house property news

mr. earnest: goodmorning, everybody. the press: good morning. mr. earnest: niceto see you all. a couple of quick thingsbefore we get started, just a logistical announcement. i know that the call timefor the present event with the pittsburgh penguins isin about 45 or 50 minutes here. so, if you need to excuseyourself to participate in that event, i will notbe personally offended.

second, the president wasupdated once again on the preparations underway toprepare for the likely landfall ofhurricane matthew. the weather forecastersat the national hurricane center and at noaa nowanticipate that the impact of the storm in the unitedstates is likely to be quite significant. we strongly encourage people who live in the areas that are likely to be affectedto heed the warnings and

instructions of localofficials, including evacuation orders. the instructions that arebeing offered by local officials are informed byinformation that they are receiving from scientistsand from federal officials, and those instructions aregeared toward protecting listen to thoseinstructions. we also encourage peopleto stay up to date on the weather forecast.

those of you who have beencovering the story know that the weather forecast or theforecast track of the storm has changed multipletimes just this week. so, it certainly is notoutside the realm of possibility that itcould change once again. we want to encourage peopleto stay up to date on that, but what we did learnovernight is that it's likely that the storm couldstrengthen further before making landfall, andthat obviously is deeply

concerning. so, we want peopleto be prepared. the last thing i'd say aboutthis is that there are those who doubt the intensityor severity of the storm. they need only look at theimages that are coming back from haiti. it's clear the storm had arather significant impact in haiti, and that is prettygood evidence of, you know, what people in thesoutheast could be facing.

for those americans that areinterested in offering up their assistance to haiti,we encourage people to visit cidi.org. it's a place where you canget some more information about how you can help acountry like haiti, that doesn't have the resourcesthat we do to deal with such a significant storm. but you know, obviouslythis is a pivotal day. people need to be makingpreparations and following

orders today. the storm is likely to beginbeing felt this evening, and you know, certainly over thecourse of the day those of us who don't live inpotentially affected areas will be sending our prayersup to those who are potentially in harm's way,but people should take confidence from knowing thatfederal officials have been working very effectivelywith officials at the state and local level, to preparein advance of the storm,

that we have developed anexpertise, and we intend to use our resources and thatexpertise to protect the american people, and that'llbe put to the test in the next few days. so with that, darlene, doyou want to get us started? the press: thanks. a couple of follow-upquestions on the latest theft of classifiedinformation. does the administration havea better sense of exactly

what informationwas taken or stolen? mr. earnest: this is aninvestigation that is being led at the fbi. federal prosecutorsobviously released documents yesterday that indicatedthat this individual had been in custodyfor several weeks. the department of justicealso made clear in the documents that werereleased yesterday that the investigation is ongoing.

so, as there is moreinformation that our investigators arecomfortable discussing publically, they'll make thedecision to do so, and you know, obviously you know,protecting sensitive national securityinformation is a top priority of theadministration. and it certainly is an issuethat this administration takes seriously. it's also an issuethat prosecutors and

investigators at thedepartment of justice take seriously. so, that investigationis continuing, and as additional information canbe made public about it, it will come from thedepartment of justice. the press: people everywhereare probably wondering how this could happen againafter ed snowden and reforms that were supposed to havebeen put in place after the snowden bout.

can you address at all howsomething like this has happened again inpost-snowden era ? mr. earnest: well darlene,i'm going to hesitate to draw too many connectionsbetween these two cases. each case is unique. some of the similarities inthe cases have been well documented publically, butlet me start by answering your question about thereforms that have been put in place.

the administration hasput in place, performs principally through thenational insider threat taskforce that is beingled by the office of the director of nationalintelligence. we had establishedgovernment-wide minimum reforms for these kinds ofinsider threat programs that prevent the theft orunauthorized disclosure of sensitive information. the intelligence communityhas launched a series of

continuous evaluationprograms, to help determine whether an individual withthe security clearance needs it and shouldcontinue to hold it. that effort has beeneffective and actually reducing the overall numberof people that hold security clearances. that number has fallen about17 percent in just the last several years. there also has been arequirement instituted that

individuals who hold asecurity clearance need to submit to a reinvestigationevery five years, to ensure that they are complying withthe terms that they have committed to, but what we'vealso tried to do is to enhance the quality ofbackground checking investigations, backgroundinvestigations. and there is a new agencythat's been stood up to ensure that thoseinvestigations are more thorough and moreefficiently conducted.

so, this is certainlysomething that the administration takesseriously, and there are important lessons that wehave learned since the case of mr. snowden, but darlene,i think that this risk is always going to be there, aslong as there is a desire to share sensitive informationacross the government, and we know that there is arisk of not sharing that information. you'll recall that thisis one of the principle

insights of the 9/11commission, that there is too much stove piping insideof the federal government. there were particular piecesof information that had they been shared across thegovernment could have been effectively used to keepthe american people safe. so, the sharing of thisinformation is critical. it's just critical that we-- that individuals who are entrusted with thisinformation keep the commitment that they've madeto the american

people to protect it. let me close by saying thatthese are the kinds of risks that our government hasfaced since the -- well, at least for a very long time,and remember we were talking a little bit earlier todayabout, you know, again an entirely different case, youknow, but a situation about 15 years ago where therewas an individual who was arrested by u.s. officials because hewas accused of stealing

sensitive information,and passing it onto the russians. this is the hansen case. so, you know, the caseof mr. snowden and this individual is unique. each is unique. you know, obviously thesnowden case got some extra attention, because franklyhe was so publically on the lamb, but this is somethingthat the -- that our

government has beenconfronting for a long time, and it's something thatin some ways is even more complicated given the moderncommunications tools that we have access to now, thatmake it easier to pass this information along. again, there's a benefit tothat in terms of enhancing information sharing, butthere's a risk, and that is a risk that we are workingvery diligently to mitigate. the press: does theadministration see this

latest case as serious asthe snowden case, or is it too early to makethat comparison? mr. earnest: i think it'scertainly too early for me to draw that kind ofconnection, or to offer up that kind of an assessment,but our investigators at the department of justiceare conducting their own independent investigation,and they will do so with a sense of urgency becausethey recognize how significant the stakesare in cases like this.

but i'll let them speak towhat they've learned, and you know, offer anassessment if they're prepared to do so aboutjust how serious it is. okay. roberta . the press: does thepresident intend to do anything to try to preventaleppo from falling? mr. earnest: well roberta,the united states has been deeply engaged ininternational diplomacy to reduce theviolence in syria.

