going online? A lot of jobs that used to be out there requiring people now have become automated. And that means us investing in our kids’ education -- nothing’s more important. Nothing is more important. (Applause.)
Now -- but you’re also asking a good question, which is, don’t just go to college without having some idea about what interests you. Now, this supply chain management I think is a great field, because the world is shrinking and products from Atkinson end up on a dinner table in China somewhere, and that means that people who understand how to move products and services and people in efficient ways, there’s going to be high demand for them. So I don’t think your professor is just trying to keep you in class; I think he actually is onto something here.
One of the things I’m worried about and we’re trying to put a lot of emphasis on in the Department of Education is, can we do more to encourage math, science, engineering, technology learning -- (applause) -- because I can guarantee you, if you are a skilled engineer, if you are a skilled computer scientist, if you’ve got strong math skills and technical skills, you are going to be very employable in today’s economy. And that has to start even before young people get to college. So we’re trying to institute a whole -- what’s called a STEM program -- science, technology, engineering and math -- in the lower schools so that kids start getting oriented towards those fields. That’s where we traditionally have had a comparative advantage, but we’re losing ground to China and India and places like that where those kids are just focused on those subjects. And we need more of those, so you keep on studying the supply chain management.
I will tell you, though, just in case there are any French teachers here or foreign language teachers, having a foreign language, that’s important, too. That makes you so much more employable -- (applause) -- because if you go to a company and they’re doing business in France or Belgium or Switzerland or Europe somewhere, and they find out you’ve got that language skill, that’s going to be important as well. And we don’t do that as much as we should; we don’t emphasize that as much as we should here in the United States. So congratulations -- proud of you. (Applause.)
Q Thanks.
THE PRESIDENT: All right. A couple more? It’s a guy’s turn, isn’t it? Well, I’m going to -- I’ve got to call on this guy right here. What’s your name, young man?
Q My name is Alex McAvoy (ph).
THE PRESIDENT: Alex, how old are you?
Q I’m 10 -- I’m 11, sorry. (Laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Eleven -- you just -- did you just have a
birthday?
Q Yes, yesterday.
THE PRESIDENT: Yesterday was your birthday?
Q Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Happy birthday. (Applause.)
Q Thank you, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Give Alex a big round of applause.
(Applause.) He made 11.
Q My grandpa is a farmer, and he owns -- well, yes, he
owns part of the local ethanol plant. I was wondering, what are you going to do to keep the ethanol plant running?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that is a great question. Where is
your grandpa, is he close by?
Q He lives in Geneseo.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, okay. He lives up there. Well, you’re an excellent representative for your grandfather, I must say. (Laughter and applause.) We might have to hire you, too. (Laughter.) I think those of you know that when I was a state senator, when I was a United States senator, I was a strong supporter of biofuels. I continue to be a strong supporter of biofuels. Tom Vilsack, as our Agriculture Secretary, continues to be a strong supporter of ethanol and biofuels.
I will say that the more we see the science, the more we want to find ways to diversify our biofuels so that we’re not just reliant on corn-based ethanol. Now, we can do more to make corn-based ethanol more efficient than it is, and that’s where the research comes in. And there are some wonderful research facilities in our own University of Illinois system that have done a lot to advance the science on this.
But the key going forward is going to be, can we create biofuels out of switchgrass and wood chips and other materials that right now are considered waste materials? And part of the reason that’s important is because, as I think most farmers here know, particularly if you’re in livestock farming, right now the costs of feed keep on going up and the costs of food as a consequence are also going up. Only about 4 percent of that is accounted for by corn being diverted into ethanol, but as you see more and more demand placed on our food supplies around the world -- as folks in China and folks in India start wanting to eat more meat and commodity prices start going up, it’s going to be important for us to figure out how can we make biofuels out of things that don’t involve our food chain.
And so hopefully your grandfather, with his ethanol plant, is starting to work with our Department of Agriculture to find new approaches to the biofuel industry. But this is a huge area of support. This is another example of where we’ve got to make sure that our budget continues to invest in basic research, and that costs money. And if all we’re doing is cutting and we’re not thinking about investments, then over time we’re going to fall behind to countries like Brazil, where they’ve already got a third, I think, of their auto fleet operates on biofuels. Well, that’s -- there’s no reason why we should fall behind a country like Brazil when it comes to developing alternative energy. I want to be number one in alternative energy, and that’s good for the farm economy. (Applause.)
