at military facilities across the nation. the projects will improve personnel living quarters and install green technologies throughout the country for the united states military. we also launched white house -- whitehouse.gov \recovery. i will not turn things back to mr. gibbs. >> in january you issued your recommendation for the stimulus that turned to be domestic. he said without the stimulus the unemployment rate would be over 8%. it i 9s 9.4%.

how do you assess that now? >> the first part of the question, when we made our initial estimates, that was before we had fourth-quarter results on gdp, which we later found out was contracted at an annual rate of 6 pe%. the important thing to realize is that our estimate, whether it 600,000 jobs or $3.5 million -- jobs over the life of the plan, that is the difference between what we believe would have occurred in the job market in the absence of this plan and what we observed in the job market. in the absence -- were this plan

not to be implemented as i have described, and as the doctor and i articulated then, in the absence of the plan, job losses would have been deeper for what ever they occurred. the unemployment rate would have been by our estimate by the end of next year between 1.5 and two points higher than it would have been. that is the difference between what would have happened to the job market, the unemployment rate, whirred this plan not in any effect, and the actual outcomes of jobs. that difference between actual and the expectation absent the plan, that is where the estimates come from. >> can you give us a better accounting on 150,000 jobs?

it is a number i've heard a couple of times. >> as i described, we know how fast the plan is spending out. we know which sectors -- it to go back to the report, you will see that we have estimates by sector, industry, but also by energy, construction, infrastructure, tax cuts -- >> so this is estimated, so we do not know exactly -- >> the 150,000 jobs comes out of the methodology i was just describing. that is we spend out, we know types of spend out, so we can will assign multipliers to the plan. tax cuts generate a smaller multiplier than direct government spending. once you know the spend it out and type of spending you are

engaged in, they can derive an estimate of how many jobs you believe you created relative to what would have occurred in the job market where you not doing that spending. one other point. this is an absolute tried and true economic methodology. there is no other way to make this kind estimate. you have to have an estimate of what would have occurred in the absence of your stimulus plan in order to come up with the jobs you have created. every macro model at the federal reserve or private forecasters engages in these exercises. >> you spend $1 billion a day, so there is 700 billion left to be spent? >> to be precise, it is a matter of obligating about $1 billion per day.

we're up to about 135 billion in terms of obligations. spend out is closer to $44 billion. , how much this summer are you obligating? >> we are unable to make that estimate at that point. >> are you going to be accounting that toward the 3.5 billion total? >> the 3.5 billion is an estimate of jobs created or saved by the end of next year. >> what you are acknowledging are temporary jobs during the summer which will not last more than three months. >> that is a good question. the 3.5 million jobs are -- are what economists call for-time equivalent jobs.

to part-time jobs count as one full time the job. >> this accelerated spending will -- >> not as 125. it is 600,000 fte's. >> b. when you say accelerated, are you saying from the pace from the first 100 days froor fm the time when the plan was passed? >> the first 100 days. our plan was to get the foundation in place over the first 100 days in terms of getting contracts in the door, evaluating the contracts, putting in the oversight and accountability that are is critical, receiving state applications for fiscal

stabilization. we have laid that foundation, and our expectation was that we would ramp the plant up, but first we have to make sure that we have the first 100 days in place and that has gone well. >> you are on schedule. you're not changing the schedule? >> i would say we are slightly ahead of schedule, that the acceleration that we are seeing in the second 100 days is better than we expected when the first atom, but we were not expecting the ramp up. >> on the unemployment rate you said that without the stimulus you would expect it to be up to two percentage points higher by the end of next year. what is your forecast for the unemployment rate by the end of next year? >> that is not a fair question, but i will not get ahead.

we have a process where we release our next forecast by the end of the summer. >> when you put together the report in january, he projected with the stimulus a rate of about 8% right now. why did it happen that it is one and half percentage points higher now? whenever it is that happened in the economy that make you miss the mark? >> our forecast at that time was right in the middle of every other forecast. if we had a forecast that was much worse than that, we would have been -- we would have been correct, it turns out. the point is that the contraction of the economy in the fourth quarter -- you should recall back then -- the magnitude of that contraction was larger than was expected.

at that time our forecast seemed reasonable. looking back it was too optimistic. what i will say and i did what want to lose sight of this is the american recovery and reinvestment act, in our view, according to our analysis, will lead to an unemployment rate by the end of next year up to two points lower than would otherwise be the case. that is the direct result of the kinds of programs and products we're talking about today, putting millions of people back to work who in the absence of this program would not be gainfully employed. >> do you think the unemployment rate has peaked already? >> i do not. i will not speculate on that. it is better to wait for --