we've obviously beeninvolved in that effort for a number of years now. the united states justyesterday participated in an issg meeting. this is the internationalserious support group that was convened. this is a group of a coupleof dozen countries who are concerned about thesituation in syria, and that have assessed that theyhave a significant national

interest in resolving thesituation inside of syria. and the united states hasworked effectively in a leadership role in thatgroup to try to bring the international communitytogether around some potential solutions. i can tell you that u.s. officials i believe aremeeting today with our european allies in europe,to discuss the situation inside of syria.

this is the so-called quintmeeting that is held at a variety of levels, but thefocus of those discussions today was on thesituation in syria. the united states isobviously very focused on supporting u.n. led efforts, and thereare a variety of those. there's obviously theefforts that are underway by the u.n. special envoy, mr. demistura to try to reduce the

violence inside of syria,and there's also been extensive work that's beendone at the united nation security council over theyears to try to focus the international community onpotential solutions inside of syria, and inaleppo in particular. we continue to be deeplyconcerned about the tactics used by the assad regimeand the russians that are focused on harmingcivilians, and that's -- it's deeply troublingwhat's happening there.

and you know, the unitedstates has been deeply engaged through diplomacyaround the world to try to address it. the press: but i guessvery specifically on the immediate threat that facesaleppo, is the united states -- is the presidentconsidering and doing anything to try to preventit from falling beyond diplomacy and sort ofthe broader effort? mr. earnest: well, againroberta, our conclusion

about the root cause of thechaos inside of syria is that there's no militarysolution to the many problems that are plaguingsyria, and we are working urgently to end the violencein syria and in aleppo through diplomatic channels. we have been very focusedon that through all the channels that ijust described. there is an important rolefor the united states military to play in termsof leading a counter-isil

coalition, and thosemilitary efforts have moved aggressively to rollback territory that isil previously controlled,and to apply significant pressure to the leadershipof isil and other extremist organizations that areoperating inside of syria. in fact, the department ofdefense announced earlier this week that a senioral-qaeda leader in syria was the target of a militarystrike, and that's an indication of the vigilancethat is being exercised by

united states militaryas they try to keep the american people safe. so, our military is deeplyengaged in the counter-isil campaign, but we're alsotrying to address the root cause of all this chaos,which is the political and we're working diligentlythrough diplomatic channels to try to reduce theviolence, and increase the flow of humanitarianassistance. the press: and just briefly,44 afghan troops who are in

the united states formilitary training have gone missing over the past twoyears, presumably to live and perhaps work illegallyin the united states. i guess i'm wondering howconcerned is the white house about the questions thatthis will raise about the training and securitygiven that i mean, they're training with the dod andthey've sort of gone awol? mr. earnest: well roberta,i can't speak to any individual cases, but iwould refer you to my

colleagues at the departmentof defense who may have more information on this for you. okay? michelle. the press: i just want toread to you something that just came in this morningfrom fbi sources. i just lost it. just give me one second. here it is. okay, so the fbibelieves harold t.

martin iii has beenillegally taking home classifiedinformation for years. when they raided hisproperty, they found thousands of pages ofclassified documents, hundreds of thumb drives,hard drives, dozens of computers and servers. he appeared to have hisown server farm, enough to operate his own cloud. so, i think it's one thingif, you know, he started

doing this last week, andthey suddenly caught him. i mean, i know he's been incustody for two weeks but, if this was a recent thing. but the fact that he --the fbi believes he's been illegally taking homeclassified information for years, and you listed anumber of changes that were made after the snowden case. so, how do you have anyconfidence that all the changes that were made arereally doing anything if

this person was able to dothis it's believed for that amount of time? mr. earnest: well michelle,i'm not going to be able to discuss any additionaldetails about what the fbi or investigators havebeen able to find. the press: right. mr. earnest: all right, soi'll leave it to them to disclose exactly whatthose investigations have uncovered so far.

those investigationsare obviously ongoing. the kind of steps that wehave taken to mitigate against so-called insiderthreats are significant, and they have made some progressin terms of accomplishing some of our goals, improvingthe background check system, reducing the number ofpeople that have security clearances, making sometechnical changes to the kind of access that peopleare given to sensitive information.

you know, there are avariety of both intuitive and highly technical stepsthat we can take to try to limit this risk, but this isa risk that is always going to exist. that risk is moresignificant, you know, given the kinds of technologythat's available now, that allows for the efficienttransfer of information. again, that is largely agood thing in terms of making the u.s.

government more effective,integrating our defenses in a way that can have apositive impact on our national security, but itdoes include an inherent risk, and this is a riskthat predates this kind of technology. i think what isunquestionable true is that the vast majority ofthe men and women in our intelligence communitytake very seriously the responsibility that theyhave to the american people,

to treat sensitiveinformation protectively. they understand theconsequences that protecting that information has forour national security. they understand that theeffective use of that information enhancesour national security. these are individuals who insome cases have the kind of expertise that would allowthem to collect a much larger paycheck in theprivate sector, but instead they used that expertise toprotect the

american people in a government job. and you know, that's apretty clear indication of their patriotism. the press: yeah. mr. earnest: but look forthese individual cases. this is a risk that exists,and as the investigation moves forward, if there ismore that we can learn about additional protections thatwe should put in place to prevent something like thisfrom happening again, we

certainly will, you know,learn from the situation. and if there are additionalreforms that are worth implementing, then we won'thesitate to do so, because the president has madethis a genuine priority. the press: there just seemsto be in such a secure operation sucha gaping hole. this person had the abilityto take home classified information overthe course of years. wouldn't you agree that, imean, there's obviously a

need for some different kindof changes than the ones that were already made? mr. earnest: well, therehave been important changes that have made, and we'vealready seen some important, positive results from them,but we certainly will as more is learned about thiscase, as the investigation continues. you know, part of thisinvestigation will be understanding exactly howthis person was able to

evade detection, and committhe crimes that are alleged, then you know, we'll wantto learn from that, and implement the kinds ofreforms or solutions that would prevent others fromdoing the same thing. the press: okay, and thelatest voice that we've heard this week was from theu.n.'s human rights chief calling as others have for alimit of the use of the veto in the security council. does the u.s.

support that, and does theadministration think that that would actually do anygood, especially at this point, to try to makechanges in what's happening in syria? mr. earnest: there certainlyhas been -- the united states has been disappointedat the way in which russia and to a certain extentchina have wielded their veto authority on the u.n. security council to bluntinternational efforts to

limit the violenceinside of syria. we've been disappointed thatthey have used that veto to protect assad. there have also beenmovements at the united nations security council toraise concerns about the conduct of individuals inthat conflict, and to ensure that they are met withsome accountability. those accountabilitymeasures have been blocked by the russians.