Yes, sir. Hold on right here.
Q Thank you, Mr. President, for being the President and I also -- (applause) --
THE PRESIDENT: Thanks.
Q And I want to go home and maybe ask my mother to cook me a good meal so I could tell her that I lobbied you. She’s a senior citizen. What’s the likelihood of her Social Security getting the cost of living next year?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me talk to you about Social Security. It is very likely that she will see a COLA, a cost-of-living increase next year, because inflation actually rose this year. The reason that there were a couple of years where she did not get a cost-of-living increase was because even though she probably felt like the cost of food and gas and groceries were going up, the overall inflation index actually did not go up. There was a period there where we actually had what’s called deflation, where the costs were a little bit lower than they had been comparable to the previous year.
So all that is done automatically. It’s not something that I make a decision about each year. And I promise you when folks don’t get their COLA, they all write to me and say, Mr. President, why -- you didn’t give us a cost of living, and don’t you care about senior citizens. And I have to write back and explain to them, no, that’s not something I did. These things just happen automatically based on estimates of what inflation is going to be.
While we’re on the topic of Social Security, though, I want to make sure everybody understands Social Security is not in crisis. We have a problem with Medicare and Medicaid because health care costs are going up so fast. Part of the reason we passed health care reform was to make sure that we could start changing how the health care system operates and try to reduce health care inflation.
But we have a genuine problem on Medicare and Medicaid: Health care costs are going up, but at the same time, there’s a lot more folks who are entering into the system. And if we don’t do anything about Medicare or Medicaid, it will gobble up our entire budget.
Social Security is in a better position. And so when I hear folks say, is Social Security going to be there for me 20 years from now -- yes, it will be there for you 20 years from now. It should be there for you 30 or 40 years from now. And the adjustments that we have to make on Social Security are relatively modest. They’re the kind of changes that Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill agreed to back in 1983 that created long-term solvency of the system. We can have Social Security solvent for another 75 years with just a few modest changes.
So when your grandmother -- tell her it wasn’t me who didn’t give her her COLA the last couple years. In fact, we tried to pass through Congress a $250 supplement because we knew seniors were having a tough time. We couldn’t get it passed through Congress. But they should get some modest increase next year. Okay? (Applause.)
All right. I think I’ve got time for a couple more questions. One more? Oh, this is always a tough one, this last one. I’m going to call on -- I’ll just call on you. You’re right there in front of me and the mics are already there. What’s your name?
Q Hi, my name is Pam Dennis (ph). I actually work for the Community Action Agency that serves Henry County. I also serve on the Henry County FEMA board. And I understand that drastic cuts need to be made in order to balance our budget. But with the last couple years being so difficult for jobs, why are budget cuts to programs that are helping these people keep their heads above water? I’m referring to the LIHEAP program, Community Service and Experience Works -- those type of programs that are helping people keep their heads above water. Why couldn’t we cut somewhere else and leave those alone for now, or at least fewer -- lessen cuts?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, well, first of all, I think it’s important to understand if we take a balanced approach we don’t need drastic cuts. The Low Income Housing Assistance Program, just to take one example, what we’ve done is we’ve said -- we have modestly reduced it, but partly because we had increased it significantly right when the recession hit, and it turned out that we didn’t need as much budgeted as was actually used. And obviously it varies depending on the weather any given winter. But what we’ve tried to do is actually keep the bulk of that program in place, and folks will get help in the winter if they can’t afford to buy home heating oil. That’s not going away.
The general principle you’re talking about is right, though. We should not cut those things that help the folks who are most vulnerable if we can find other places to cut for folks that would be nice to have but we don’t need. (Applause.) I agree with that general principle.
