|
|
|
Welcome to "Ask the White House" -- an online interactive forum where you can submit questions to Administration officials and friends of the White House. Visit the "Ask the White House" archives to read other discussions with White House officials.
|
|
|
October 13, 2004
Margaret Spellings
Good to be here today and I'm looking forward to answering your questions.
David, from Lawrence, KS writes: Margaret Spellings Since last August, the American economy has created 1.9 million new jobs. These jobs are spread across the economy, and include job creation in high paying industries like health care, construction, manufacturing, transportation, professional services, education and health care. Both the Council of Economic Advisers and the Department of Labor point out that claims of low-paying job creation are not supported by any available economic evidence. So view these claims critically -- there's no evidence to support them. The jobs being created right now are broad-based and reflect a growing, strengthening economy.
Check out Lawrence Kudlow's column in today's Wall Street Journal. Sean, from Smyrna, TN writes: Margaret Spellings President Bush has provided significant increases in federal funding for education. In fact, including the President's 2005 budget, federal spending on K-12 education has increased 49% since 2001. And the President has increased money for our neediest students from $8.8 billion in 2001 to $13.3 billion in his 2005 budget, a 52% increase. This money goes to our neediest schools where local officials can choose how to best spend the money--on things like professional development for teachers, reducing class size, buying new books, or other local needs. Federal funding for education, however, is just one part of spending for schools. Most funding for schools comes from state and local governments including funds for school construction.
I'd advise you to contact your local schoolboard about issues you see at your local school. Vaasu, from California writes: Margaret Spellings To make the United States more attractive to job creators, we cannot retreat into economic isolationism. It doesn't work, and it would mean fewer jobs and fewer opportunities for Americans. 12 million Americans wake up every day and have a job because of American exports to other countries. Another 5 million Americans go to work in the morning for a foreign company -- like BMW and Honda -- that chose to invest in this country. We shouldn't take actions that would jeopardize those high-paying jobs. Instead, the President is focused on reducing the barriers to growth in this country, including high health care costs, regulatory burdens, frivolous lawsuits, and energy costs. Another area he's focused on is our tax code. Our international tax rules penalize U.S. companies participating in the global marketplace. You remember Chrysler? It used to be an American company. It's now based out of Germany. Which means more jobs (and tax revenues) for Germans, fewer jobs (and tax revenues) for Americans. Many people believe our international tax laws played a key role in moving Chrysler to Germany.
The President is focused on reducing the tax burden on families and businesses, to encourage more work and job creation in this country. Plans to increase the tax burden on companies like Chrysler will only encourage more companies to move overseas. Michael, from Cedar Rapids, IA writes: Margaret Spellings Thanks for asking, I could go on and on...and I will. The President has set an aggressive agenda to keep America the most innovative country in the world. He has set a goal of making broadband access available to every American by 2007. He has promoted math and science education to improve the quality of our nation's workforce. He has proposed the largest ever Federal research and development budget and doubled the funding for cutting edge science such as Nanotechnology - a research that holds the promise of revolutionizing technology development. He has extended the research and experimentation tax credit to promote private sector research. He has signed legislation into law to fight against SPAM, which jams our information highways. He has worked to protect intellectual property from foreign piracy. He has championed eGovernment to make the Federal Government more efficient and consumer friendly through the improved use of technology. He has called for computerizing medical records to improve the delivery of healthcare. And he has fought against placing new taxes on Internet access, which would increase the cost of important new services such as broadband.