so, we've been deeplyconcerned by the way that russia has used itsveto power on the u.n. security council to preventas much action from the u.n. as we would like to see. i know there has been abroader and in some ways esoteric discussion aboutproposed reforms of the u.n. security council and the waythat it works, and there have been someproposals to enlarge it. you know, our friendsin india are certainly

interested in benefittingfrom reforms like that, but you know, as it relates tothe situation inside of syria, i think you know, ourconcern, our most urgent concern is with the way thatrussia has used their veto authority on the securitycouncil at the united nations. the press: so is thatsomething that should be done and should be looked atmore closely now, or is -- do you feel like now is notthe time for that, that it's

not really going to doanything at this point? mr. earnest: well, i think,you know, many united nations processes arecharacterized by the length of time it takes to completethem, and surely the idea of reforming those processes isalso likely to take a long time too. so, you know, we'veexpressed in other contexts our support for a set ofreforms that could make the united nations moreefficient, more effective,

and potentially even morerepresentative, but you know, our focus right nowis on you know, trying to reduce the violence andurgent situation inside of syria, okay? justin . the press: i guess i wantedto follow on a couple of things michelle asked aboutfirst, the reason the veto conversation wasparticularly relevant is reports that the u.s. is considering sanctionsagainst companies in

response to [inaudible]use in syria. i know that you network sortof talk about sanctions [inaudible], butwould the u.s. be willing to pursuesanctions with europe and other allies outsidethe framework the u.n. to addressconcerns in syria? mr. earnest: well, there areother examples of the united states being able to workeffectively outside the auspices of the u.n.

to implement sanctions ina coordinated fashion, to maximize the impactof those sanctions. so, the situation in ukraineis obviously the best example where the unitedstates has been able to work effectively with oureuropean allies to impose tough sanctionsagainst russia. of course i would be amongthe first to point out that the sanctions that we haveimposed on russia in concert with our european allies asa result of russia's actions

in ukraine have not yetachieved the desired result. we haven't seen the changein strategy on the part of the russians that we'dlike to see in ukraine. we haven't seen themindicate their clear respect for the territorialintegrity and sovereignty of ukraine, but we do know thatthose sanctions have had an impact on russia's economy. russia is paying the pricefor their actions inside of ukraine, and that price isone that they have to pay

because of the ability ofthe united states to work effectively with oureuropean partners to impose those costs. that's something that wedidn't do through the u.n. obviously because russiahas a veto on the u.n. security council. so, that's one example ofwhere we have been willing to work outside the auspicesof the united nations, but and in a way that has had animpact, even if we have not

achieved the desired result. so, what i would say is ourpreference is always to work through the u.n., when itcomes to implementing these sanctions, because it meansthat even more countries are able to coordinate theiractions with the united states, which essentiallyhas a multiplier effect in terms of the strength of thesanctions, and the size of the cost. but outside of, we dohave options and we have

demonstrated an ability towork outside of the u.n., to achieve a similar result. so, i guess the point is inthis case i wouldn't rule out multi-lateral effortsoutside of the u.n. to impose costs on syria,or russia, or others with regard to the situationinside of syria. we've done that in the past,and i wouldn't take that off the table in terms of theoptions the president may consider in this situation.

the press: on the datatheft, i know you talked to michelle yesterday, and thenagain this morning at some length about steps thatyou've taken particularly related to federalcontractors, but in both this and the snowden case iswhere contractors that were working for boozallen hamilton -- mr. earnest: [affirmative] the press: -- in particular,and so i'm wondering if this has inspired any sort ofreevaluation on whether that

firm should be involvedin or receive u.s. government contracts onhighly classified data to their employeesengaging [inaudible]? mr. earnest: i'm not awarethat the investigation that's been conductedthus far has detected any wrongdoing on thepart of the company. you know, so i'd referquestions about that to the department of justice. my guess is that since thereare still in the midst of

the investigation, and notlikely to talk about that a whole lot, but look, we wantto learn as much as we can about this situation, and asi indicated to michelle, you know, if there are lessonsthat we can learn, and reforms that can beimplemented to prevent something like this fromhappening again, we certainly want to do that. but as long as we aresharing information with government employees,sensitive national security

information that is criticalto protecting the country, this kind of risk exists,but the risk of not sharing that information is evenhigher, and that's one of the lessons welearned after 9/11. the press: the [inaudible]released a report yesterday that found that the obamaadministration spends about $1 billion on pr annually,and that you guys have added 667 pr staffers duringthis administration. and that their mediansalary was $90,000.

this has raised somecriticism from government groups and fromcritics on the right. so, i'm wondering if youcould maybe talk about why it's important for theadministration to have added all those staffers, and bespending that amount of money on pr efforts? mr. earnest: i haven'tseen the report. so, it's hard for me toassess the other conclusions that they've reached.

what i can just say ingeneral is that the administration has made ita priority to interact with the public, and interactwith the press corps, and to be as transparentas possible. and that is work thatrequires dedicated professionals who areinterested in furthering that goal, and helping theamerican people understand exactly what theadministration is doing, what we have prioritized,and what our success has

been in implementing theagenda laid out by president obama. so, you know, i think ourtrack record on this is pretty strong, both in termsof the substantive progress that we've made, but also interms of the effective way in which we've been ableto communicate with the american public. i think the american publicin our democracy is well served by that, but youknow, there's not much that

we do around here that isn'tthe source of vociferous criticism fromthose on the right. so, they're certainlyentitled to do that. okay, ron . the press: the storm andfema, do you have any more specifics about the size,and the scope, or metrics of the federal response so far? i know that there are-- have been teams and resources prepositioned.

are we talking abouthundreds of people, or dozens of people,or just what? mr. earnest: well ron, idon't have a whole lot of new metrics toshare with you. i can certainly contactmy colleagues at fema. i don't know if those aresome of the people that were added to the gaoreport or not, but -- the press: pr? mr. earnest: yeah, exactly.

the press: oh. mr. earnest: those are thepeople who would find out that information for you. let me see what we can do onthat, but there is -- i can provide you a little texturehere, which is that there have been a number ofresources that have been predeployed to the region. this is a relatively newstrategy that's been implemented under theleadership

of administrator fugate. the idea here is toessentially prestage supplies that are likely tobe needed in areas that are just outside of the affectedareas, so that after the storm passes, theseresources are all in one place, and not too far awayfrom where they're needed most. so, that work has been goingon for several days now, and we can provide you someadditional information about

the quantity ofthose supplies. the other thing that i cantell you is that there are a number of coordinationcenters that have been set up all up and down theeast coast, and those coordination centers are nowoperating around the clock. and they're fully staffed. and that requires a lot ofpeople to ensure that those operations can continuearound the clock. the other thing that we haveprioritized, ron, and this

is something that thepresident raised in his discussion with federalofficials yesterday, is his concern about potentialpower outages. you know, any time you'redealing with a storm like this, you want to try andget the power back up as soon as possible. that's certainlytrue in this case. so, some of the suppliesthat are being mobilized are fuel for generators forexample, so that people who

have emergency generatorscan get them up and running, but also so the criticalfacilities like hospitals can also fueltheir generators. there also has been a lot ofimportant work done to pool the resources of utilitiesin regions of the country that are not affected bythe storm, so that they can share their personnel andtheir trucks, and their equipment to help thosecommunities that are experiencing somewidespread devastation.