>> you speculated in january. >> we have a process by which we release these forecasts. it to be disruptive to the process for me to share my speculation. the budget director will be releasing those in late summer. >> i am not an economist, but we have said and i have said each and every month we have been in here that we expected many, many months of continued job loss in the hundreds of thousands. the reason this was -- the reason this was not a $787,000,000,000.99-day economic plan, we never expected this to be solved in 100 days. that is why the spend it out is over 82-year plan. the obligation that we talked about in terms of over $135 billion -- i have seen some of

the reporting to date. this notion that we thought somehow 100 and some days into the stimulus plan being law that our economy would be complete turnaround is not predicated on anything that we have talked about in here each and every day since the administration began. >> he said by the end of the third quarter in a report that was -- >> it was important to understand to remember the type of questions that i got the day that the growth number came out that showed contraction in that quarter, as jared said, down 6%. the rate of job decline in december and january changed dramatically. something was happening in the economy in that time. and in those months that caused

the acceleration of the deterioration. the point that is being tried to make here, regardless of where that occurred in the downturn was or differently, that core in where the job percentage number was, the unemployment rate, you're still talking about you can shift that curve up, but the plan was always predicated to have that number be 1.5 to two percentage points less than in absence of a recovery. >> this plan, because of the way your specifically modeling this -- in some estimates it says 2.2. >> every economic estimates as

an interval of around it. when of the things we are doing and you will see quarterly reports on this, we have real- time data that we add in to our estimates were recipients of dollars report job creation to us. the response to that is, why do you not just count those? that is just one piece of those job creations. that is the job creation created by spending. you do not get jobs like that -- you're not counting the tax cuts. you're not counting the multiplier effect for people who want that direct spending go to the lunch counter and create extra demand that would not otherwise be there.

>> the vice president had a good example today. this is a good example because there is a tax credit for energy efficient windows that a tax payer would use and apply for in next year's taxes. there are going to be a window makers are producing, in anticipation of the tax credit causing an economic multiplier effect, and window producers are making more windows, somebody who decides they are going to change the wind is in their house to take advantage of the tax credit that will show up on their next year's taxes. >> you are counting and it is your number and you came up with it through modelling. some states have received money

and that has helped them keep people on no -- >> i do not want to pretend to be accurate on that spot. >> when will you be able to go beyond the methodology and go back and look and say we're right, it was that number of jobs, or we were wrong? >> let me refer you to to papers that i think, i believe, i hope, take you through this kind of methodology, this estimate, in reader-friendly language. there are both on recoveryact.gov, and one of them is a more recent one on how we are counting jobs. >> so you can add them up and actually look at them. when we get to that point?

>> every quarter, and you will see, under the act, the council of economic advisers, has the obligation to report job growth quarterly. as i was explaining kumbaya part of the complication -- calculation involves recipients telling us the jobs they created. part of it is going to be jobs saved. i mentioned 150,000 school teachers across the land as part of the second 100 days, teachers, principals, and support jobs -- staff. those are jobs saved. that will be something they cannot get by contractor. he will compare the actual outcome relative to an expected outcome in the absence of your investments. >> good to that's the trick how much of the estimate is going to

be direct government contract jobs and how much is it going to be this? >> i did not have that with me. it is a part of the report, precisely that question. i want to say it is something like60/40 director. >> one other question on the web site. is this going to be a cheerleader thing or if you put a whole slew of people coming in and say i am not getting the job that i thought i was getting, when will they be on there, too? >> as soon as you file that story, we will uploaded to the web site? --. thank you. before we -- i will do one quick announcement. president -- president obama will meet president lee at the

white house on tuesday, june 16. he extended the invitation in london on april 2 during the g- 20 summit. the republic of korea is a key ally, and the experts -- and the president looks forward to how the two countries can export corporation in the 21st century. they will consult on a range of bilateral and other issues. with that, yes, sir. >> having listened to all that i am still trying to figure out one key point here. we knew from the white house weeks ago that the white house thought the stimulus would create or say 600,000 jobs this summer. we knew there would be a ramp up. what is the point of this big splash today, the president and vice president had a detailed briefing? this -- do you think that you

are off message? the you think people are losing confidence in the stimulus? >> part of it is to outline the exact details with which jered just want you to the 10 slides to talk about the projects that we are going to see created and what is going to be taking part in the next 100 days in the history of the recovery. it is in congruent to say it is hard to ask if we planned this -- if all this out as planned, how could it be in response to criticism? are you infering that on the 136th day -- i do not know if it was a hundred 36. >> i am trying to figure out -- what the strategy is when you