In short, the President understands the need to keep our nation the most innovative in the world and his policy are doing just that. Thanks for asking. Sandra, from Brownwood, Texas writes: Margaret Spellings The President has proposed to make health coverage more affordable for people like you who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid. Each state has its own income limitation for Medicaid coverage but they all have one thing in common: under Medicaid, you have to stay poor to stay covered. That is why, instead of proposing to put millions more people on Medicaid, President Bush wants to provide income-related assistance to low-income workers and their families through "refundable tax credits." Families with incomes of up to $60,000 would qualify for these credits of as much as $3,000 annually to help them purchase health insurance coverage. The credits are "refundable," which means that you get the $3,000 whether or not you pay $3,000 in federal income taxes. They also are "advanceable," which means that you won't have to wait until tax time to get your tax credit. The credits will come to you throughout the year as your premiums come due. To make it easier for you to find affordable coverage, the federal government will make grants to states to establish health insurance purchasing pools. This pool gives you a place to "shop" for coverage and let's save on your premiums by taking advantage of volume discounts. You can take this credit in two ways: you can use the entire $3,000 for your health insurance premium or, if you choose, you can get a $2,000 subsidy and have the government put $1,000 into a health savings account. This account will belong to you -- not to your employer or the government. You can use money from the account to pay for your everyday medical expenses. If you have money left over at the end of the year, it stays in your account. And if you change jobs, you take the account with you. Your insurance policy will cover the big expenses, like hospitalizations and surgeries. Your employer can contribute to your account as well. And, given your income level, your children almost certainly qualify for coverage under the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), so the state can use SCHIP money to provide further help with your health insurance premiums and can also put money into your health savings account. The President believes that giving you health coverage that you own and a health savings account that belongs to you is much better than putting you on Medicaid, where a raise or a job change can result in the government taking your health care away. He is working with Congress to provide this new health insurance assistance to millions of Americans like you who can't afford health insurance coverage.
In the meantime, you should contact your state Medicaid office and ask about whether your children can get coverage under SCHIP. This coverage is available today in every state. Joshua, from New York, NY writes: Margaret Spellings The issue is not, of course, a purely scientific one. Embryonic stem cell research requires the destruction of a human embryo. So, we need to look at both the scientific interest in more federal funding AND the moral question. The balance President Bush struck in 2001 was to allow scientists in the private sector to use any available embryonic stem cell lines (including newer lines), to provide substantial federal support to all forms of stem cell research, and to tell researchers using embryonic stem cells that taxpayer funds cannot be used for research involving the additional destruction of a human embryo.
Embryonic stem cell research is still at a very early stage. It will be years before we'll know whether this research will ever produce a safe treatment for disease. However, there is a lot of evidence that the balance the President struck was the right one on both moral and scientific grounds. As the head of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Zerhouni, has said, the science is moving forward faster than at any time in history. Last year, NIH provided half a billion dollars to all forms of stem cell research. Substantial funding is also being provided in the private sector. Adult stem cell research, which doesn't require the destruction of a human embryo, is continuing to show great promise. Clinical trials are underway in the U.S. on the use of adult stem cells to treat heart disease, parkinson's, multiple sclerosis, and leukemia, multiple myeloma, and other blood cancers. Wendy, from Jacksonville, NC writes: Margaret Spellings President Bush also appointed the President's Commission on Excellence in Special Education, and that Commission submitted its report to the President in July of 2002. The President accepted many of the recommendations to help students with disabilities to achieve their fullest potential.
It sounds like your son has a great advocate in you. Krishan, from MA writes: Where is his compassion? Thanks. Margaret Spellings All states provide up to 26 weeks of income support for unemployed workers. The President has signed legislation to extend Federal unemployment benefits at least an additional 13 weeks three times since 2001, providing over $23 billion to help 7.8 million American workers. Over the last thirteen months, we have seen over 1.9 million jobs created, and the unemployment rate has fallen from its peak of 6.3 percent last June to 5.4 percent in September and we expect that trend to continue. Trent, from Orange County, CA writes: Margaret Spellings First, No Child Left Behind does not set a national standard for schools. Each state develops its own testing and accountability system that best meets their needs, but that ensures that all students will be proficient in reading and math in twelve years. The annual targets that schools must meet are set by each state according to their state assessments. Each state, as part of its accountability plan, must also develop a system of sanctions and rewards for schools. When schools do not meet their annual targets for two straight years, the school must develop a school improvement plan and allow parents to transfer their child to a higher-performing public school if they so choose. If the school does not meet their targets for a third straight year, it must offer after-school tutoring to struggling students. Each state is also required to set aside 4% of its total Title I allocation (that would be over $500 million of the Federal 2005 education budget) to assist schools that are identified as needing improvement. This funding goes directly to these schools to assist in improving the school, implementing new curricula, hiring reading instructors, or addressing other needs of the school.
President Bush has also provided significant increases in funding for Title I schools across the country--those schools that serve the neediest students. Including the President's 2005 budget, Title I funding has increased 52% since 2001, and overall K-12 funding has increased 49%. John, from Hanover Park, IL
writes: Margaret Spellings The President favors personal ownership within the existing Social Security system. As a federal employee, I am given an opportunity to participate in the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). The TSP permits me to designate a portion of my pay to be saved in a personal account. This account helps me and other federal employees to build a nest egg for retirement. The TSP is not a privatized system. It is a system that offers personal choice and control, but is administered by a government agency. Similarly, with Social Security personal accounts, individuals would have greater choice and control, and personal ownership. The system would not be privatized.