and some of thatcoordination work has been done in advance as well,because this is obviously a priority thatwe're mindful of. the power's going to go out,and people are going to be challenged to operate in anenvironment where the power is not on. we just want to try to do asmuch planning as we can in advance, so that we canget it on as quickly as possible.

have there been any disasterdeclarations yet or requests? i believe the governor offlorida made a request. mr. earnest: he made arequest for an emergency declaration, which isessentially a request that can be submitted to thefederal government in advance of a storm. this is a relatively newinnovation as well, again, to expedite the provisionof federal support in a

situation like this. there is a process that femaconsiders when they receive an application like this. i know that they'll workquickly to evaluate it and respond, but i'm notaware that they have yet. but they are -- theywill respond quickly. the press: is that apresidential response? mr. earnest: what it is isit is something that is moved, that goesthrough fema first.

the application is considered and processed there. i do believe there is a stepthat requires presidential signoff, but that is nota process that takes very long. the president relies heavilyon the advice he receives from experts at fema. the press: is there anyconsideration the president altering his travel plans?

mr. earnest: at this pointthere's no plans on the part of the president tochange his travel. he obviously is traveling toa part of the country that is not in the path of thestorm, but even as the president travels, he willstay closely attuned to federal officials whoare on the front lines of supporting the state andlocal officials who are leading the response. that's the proper role forthe federal government in

these situations. it's that the federalgovernment plays a supporting role in termsof providing supplies, and offering advice, butultimately it's the responsibility of state andlocal officials to manage their response. that's why we're encouragingpeople right now to listen to the instructions ofstate and local officials. they know best about what'sneeded to

protect their communities. they're also going to knowwhat's best about what's needed to help thecommunities recover, and the role the federal governmentis to support them as they do that important work. the press: just on aleppo,is there a national security meeting? is the president havingany meetings today on that situation?

mr. earnest: i'm not awareof any formal presidential meetings like this. the president obviously hasa ptb this morning, but you know, the president meetsregularly with his national security team. i don't have any details toshare with you about any meetings today. the press: there was astatement from the syrian army last night warningcivilians to get out.

is it the administration'sassessment that aleppo is about to fall? is that conceivable in theway you see the situation there on the ground now, andis there a response that you have plannedshould that happen? mr. earnest: well, first ofall i think it's outrageous that the -- a militaryorganization that has been attacking civilians foryears using barrel bombs, weaponized chemicals,industrial chemicals like

chlorine, bunker bustingbombs, for them to suggest that somehow they'renow looking out for the interests of civiliansis outrageous. so, what i'll say ingeneral is i think it's an indication of why the worldis so concerned about the situation inaleppo right now. i don't have an assessmentto offer in terms of the latest conditions on theground, but that is a city that's been under siege foryears, and that the pace of

that siege, and theintensity of that siege has only increased in thelast couple of weeks. that's been deeplydistressing, but i don't have assessment to share interms of how or, you know, or how likely it isthat city will fall. the press: and there'snothing that you could say that might be morereassuring to the world communities very concernedabout this, about any contingency plans, or anyother -- you can hear your

statements about their[inaudible] of all this all the time. a lot of people are lookingfor some sort of action frankly, to be tangible. mr. earnest: yeah. well again, ron, i think thekind of action that i've been talking about, it's theconversations that we've been having through theauspices of the united nations, trying to supportthe work of the u.n.

envoy there, theconversation we've been having with our europeanallies about the situation in aleppo. there are a number ofbilateral conversations that the united states has beenengaged in with our partners and friends in the region. so, we've been very focusedon this, and you know, our goal has been to try toreduce the violence in aleppo, and expedite theprovision

of humanitarian assistance. the united states has nowprovided about $5.9 billion in humanitarian assistance,more than any other country in the world. so, you know, the unitedstates has been engaged in trying to address theproblems in aleppo, and many other people around theworld have been as well. the press: but despitethat, it's fair to say the situation justkeeps getting worse.

mr. earnest: well, we'vebeen deeply concerned about the increasing pace of a taxfrom the syrian army, and with the support ofthe russian military. that's been deeplydistressing. the press: and so, it'syour position that the u.s. response has beenadequate, appropriate? mr. earnest: ron, i don'tthink there's anybody satisfying when you see --satisfied when you see such widespread deathand destruction.

the blood that has been shedby innocent civilians, men, women, and children has beendeeply distressing, and i don't think there's anybodythat feels god about the situation inaleppo right now. okay? rich. the press: just to getinside some of the conversations that he'shaving with fema and with others in the administrationdealing with the storm, is the administration'sviewpoint that there is the

chance that this couldbe the most significant damaging weather event inthe administration -- that the administration hashad to deal with, and the potential that these localofficials who are the ones who are responsible forhandling the immediate response will turn to thefederal government if there are large groups of peopledisplaced, and a great need for resources? mr. earnest: well you know,rich, what the scientists

tell us is that this islikely the largest and most powerful hurricane to hitthe united states in a decade or so, and thepreparations that we have been making in advanceof the storm i think are indicative of just howserious we think it is. that's why you've seensuch a forceful response mobilized by the federalgovernment, even in advance of the stormmaking landfall. we seen a similar responsefrom state and local

officials, and that's apositive thing as well, but this is something that --this is a storm that people should take seriously. the federal government istaking it seriously, and it's important for peoplewho live in the path of the storm to take it quiteseriously as well. the press: have there beenany conversations yet, i might be getting a littleahead, but if there's a need for an additionalappropriation with congress

out, have there beenthose discussions with congressionalleaders at all? mr. earnest: i'm not awareof those discussions at this point. what we typically will do isdo a damage assessment to determine just howsignificant the losses are, and from there we can make adetermination about whether or not it is necessary forcongress to consider an additional appropriation.