talk about -- >> the president always thought about ensuring that people understood where we were on the road to economic recovery and the steps that the administration was on to take in order to improve the economic outlook of this country. i think you heard the president talk about -- today and others in ministration talk about on friday that we have seen the fewest number of lost jobs in about an eight-month period. while the number was less than what was estimated, the vice president said on friday and the president said again today that less bad is not good enough. these are the steps that the administration is outlining to ensure that the steps to recovery are taking place. some of the figures that he

talked about, there is about $499 billion in spending, and he talked about over $135 billion of that has been obligated. what is not included in that number is some of the tax stuff, and this is part of the president's continuing to discuss the steps we're taking with the american people. >> part of the effort is not just to implement the recovery act successfully, but should the american people that it is working, and you do have critics that are seeing the money is not being spent well or that to the's event is a packaging. d you feel that the white house is winning that battle, the message to the american people? >> the american people are not worried about the message battle that is going on in washington. they are worried about whether or not we are taking concrete

steps to fix our economy, to improve its for the future, to save and create jobs now. i cannot assure you they are not worried about a bunch of back and forth speaking. they are concerned rightly about the steps we're taking to improve. that is exactly what the president out line today. yes, sir. >> i have two questions related to north korea. first about the journalists. is there an indication that north korea intends to use these women as a bargaining chip in the nuclear standoff issue? >> i think there detainment is not something that we have linked to other issues, and we hope the north koreans do not do that either. i think this is a humanitarian issue, and these women are

innocent and should be released to their families, and the administration is working to see that happen. >> there have been no sign so far that they have been linking the two issues? >> no. >> the u.s. is considering putting north korea on the list of state-sponsors of terrorism? >> it is important to look at the question that secretary clinton got, which what she was asked about a letter from the senators about this topic, and she has received a letter. we are working and continue to work with congress to consider any and all ideas related to dealing with the situation with north korea. obviously, the statutes is clear and lays out a series of

requirements, as she noted in the interview, and i think obviously the main focus for us is on what steps internationally can be taken and that we are working on in response to north korea's. lastly, this is also a very big issue about their actions. i have said this probably each and every day in here that we have done this, the actions they have taken the firm -- have further isolating themselves from the world. they are stepping away from their rights and responsibilities. the responsibilities and accountability that they have to not necessarily fall under the provisions of the law that she was talking about. we were talking about you and

security council resolutions and agreements that they have made as part of the negotiations. >> last week -- i assume you were not here in washington for this -- >> i saw you in france. >> the commissioner of the bureau of labor to six testified before congress. kenya substantiate -- -- can use substantiate the claim of 450,000 jobs? the commissioner said that would be a difficult thing for anything -- anyone to substantiate. you cannot verify the administration's policies have created these jobs? he said, no, we're just counting jobs. is it fair to use this to say this that the commissioner of labor statistics does not stand

by them? >> i would point to you about the two reports that were on the internet. i have not seen the report, having been overseas, but we continue to think it is fair. >> abc interviewed the former guantanamo detainee who is now free in france. he spent seven and half years in guantanamo. he is considering suing the united states government for that time. does the obama administration think that people who have been freed from guantanamo deserve any kind of compensation? >> i would have to ask somebody at nsc what that involves. that has not been part of the discussions the have taken place here as it relates to the issues around the closure of guantanamo. >> on north korea, as the

president or anyone been in touch with the former vice- president or about taking a role in helping to try to secure the release of the rich journalists? >> i can check. i have seen discussions about the news -- news reports, i should say, about different people that may or may not go, but i do not have anything to add. >> has the president talked about judge sotomayor? >> i do not think he has talked about her. i know that as a result of a tripping at la guardia, broke a small bone in her ankle. she flew to d.c. it was look at when she got here and she was advised to get x- rays, which she did. she spent a couple hours getting a cast, and the last time i saw

video up on capitol hill, she is continuing to meet with senators as part of her meetings surrounding her nomination. i think she has six meetings skill today and she will make all six -- i think she has six meetings scheduled today and she will make all six. >> will you sign the cast? >> i think i will. maybe we can get senators to sign. >> now that the the president has defended his position on the middle east, will he follow through? >> hollen, we have said this to route the past several days. i do not look at his alma reach as having started in the speech and it is not going to and as part of that speech. going all the way back to the beginning of the administration,

in ensuring that the this administration was involved early on in the middle east peace process, the president talked about that as being a high priority, interviews he has done, this speech to the parliament in turkey, as well as that speech, and i think he outlined a series of things that the administration will focus on in terms of democracy. >> i am not talking about speeches. what is his next step? >> let me finish and i will give you some action. the president continues to work on the peace process and we will have some readouts a little bit later for you today on some of that. the president will be engaged in dealing with the parties there.