The issue about which you are concerned is a much greater concern in the current Social Security system. The current system is promising more than $10 trillion in benefits in excess of what it can pay over the long term. If we do not act to fix it for our children and grandchildren, then in the future we will need to either suddenly reduce benefits or drastically increase tax revenues. If the government chooses to increase taxes by $10 trillion, it is likely that much of the additional money required from taxpayers like you would not go to strengthen your own benefits, but to finance other unfunded benefits in the system. Hence, taking more of your money is a much greater risk if we do not fix Social Security than if we establish personal accounts in a stable Social Security system. Ary, from Alabama writes: Margaret Spellings The President agrees with you and believes we need to do more so that Americans aren't at risk for future flu vaccine shortages. His budget has called for investing in next generation vaccine development to guarantee year-round influenza vaccine capacity. Congress has not funded his full request. Tort reform is also critical to getting modern vaccines to Americans. The fact is that the manufacturing process for the current flu shot is very complicated -- it literally involves chickens and their eggs! The number of flu shots produced in any given year literally depends on decisions vaccine manufacturers make about those chickens and eggs many months before any flu shot is actually given. Because of the critical shortage this year, President Bush has directed that our public health experts in the federal government do everything they can to make sure the flu shot is available to people who need the vaccine the most, America's children, the elderly, and people with chronic diseases. The government is working to direct the flu vaccine to these people. We are tracking the vaccine supply and demand all across the country, so that we can better respond to flu outbreaks when they occur. Last year, the President became the first President to authorize purchasing the flu vaccine for children, and the government spent $40 million dollars this year purchasing over 4 million doses. We are also stockpiling drugs to help treat people with the flu.
I am glad the President took the actions he did over the last several years because his decisions have made the federal government better able to deal with the unfortunate situation we face. Robert, from Gillette, NJ writes: Margaret Spellings President Bush is committed to spending what is necessary to win the War on Terror and protect the homeland, while restraining government spending elsewhere. Annually enacted spending unrelated to defense and homeland security was increasing by 15% in the budget year before President Bush took office. Under this President, the rate of growth has been reduced every year – to 6% in 2002, 5% in 2003, and 4% in 2004 – and his 2005 budget proposes to hold the growth of spending not related to security to less than 1%.
Total annually enacted spending will increase at less than 4% under the President’s Budget – in line with the average growth in American families’ incomes. With adoption of the President’s pro-growth economic policies and spending restraint, America will be on a solid path toward cutting the deficit in half within the next five years. Laura, from Stanton, Kentucky writes: I am the mommy of a 5 year old little boy who has Type 1 Diabetes. He has suffered with this since he was diagnosed at 17 months old. His Daddy and I are like so many other concerned parents of Type 1 Diabetes children. We have been told that the stem cell could cure so many diseases including Type 1 Diabetes and we just don't understand what the president has against this. Thank you for the opportunity to ask a question that so many of us would like answered. A very concerned mommy, Laura Margaret Spellings The first point I should say is that President Bush is not opposed to stem cell research. To the contrary -- he is the first President to support Federal Funding for embryonic stem cell research. There are many different kinds of stem cell research, all of which are important to studying disease. Last year, the NIH provided over half a billion dollars for all forms of stem cell research. He has asked NIH to establish Centers of Excellence for stem cell research, which give scientists in this area extra support, and his Administration is establishing a Stem Cell registry, to make sure that scientists can get access to embryonic stem cells quickly. In fact, more than 3,500 shipments of eligible stem cell lines have been sent to researchers for this important work. The President has said only that researchers using taxpayer funds cannot use the funds for research that requires the destruction of an additional human embryo. Researchers can use private funds for any form of stem cell research. Moreover, many scientists focus on stem cell research that does not require the destruction of a human embryo because it uses cells from placental tissue or bone marrow. This type of stem cell research has already produced treatments for disease, and there are clinical trials underway on new treatments for diseases like parkinsons, multiple sclerosis, and leukemia.