the press: turning to thepresident's piece on the economy in the economist, hetalks about expressions of americans now areechoes of the past. he talks aboutno-nothingism, which i assume is a shot perhapsmore at those who support donald trump, but he doestalk about how as appealing to some more radical reformscan sound the abstract breaking up all the biggestbanks who are erecting prohibitably steep tariffson imports on the economy is

not an abstraction. in writing this, does thepresident see that sentiment equally spread amongdemocrats and republicans? mr. earnest: i think thepresident addresses this directly in the piece, whichis that this sentiment is more widespread on the rightthan it is on the left, but it is a phenomenon on theextremes of both ends of the ideological spectrum, and ithink the president makes a pretty persuasive, ifdetailed, case for the kinds

of things that we can do toaddress the concerns that have been raised. i think the president's viewis that the concerns that have been raisedare legitimate. some of the proposedresponses that we've seen from the extremes on bothends are not, and in some cases, would end up doingmore damage -- would compound the negativeimpacts of globalization that are being experiencedby some communities.

and there actually are somethings we can do to try to compound the positiveimpacts of the forces of globalization. let me just give you oneexample of the -- the article itself is quitelong, and i commend it to everybody's attention -- iwon't repeat all of the case that the president makes,but you know, one example of this would beinvestments in education. we know, in an increasinglyintegrated global economy,

those who have marketable,highly technical skills are in a position to succeedas a result of the global economy. we know that jobs that aretied to the international economy, that are tied tothe exports here in the united states payssubstantially more than the average job that'snot tied to exports. so, why wouldn't we makethe kinds of investments to ensure that our work forcecan benefit from that kind

of opportunity? so, let's make sure thatwe're investing in early childhood education. let's make sure we openup the doors to a college education to every middleclass family, and every family that's working hardto get into the middle class. let's give more to giveindividuals who are ready to make a mid-career shift getthe kind of job training

that they need to qualifyfor these higher paying -- higher paying jobs. that's the kind of commonsense approach that the president advocates. there are others who saythat we should respond to this situation bytrying to close the u.s. economy off from theglobal supply chain. that would have a terribleimpact on our broader economy, but it would alsowould reduce the number of

jobs that are tied toexports, which means that's -- there's a smaller numberof higher paying jobs to be -- to be gained. so, it's important that wefocus on specific, rather common sense strategies forcompounding the positive benefits to some of theseglobal changes in the economy, as opposed tomaking the negative consequences even worse. the press: the presidentalso talks about many of the

positive points in theeconomy; we're not at a point of losing 700,000jobs monthly, income gains. but there are still issuesout there -- gdp growth between 1 and 2 percent,federal funds rate that the fed views as an economythat isn't strong enough to support a target rate ofhigher than a quarter to a half percent. is an issue here also thatjust the growth just -- broad based isn'tstrong enough yet?

mr. earnest: well, we knowthat one of the head winds that we face from -- forgrowth here in the united states is actually fromthe weakened international economy. the united states benefitsfrom being able to trade with the world, and whenour trading partners have economies that aren'tperforming at particularly high levels, that's going tohave an impact on the number of goods and services theypurchase

from the united states. so, that certainly is partof it, and that's why, you know, much of the audiencefor this piece is the international community --international policymakers, international businessleaders, who can have an impact on some ofthese broader trends. i think what's also true,rich, is that the -- we've encountered opposition fromthose on the extreme right who wield inordinateinfluence in the

united states congress. they have succeeded inblocking the kind of common sense investments ininfrastructure and education that would have a material,positive impact on economic growth. economic growth would behigher if republicans hadn't bought policies, they'dcontribute to economic growth. so, i know that -- at therisk of offending my friends

with years of technicaleducation in the field of economics, this isn'tthat complicated. and it's the opposition tocommon sense proposals, like investments in educationand investments in infrastructure thathave prevented the u.s. economy from performing evenbetter than we have thus far, and again, i guessthat's where the allusion to the know-nothingsmight come in. all right? jordan?

the press: thanks, josh. on the hurricane [inaudible]administration and governor scott have sparred in thepast over disaster relief and emergency funding. i believe that governorscott has the far higher rejection rate for emergencyfunding requests, fema, than other states and governorsaround the country. so, given that, canyou describe the administration's interactionwith governor scott's

administration thus far onthis storm, and describe how have thoseinteractions been? mr. earnest: jordan, whenwe're talking about millions of americans who are inthe path of a potentially devastating storm, the likesof which we haven't seen in the united states in abouta decade or so, we put partisan politics aside, andwe focus on making sure that we're meeting the basicneeds of our fellow americans.

so, there's been extensivecoordination between federal officials and state emergency officials in florida. those of you who followthese issues closely know that craig fugate is afloridian himself, and he burnished is reputationas an expert in emergency management in helping thestate of florida, in 2004 and 2005, deal with anunprecedented series of hurricanes thatstruck his state.

and my personal experiencewith this is then, in 2006 -- 10 years ago now, i wasworking on the florida governor's race -- for thedemocratic candidate for governor, and one of theprinciple talking points of the -- both democratic andrepublican candidate for governor, was to promise toleave craig fugate in his job. so, i think that's a prettyclear indication that mr. fugate doesn't considerpolitics

when doing this job. i'm sure that contributesto the success that he has enjoyed, in terms ofproviding service to the american people. but that's also been theapproach that president obama has taken as well, andwe would expect that the significant politicaldifferences that exist between governor scott andthe white house are going to have zero impact on theability of emergency

officials in florida to getthe kind of help and support and assistance they needfrom federal officials when dealing with this storm. okay? karen? the press: josh, can yougive us an update on what the u.s. is doing in haiti? i mean, the pictures comingin are showing just massive destruction. there's a lot of areas thatare completely cut off right now.

i think earlier in theweek, there was talk about helicopters going down andgetting supplies to the capital, but is there anupdate you can give on resources that have beensent, or are going to be sent there? mr. earnest: i know that mycolleagues at the department of defense can talk to youabout some of the resources that have been mobilized --military resources have been mobilized to assistrecovery efforts in haiti.

i don't have thosestatistics in front of me, but we can certainly get yousome information about that. there's also been someimportant work done through usaid to deal with theimpact of the storm. usaid foreign disasterassistance teams were actually deployed to bothhaiti and jamaica -- and the bahamas, in advanceof the storm hitting. so, there are alreadydisaster recovery experts from the united states, fromthe ground, in these places,

to assist these localgovernments in setting up a recovery effort. there has been an initialcontribution from usaid of $1.5 million to addresssome of the immediate humanitarian needs after-- in the aftermath of the hurricane, but that's justan initial payment, and i'm sure that there will beadditional resources that will come from the u.s. government to assist ourfriends in haiti, who are

dealing with a verydifficult situation. but you know, i just want tomention once again, there's an opportunity for americanswho might be concerned about the situation there. they can go to cidi.org. this is a non-profitorganization that is dedicated to disseminatinginformation in the aftermath of disasters, and they alsocan ensure that financial resources that are dedicatedto the recovery effort get

to the right place, andare used effectively. the press: we've talked alot -- we've had a lot of statements this week aboutthe u.s.-russia relationship -- (inaudible) deal, thediplomatic talks over syria. this morning, there was aseemingly extraordinary statement from a spokesmanfor the russian defense minister, stronglywarning the u.s. to not make any attempts toconduct military strikes against assad regime targetsin syria being taken as

threatening to shoot downamerican planes if the u.s. tries to do that. what's the right --white house response? mr. earnest: well, i haven'tseen that statement. what i will say is thatthere was a concerted effort on the part of the unitedstates to try to work effectively with therussians to reduce violence inside of syria. and time and time again, therussians did not live up to

the commitments that theyhad made, in the context of those negotiations. and that was a source ofdeep disappointment, not just here in the unitedstates, but around the world. and it's had tragicconsequences for innocent civilians in andaround aleppo. at the same time, there's nointerest, on the part of the united states, on escalatingthe violence in syria.