When Congress gets back in September, my basic argument to them is this: We should not have to choose between getting our fiscal house in order and jobs and growth. We can’t afford to do just one or the other. We got to do both. And by the way, the best thing we can do for our deficit and debt is grow the economy -- (applause) -- because when the economy is growing, more money in people’s pockets, they pay more in taxes, and there’s more revenue and fewer people are on unemployment. And that helps to reduce the strains on our budget.
So we’ve got to do both. And essentially, the best way for us to do this is to look at some of our long-term obligations and costs, figure out long-term savings that are gradually phased in so they don’t hit too hard right now. In the short term, there should be some things that we do that are paid for by some of these long-term savings in order to get the economy rolling and get the economy moving.
And some of the programs you mentioned I think are ones that, in a wealthy and decent society like ours, we should be able to help people make sure that they’re not freezing during the winter. I mean, that’s just I think a basic obligation we have to our fellow Americans. (Applause.)
Q Some of those programs are dependent upon the unemployment rate. My question is, with the unemployment rate, you’re only counting the people who are actually on unemployment. It’s not counting the people who worked a temporary job that was not eligible for unemployment or the people who were on unemployment and now that unemployment has ran out. So those people are not being counted.
So that affects specifically the FEMA funding that our Henry County gets. Henry County is not eligible for the FEMA money. They get the set-aside. And this year, because of the unemployment rate, we were not even able to get those set-aside funds. So I think that’s kind of a skewed number by using the unemployment rate.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, here’s the basic principle: With the economy not growing as fast as we want it to, the need is going to outstrip our resources. There’s always going to be more need out there relative to the amount of money that the federal government can spend.
But I guess the main argument I’m making to you is that don’t think that our choice is we’ve either got to stop our obligations to the most vulnerable or to our seniors or to our kids, or otherwise the budget is just going to go sky high -- or the deficit and debt are going to go sky high. We can do both in a sensible way.
And I will be presenting before this joint committee a very detailed, specific approach to this problem that allows us to grow jobs right now, provide folks who need help the help they need, and still gets our deficit and debt under control.
We do also have to look at some programs, because they may not be well designed, as well designed as they could be. I’ll give you an example. Unemployment insurance, the way it’s designed -- it was designed back at a time when you’d have layoffs and then people would hire you back when the business cycle went back.
The economy is changing so fast right now, people are having to re-train; companies move to an entirely different state. We’ve got to rethink how we do unemployment insurance. There is a smart program in Georgia. What they do is they say, all right, instead of you just getting unemployment insurance, just a check, what we’re going to do is we will give a subsidy to any company that hires you with your unemployment insurance so that you’re essentially earning a salary and getting your foot in the door into that company. And if they hire you full-time, then the unemployment insurance is used to subsidize you getting trained and getting a job. (Applause.) And so those kinds of adjustments to programs -- we’ve got to be more creative in terms of not doing things the way we’ve always done them.
But let me just close by saying this, Atkinson. First of all, it is good to be back. I’m grateful to all of you for your extraordinary welcome and hospitality. Don’t bet against America. Don’t bet against our workers. Don’t bet against our businesses. (Applause.)
We have gone through tougher times than this before, and we’ve always come out on top. As long as we pull together and as long as American know-how and ingenuity is promoted, there’s no reason why we’re not going to get this tough time just like we have before. And America is going to emerge stronger, more unified, more successful than it was in the past.
In order for that to happen, though, I’m going to need your help. I need your voices out there, talking to folks from both parties and telling them we expect you to show some cooperation; stop thinking about politics for a little bit; try to make sure that we’re moving our country forward.
And if you’re delivering that message, it’s a lot stronger than me delivering that message, because you’re the folks ultimately that put those members of Congress into office.
All right? Thank you, everybody. God bless you. God bless America. (Applause.)
A visit to President Lincoln's hometown to unveil new logo, new website, and "soft launch" the year of festivities...
Throughout 2012, USDA will mark important events, such as Lincoln signing the Department of Agriculture Organic Act on May, 15, of 1862, which established the Department, and the June signing of the Morrill Act to establish public land grant universities. The year-long commemoration will formally launch in February of 2012 at the USDA’s annual Agricultural Outlook Forum. Wednesday's party included a big cake with the new logo (above).