I should also note that stem cells are just one of the many areas scientists are studying for possible cures and treatments for diabetes. Since President Bush took office, funding for all forms of diabetes research has increased by $336 million dollars -- a 49% increase. Stan, from Macon, MO
writes: Margaret Spellings
To meet those responsibilities the President proposed and signed the Patriot Act. It gives the FBI and others on the front lines the tools they need to track and disrupt terror groups. It allows law enforcement and intelligence officials to work closely together to prevent attacks. The Act has been used to break up terror cells within our country. There are some in Congress who voted for this good law, but now want to weaken it. But when you hear attacks on the Patriot Act, keep a few things in mind: Many of its provisions have long been used against drug smugglers and mobsters – and they should also be used against terrorists. To prevent abuses, monitoring and searches are approved by judges. The President is protecting civil liberties and protecting American security – and there is no contradiction between them. Margaret, from Plympton writes: Margaret Spellings Thanks for a great question. You are right that President Bush has provided unwavering support to our men and women in uniform by increasing basic pay, improving housing, and providing better training and maintenance. He also strongly believes that American must honor its commitment to the veterans who have sacrificed so much for our Nation. That is why he has been proud to enact unprecedented support for health care services for veterans. The President's budget for the VA represents an increase of almost $20 billion, or 40 percent, since 2001. The President increased veterans funding more in four years than the previous Administration did in eight. The President's budget includes a 41 percent increase in veterans’ medical care since 2001. This has allowed the VA to enroll 2.5 million more veterans, increase outpatient visits from 44 million to 54 million, increase prescriptions filled from 98 million to 116 million, and open 194 new community-based clinics. In the coming years, the President is seeking to modernize VA facilities and provide more care to more veterans in more places, where veterans need it most, like the South and West where more veterans are retiring. Also, some veterans are receiving care in old, outdated hospitals. Those who have fought in 21st century wars shouldn’t have to receive care in pre-World War II facilities. The President has committed $1.5 billion in the 2004 and 2005 budgets, and additional funding will be requested in the future to increase outpatient health care services, build new hospitals, and replace outdated facilities. Eventually the VA will distribute its health care facilities so that the vast majority of veterans are within 30 miles of one.
By the way, you have a great name. Jacki, from San Diego writes: Margaret Spellings Sharon, from Tyler, Texas
writes: Margaret Spellings There is good news on the way to help Americans control their health care costs. President Bush signed legislation creating Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), which people can set up when they purchase a low-premium, high-deductible health policy to cover major medical expenses. You can save tax-free in the HSA to pay for routine medical expenses or future health needs. The President wants people with HSAs to be able to get a tax deduction for the premiums they pay for their policies, allowing greater savings on coverage and more control over health care spending. To extend the option of HSAs to low-income families, the President is calling for a $1000 contribution to the HSA and a $2000 tax credit toward the purchase of the health policy. The President believes it important that families maintain control over their health care as opposed to being placed in a government-run plan and simply transfer the cost to taxpayers. 60 percent of uninsured Americans work for small businesses, that is why the President has called for Association Health Plans (AHPs) to help small businesses band together to better provide care to their workers and families.
Finally, the President believes we need common-sense reforms to fix the run-away costs of the medical liability system where frivolous law suits are forcing providers to practice defensive medicine and running more doctors out of the practice of health care, increasing costs for all. Russell, from St. Petersburg
writes: Margaret Spellings Some brand name drugs are less costly abroad because many foreign countries impose price-controls on drugs and have government-run health care systems. This leads to the US supporting most of the world’s research and development of new, life-saving, breakthrough drugs. But not all drugs in Canada are less expensive. You will find popular generic drugs are often cheaper here. The President has some concerns about importing drugs from Canada. Safety is his primary consideration, so any importation of drugs must guarantee Americans the same level of safety and effectiveness we currently have under the Food and Drug Administration. The President has appointed a federal task force to find out what resources and authority would be needed to ensure that importation could be done safely.
You are right though, that Americans deserve a more efficient and dependable source of prescription drugs here in America. President Bush has worked to make medicines more affordable for all Americans by passing a new Medicare drug benefit that will cut seniors' drug costs in half. Medicare approved drug discount cards are currently saving seniors up to 30 percent on their drugs, and low-income seniors are eligible for $600 of immediate assistance. We have also closed loopholes to speed generic drugs to market, which will save Americans $35 billion in drug costs over 10 years.
Jimmy, from Ballingary writes: Margaret Spellings
Margaret Spellings
|