we actually want to see theviolence and the conflict reduced. and that's what we'reworking so diligently, through diplomaticchannels, to try to affect. all right? gardner? the press: josh, thisadministration has prosecuted more leaked casesthan all previous presidents combined. and this administrationhas suffered three of the

largest thefts of classified information in american history. this one, the wikileaksone, and the snowden one. has the administration'scrack down been a failure? mr. earnest: well, gardner,we can walk through the statistics about theleaked prosecutions. i think what is clear isthat the administration does take, quite seriously, theneed to protect sensitive national securityinformation.

of course, those decisionsabout how and whether to prosecute an individual aremade by officials in the those decisions are madewithout any sort of political influence. of course, there is generalpolicy direction that does come from the white houseabout the priority placed on protecting nationalsecurity, and protecting but those prosecutorialdecisions are made by independent prosecutors atthe -- at

the department of justice. more generally, i think thatwe have seen, gardner, is the impact that moderntechnology has on the movement in disseminationof information. there's an upside: thattechnology can be used to ensure that nationalsecurity information can be quickly, instantaneously,shared across the federal government in a way thatkeeps our men and women in uniform safe, in a waythat aids terrorism

investigations beingconducted by the united states and our allies aroundthe world, and in a way that protects the unitedstates homeland. the downside risk of thistechnology is that those with bad intentions can,on an unprecedented scale, disseminate thatinformation. and unfortunately, thathas harmful consequences. we've talked in here, atlength, about the way that mr. snowden's unauthorizeddisclosures put americans in

harm's way, whether that'scompromising the identity of undercover intelligenceoperatives, or unauthorized disclosure of informationthat has an impact on the safety and security of ourmen and women in uniform. so, that's the -- that's themodern environment in which we're operating in,and that's why the administration hasundertaken so many of the reforms -- so many of thereform efforts that i described to michelle totry to

counter this insider threat. and as we learn more aboutways that bad actors evade those reforms, you know,we'll learn those lessons. we'll beef up ourdefenses even further. but it continues to be thebelief -- not just of this administration, butof national security professionals in bothparties, that the greater risk is associatedwith withholding that information, and noteffectively sharing it.

and this was one of thelessons that we learned in the aftermath of 9-11. that the internal stovepiping in the federal government detracted fromour national security, and there has been a concertedeffort to more effectively share that information toprotect the american people. that has been a good thing. that has been a -- that hasrevolutionized the way that intelligence informationis used to protect our

interests, and toprotect our country. but it has also caused us toconfront this latest, most recent risk. the press: josh, you talkedabout waiting until the investigation is done toundertake further reforms, but given that this guyseems to defy so many of the reforms that wereimplemented, post-snowden in 2014, that the two-personrule, the no thumb-dive rule.

isn't there just anextraordinary urgency that this administration needsto have, right now, about reminding the entire federalgovernment in sort of a hair-on-fire way that theserules are in place, and cannot be defied. there -- let me assure youthat there is a sense of urgency around this, and idid not mean to leave you with the impression thatwe're not going to do anything until theinvestigation is completed.

if, over the course of theinvestigation, we learn information that couldbe valuable in patching vulnerabilities, we will undertake that work immediately. what i think is also true isthat the vast majority of the men and women in ourintelligence community, our people, our experts, areprofessionals who take these rules very seriously. they're patriotic americanswho dedicate their lives to

protecting this country,and they have a valuable expertise that they useto protect this country. so, the vast majority ofthem don't need to be reminded of justhow serious this is. but you know, i thinkeverybody who serves in the intelligence communityrecognizes the grave consequences for notfollowing the rules that are on the books. and again, i say thatwithout knowing exactly --

or at least, not being ableto discuss, in detail, what we know about thisparticular situation. but you know, it's hardto -- let me clarify. the point is this: it's notclear, in this situation, whether these alleged crimeswere committed because the rules weren't beingeffectively followed, or if there is a creative way forgetting around the rules. but either way, if thereare reforms that we can implement to either ensuregreater fidelity to these

policies or furtherstrengthening of these policies, we'll do thatto ensure the safety and security of thissensitive information. the press: are youconfident, right now, that you have this -- theboundaries of this leak understood, andunder control? in other words, that you arefairly secure that you know who leaked the nsa interceptdetails in the recent nsa computer codes, and thatyou've got

all of that stopped? or do you have confidencethat this is now under control? the leaks are plugged, andyou've got everyone that you need to get in thisinvestigation? mr. earnest: gardner, ithink it's an entirely legitimate question, butit's one that's going to have to be directed to mycolleagues at the department of justice.

they're the ones thatare conducting the investigation, and so, i'lllet them speak to the scope of it. the press: do you know whatcontractor this guy worked for, prior to booz? because i think part of thistook place prior to this, booz -- the press: -- becausethat also details -- mr. earnest: yeah, i can'tspeak to this individual's

employment history, but thatmay be a detail that the department of justicecan share with you. the press: okay. mr. earnest: okay? sarah? so, today, a poll came outfrom (inaudible), showing the president's approvalrating at 55 percent, which is the highest ofhis second term. mr. earnest: thankyou for mentioning it. the press: sure.

thought you mightappreciate that. mr. earnest: it's a littleawkward for me to do that from up here, so -- yeah,i take some pride in it nonetheless. the press: and that -- it'sbeen trending upward since earlier this year. and just from a macroperspective, it seems, perhaps, a little counterintuitive, given that the other trend that we've seenin this election is this

thirst for change. and so, i'm just wonderingif the president has any insight into, you know,what's at play there. well, listen, i -- the --i'll let you guys, you know, do the important workof analyzing the polls. and lord knows, there areplenty of people who are volunteering forthat responsibility. what i will say is that thepresident is enormously proud of the progress thatwe've made in this country

over the last eight years. when president obama tookoffice, he obviously encountered the worsteconomic downturn since the great depression. and the progress that we'vemade over the last seven and a half, almost eight,years is remarkable. and i think was better thananybody had predicted seven and a half years ago. the kind of sustained jobcreation that we've seen in

this country, the longestconsecutive monthly streak in our history. the progress that we've madein putting upward pressure on wages. the success that we'vehad in reducing poverty. poverty fell more in 2015than it has in any year since the 1960s. and the increase in medianwages in this country -- in 2015, was the greatest --or the largest, on record.

so, that's an indicationthat we really have made criticallyimportant progress. and the president has always-- the president's approach has always been to focuson longer term goals. and there are situations inwhich that longer term focus has had an impact on thenumbers reflected in short term polls. but the president has beenwilling to sacrifice the hot takes for longerterm results.

and you know, after eightyears in this office, i think that has been astrategy that has strongly benefited the americanpeople, and it's starting to show up in the polls. and the president does takesome satisfaction with that. in terms of sort ofreconciling the -- i think the unquestioned desirefor some changes in our government, i think youwon't be surprised to hear me say that i wouldattribute that to the

dysfunction that has runrampant under republican leadership in congress. and that has contributed todeep frustration -- not just inside the white house, butin houses all across the country. that congress has failed,time and time again, to do common sense things thatwould be good for the country because republicans continually prioritize politics.

and whether that is, youknow, the kind of common that would have a positiveeconomic impact or the kind of common sense reforms ofour immigration system, you know, there are a varietyof ways to measure the congressional dysfunctionin a way that's left people quite dissatisfied withthe way they're being represented in washington,d.c. right now. so, you know, i recognizethere may be some republicans with a differentanalysis, but you got to

admit, the analyses thati've just offered is backed up by the numbers. the press: but bothpresidential candidates also have kind of historicallyhigh negative ratings, in addition to congressand the media. but so, is the president'spopularity actually just organically -- people likebarack obama, or is it sort of in comparison? people are expressingpreference?

mr. earnest: well, i thinkit's probably a little bit of both. i think that people arepleased with the president's performance in office, andthat's reflected in the polls you saw today. i think the president hasalways maintained a personal approval rating, even amongthose who don't support his policies because they seethe approach that he's taken to his job, even if thathasn't led to the kind of

policy outcomes thatthey would like to see. but they see the presidentas somebody who actually can be a role model to our kids. they see somebody who isa good husband and a good father. they see somebody who isserious about his faith. they see somebody who takeshis job very seriously. but himself? not more seriouslythan necessary.

and so, i think the publicappraisal of the president's character is one that, evenin the most difficult times, has been pretty durable. and i think people arereminded of that when they see some of the rhetoricthat's uttered by the republican nomineefor president. and i think that mightlead some republicans and independents to conclude --for as frustrated as they are with washington rightnow, they've been pleased

with the decisions that theguy sitting in the oval office has been making. okay? margaret? the press: josh (inaudible)relationship with (inaudible) and dr.biden traveling there. was there any -- can weanticipate any kind of offer to help them withhurricane recovery? mr. earnest: i'm notaware of any changes for dr. biden's schedule.

but you know, given theimpact that they storm has -- has had in that regionof the world, i would anticipate that this will bean added feature of her trip that she'll be talking aboutwork that the united states can do to help those who arerecovering from the storm. the press: and they're --under the status and the relationship now, any kindof aid to help with that relief is permitted, or -- mr. earnest: i'm not surethe kinds of rules that

would govern that kind ofassistance, but we can certainly lookinto that for you. the press: question for you. when you were talking aboutsyria, and you mentioned the support for diplomacy,including that of the u.n., were you specificallysupporting about the proposal from the u.n. envoy, de mistura, to gointo aleppo and (inaudible) to help escort out whowere fleeing that city?

mr. earnest: well, i wasnever referring to any specific statement orinitiative from mr. de mistura; rather, our generalsupport for the tireless efforts that he has ledto focus international attention on this troublingsituation, and to find a solution. he's done important work,and you know, he's preserved the kind of -- he's playedan important role in trying to bring the internationalcommunity together around

some constructive ideas foraddressing some potential solutions. we haven't found it yet,with regard to the situation in aleppo, but that has notprevented him from working tirelessly, and in goodfaith, to try to find that kind of solution. the press: wouldn'tyou say it's kind of an extraordinary offer, interms of the sense of urgency being felt thereright now, that (inaudible)

diplomacy otherwise has notled to anything that would provide immediate relief? so, (inaudible) offeredto go in himself? mr. earnest: yeah, it is-- it is an extraordinary offer. you know, i -- again, it'shard to know whether or not that's, you know, arhetorical device that he was using to express his ownpersonal sense of urgency, or you know, or if hewas packing his luggage.

you'd have to ask him whathis intent was, but i think that regardless of whatspecifically his message was, i think he's conveyinga sense of urgency that many people, including thepresident of the united states, feel. the press: and can i justask you -- you said the other day, from the podium,that there was nothing left to be discussed with therussians, and that's why the the u.s.

was severing these --suspending these talks. but john kerry is back,talking to sergei lavrov now. what made the presidentdecide to say, "start talking to russiaagain about syria?" mr. earnest: well, i'll letmy colleagues at the state department read outthe nature of those conversations. i mean, what we have saidall along is that there are

variety of aspects to therelationship between the united states and russia. and you know -- the press: well, they said abit of it was syria, and the (inaudible). mr. earnest: so, again, i'lllet them talk about the details, what was --what was discussed. what i can tell you thatthey were not talking about is trying to, you know,re-institute the kind of

cessation of hostilitiesagreement that we thought we'd instituted a month orso ago, but failed because of russia's repeated andviolent abrogation of the commitments that they hadmade, in the context of those talks. the press: so, just to beclear, when you were talking about suspending, you werespecifically only talking about that u.s. offer of potential militarycoordination with russia.

that, off the table. that's not being revisited. but we can still talkabout russia, about other diplomaticinitiatives in syria. is that what you're saying? mr. earnest: well,obviously, russia's going to have to be a partof any sort of u.n. process because they said onthe security council, russia is a member of theinternational serious

support group. that is another multilateralinstitution that we have -- or another multilateralvenue where the united states has tried to find asolution -- russia has been a part of those as well. you know, we've neverindicated that we were shutting off all diplomaticties with russia. but we did make clear thatrussia had, too often, and repeatedly, violated thekinds of commitments that

they had made that made itunnecessary or unworkable to continue to pursue thatspecific approach. but there are a variety ofother way in which russia is involved, and theywill continue to be. but the kind of arrangementthat we had envisioned of getting russia to playa constructive role in reducing violence, inexchange for closer russian-u.s. military cooperation, goingafter extremists, is an

agreement that nevermaterialized, unfortunately. the press: andwhen you said, u.s. has no interested inescalating the violence in syria, were you specificallyin response the the question about russia's -- sortof felt like (inaudible) stately. brie basically saying,"you've got nothing to worry about. i mean, the u.s.

won't be using any kind ofmilitary force in any form of action. mr. earnest: well, what i'msaying is that the -- i'm not going to be a positionwhere i'm taking options off the table for thecommander in chief. i think i've discussedat some point -- and the president discussed in somedetail, but military action against the asaad regime totry to address the situation in aleppo, is unlikely toaccomplish the goals that

many envision now, in termsof reducing the violence there. and it's much more likelyto lead to a bunch of unintended consequentlythat are clearly not in our national interest. but i'm not going to takeany options off the label, and i think what i'marticulating is a desire to de-escalate thesituation of syria. to de-escalate the violence,and try to bring some

much-needed humanitarianassistance to those who needed it so -- whoneed it the most. okay? john? mr. earnest:thank you, john. two brief questions first. and i hope i'm sayingyour name right. dr. zahir saul of theamerican relief committee for syria -- we'd appearedon the friends 24 debate on tuesday night, said thatwhat is happening in syria

was reminiscent of sarajevoand sabrinke, and he called it ethnic cleansing. is that the administration'sofficial opinion of what is happening in syria? ethnic cleansing as well? mr. earnest: i've not seenthat label be used in this particulate situation. obviously, we have beendeeply concerned about the widen spread silence that'sbeen perpetrated against

innocent civilians. in some cases, that violencehas been motivated by religious differences. and that's deeply troubling. you've heard the -- a satedepartment talking about the -- how the increasedviolence in the region has fueled extremism. and has created a situationwhere there're populations are at risk of genocide.

so, the situation inside ofsyria is a deeply troubling one, both because of theactions -- both as a direct consequence of the actionsof the assad regime. but also, the second andthird of consequences of their actions that are onlycontributed to a sense of chaos that's fueledextremism, that has worsened the kind of sectarianconflict there that has cost too many innocent livesalready, and we're deeply concerned about thepotential of further -- of a

further escalationin violence. the press: another thingis does the administration agree with former presidentclinton that they affordable health care act needstinkering and fixes? mr. earnest: john, the veryday that the president signed the affordable careact into law, he'd indicated a commitment, a willingnessto work with democrats -- or republicans, on capitolhill who had good ideas for further strengtheningthe law.

the affordable care act hasprovided enormous benefits: 29 americans have healthinsurance that didn't have have it before theaffordable care act went into effect. millions more americansbenefit from the consumer protections associated withnot being discriminated against because they havea preexisting condition. not being charged morebecause you're a woman. not being dragged intobankruptcy court because

somebody in yourfamily gets sick. not getting kicked off yourhealth insurance because you get sick. these are all consumerprotections that are available to tens ofmillions of americans. these are consumerprotections that weren't available before. so, the affordable careact has had an enormously positive impacton the country.

but if there are otherthings that we could do to further strengthen theaffordable care act -- the president's talked aboutthe idea of adding a public option that could makestate-based marketplaces even more competitive, andgive consumers even more options. that, obviously, would beone way we could strengthen the law. but you know, ultimately,it requires congressional

action, and we'll haveto see congress is -- republicans and congress,are willing to consider anything other than justrepealing the law, which would repeal all thoseconsumer protections that i just talked about. so, the president stronglyopposes the idea of repealing the law, buthe's willing to work with republicans, if they'reprepared to work with him to strengthen it.

the press: (inaudible)president clinton on that, that it needs some fixing,and he's willing to do it? mr. earnest: consideringthat president obama said it six years, ago, i thinkit'd be fair to say that president clinton agreeswith president obama about that. the press: thanks, josh. mr. earnest: okay? all right?

pam, i'll giveyou the last one. the trump campaign put out astatement, calling the paris climate and (inaudible) justanother bad deal, saying it would cost the americaneconomy trillions of dollars, and proposed ahigher electricity cost for americans, and gives chinaan edge because this allows china to keep raising theiremissions for a dozen years. do you want torespond to that? mr. earnest: well, thebenefits associated with the

international agreement --the historic agreement to cut carbon pollution aresignificant to the united states. both in terms of the impactthat they'll have on the environment, but also interms of the impact it will have on our economy. china, for the first time,because of tough principle diplomacy on the part of theunited states, agreed, for the first time, tolimit their emissions.

you'll recall thatrepublicans' chief criticism of any effort to undertakea reduction in carbon pollution by the unitedstates was that china would never go along with it. they were wrong about that. we just needed somebody whowas tough enough to go and negotiate a smart deal withthe chinese, with is exactly what the obamaadministration did. and as a result, thatcatalyzed the international

community to alsomake commitments. now, again, we'll have apositive impact on reducing carbon pollution and havea positive impact on the health of the planet. what this will also dois send a very clear, unmistakable market symbolto entrepreneurs in the clean energy security. a hundred ninety-sixcountries have now made a commitment to reducetheir carbon pollution.

that means they're on themarket for figuring out how to produce energy and reducethird carbon pollution. that is a wide open partyfor people who have an innovative approach to solarenergy, or wind energy. hydroelectric energy. that is an open market topeople that have -- are ready to take to market newbattery technology, or other forms of improvedenergy efficiency. that's not a -- that's nolonger a niche market; that

is now a global market. and the president isdetermined to make sure that the united states is at thecutting edge of that market. and that's why the u.s. government, in the contextof the recovery act, supported so many loans tothe clean energy sector, and it's why the united statesis now poised to benefit from the kind of commitmentsthat countries are making all around -- that countriesall around the world are

making. and that's a good thing, andthat's why this agreement is one that isn't just good forour planet; it's going to end up being a reallygood thing for the u.s. economy. the press: and one more --noah says that there've been 12 weather events so farthis year that cost $1 billion. any concern about the impacton the economy of these

kinds of weather events, orthe government's ability to continue fundingdisaster assistance? and there have been a stringof small earthquakes in california, raising concernabout a big one coming. have there been any specialpreparations for that? mr. earnest: i'm notaware of any earthquake preparations that are-- that are under way. i think i'd refer you toofficials in -- at the u.s. geological service or incalifornia, about that.

as it relates to thepotential economic impact of the storm, that's somethingthat we're always mindful of. and the -- some of thecities in the potential path of the storm have largepopulations, and displacing large populations can havea negative impact on the economy. so, we'll certainly watchthat, but we're also prepared to mobilizesignificant financial

resources to help those --to help those communities recover as quickly aspossible, and get life back too normal asquickly as possible. so, we've done a lot ofpreparation in advance to that, and you know, weintend to work closely with state and local officialsto make that happen. okay? thanks, everybody. have a good rest of the day.