we have a generation that is able to fight and able to -- libya will have a democratic society. free women. free religion. women of freedom. so what you want from america, clear.ite we told them, we told them, and we told the united nations. after gaddafi we are able to have and build the new libya, democratic, free, moderate, modern libya. libya, all of us are muslim.

sewn sunnies.as yo as you libyans. they are patriots. they are fighters. after jihad against the italians their sacrifice are quite clear. and we are proud of them. are our brothers. no difference between whether from beirut or -- we are united. we are one tribe. the tribe of libya. >> thank you. [applause] just to add to it, after the liberation of the cities in libya, most of the cities have established civilian governing

bodies. these civilian governing bodies are made of lawyers, of judges, of the youth, of the movement. and all of them are working now even though in the short period they have shown the people when the people govern themselves really, not as gaddafi used to do, they have done a better job and the people have seen the difference. all the material that we see sometimes in the western press, it's really amazing that people don't know what's going on in libya. they spie of things we don't know as libyans. it's something very alien. there is no civil war because there is no civilians fighting each other. it is the libyans fighting the mercenaries of gaddafi. there is no tribal divisions. because we are almost united in a tribe called the tribe of libya. believe me, i think some of our friends in the media need to do

some home work. we thank them, but there are some buzz words. there's no guide in extremism. there's no extremism in libya. there is no civil war in libya. and those in the foreign media in libya, they have -- still we hear the buzz words here and there. sorry for the interruption. yes, please? [speaking in foreign language] >> because we started late. give them another 15 minutes. [speaking in foreign language] >> five minutes. >> ok. five minutes more? you need to go? i can't keep you if you are in a rush. just a minute. ok. >> [question inaudible] questions and answer

quickly. >> i'd like to ask again -- i think we didn't really get the answer what exactly did you ask the u.s. in terms of -- did you ask for arms, for your position? did you ask for -- what did you ask for? >> well, i think we asked them for anything to make this resolution go through and gaddafi step down. anything they can do for this. this revolution to not go back. they have no choice, either victory or die. there is no choice. if they don't die in the war, then gaddafi, he will -- anything that can help, we are ready to accept. as far as no physical presence on our soils.

>> asking about a divided libya, it is impossible. believe me. believe me. i am from the south. my wife from the middle of libya. you can't divide yourself. you can't divide libya. [applause] >> for the sake of, you know, his schedule and tight schedule, i like really to thank him very much. just want to say thank you, thank you to the community, thank you to the press to be here with us today. and thank you for taking care, for supporting the libyan people. i want to especially thank -- he came to the minister of foreign affairs, i remember, as a

minister in 2000. i don't know him that time. but i've been working as a director of america's department and then after about one year he send know canada to help with mission there. he was my boss and he still. i want to thank him very much for joining us today. he came all the way from new york i think the speech he made in the security council, i think it's a historical speech. made people cry inside the room, outside, and all other the world. he's a man with principles. he's a man with thought. he's a man with thinking. i'm very happy that we have somebody like him. he stand with the libyan revolution. and he stand with the cause of libya. he believe in freedom. he believe in justice. he believe in hope. he believe in fuel libya.

i'm very proud to know you. i'm very proud to work with you. you were my boss and you're still. he is now the member -- [applause] >> i would like to thank all the panelists, especially my colleagues. you really are the people behind this meeting with me. they have been working the last weekday and night to bring this gathering together. i would like to ask to thank all the libyans who signed -- and also those who came from around the country to attend with us here. thank you for really joining us, for being real patriot libyans. >> for the libyan attendants, please, you can stay here for a while. need to you stay here.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> today on c-span, president obama holds a news conference at the white house. then today's "washington journal." and later, the chairman of the national commission on fiscal responsibility and reform testify at a senate budget committee hearing. >> on television, on radio, and online. c-span, bringing public affairs to you, created by cable. it's washington your way. white house news

conference president obama said the u.s. is prepared to use its strategic petroleum reserves if oil supplies are significantly disrupted by events in the middle east. the president also talked about u.s. efforts to respond to the earthquake and tsunami in japan. from the white house, this is about 50 minutes. >> good morning, everybody. before i begin, i want to say a few words about the terrible tsunami that struck japan today. first and foremost, our thoughts and prayers are with the people of japan. this is potentially a catastrophic disaster. images of the destruction and flooding coming out of japan are simply heartbreaking. japan is, of course, one of our

strongest and closest allies. and this morning i spoke with prime minister kan. on behalf of the american people, i conveyed our deepest condolences and offered our japanese friends whatever assistance is needed. we currently have an aircraft carrier in japan, and another is on its way. we also have a ship en route to the islands to assist as needed. the defense department is working to account for all our military personnel in japan. u.s. embassy personnel in tokyo moved to an offsite location. and the state department is working to account for and assist any and all american citizens who are in the country. tsunami warnings have been issued across the pacific. we've already seen initial waves on guam and other u.s. territories in alaska and hawaii, as well as along the west coast. here in the united states there

hasn't been any major damage so far, but we're taking this very seriously and are monitoring the situation very closely. fema is fully act vatted and is -- activated and is coordinating with local, state officials to support those necessary. if people are told to evacuate, do as you are told. today's events remind us of just how fragile life can be. our hearts go out to our friends in japan and across the region. and we're going to stand with them as they recover and rebuild from this tragedy. before i take a few questions, let me say a few words about something that's obviously been on the minds of many americans here at home. that's the price of gasoline. in an economy that relies on oil, gas prices affect everybody. from farmers and truck drivers to restaurant owners and workers as well as consumers.

businesses see rising prices affect their bottom line. pinch everyl the time they fill up the tank. for americans already facing tough times, it's an add burden. of course, rising prices are not a new phenomenon. three years ago, before the recession hit, a combination. factors including rising demand from emerging economies like china drove gas prices to more than $4 a gallon. the worldwide recession and the decrease in demand pushed prices back down. but over the past year as the economy's picked up steam and global demand for oil has increased, prices have increased again. turmoil in north africa and the middle east has added uncertainty to the mix. and lost production in libya has tightened supply. here's the good news. the global community can manage supply disruptions like this.

other oil-producing nations have committed to filling any gaps. we will continue to coordinate closely with our international partners to keep all options on the table when it comes to any supply disruptions. here at home everybody should know that should the situation demand it, we are prepared to tap the significant stockpile of oil that we have in the strategic petroleum reserve. we're also using the resources at our disposal at the federal level to monitor any possible manipulation in the oil markets. and i'm asking the attorney general and relevant agencies to work with states attorneys general to monitor for price gouging to make sure that nobody is taking advantage of working families at the pump. in addition, america is better prepared than we used to be. today we use 7% less oil than we did in 2005. even as our economy has grown since then. partly because our economy as a

whole is more efficient. we're adapting. we're producing more oil. and we're importing less. our automakers, for example, are manufacturing more fuel-efficient cars, some that now get more than 50 miles to the gallon. and our consumers are driving more of these cars. in december, democrats and republicans came together to pass a payroll tax cut that is already helping to grow our economy and create jobs. in the wake of rising gas prices, it should also help act as a cushion for working families. this doesn't lessen our commitment to do everything that we can to get gas prices down. but that tax cut will total for the average working family this year or an extra $80 or so showing up in your paycheck each month. that tax relief package is a key reason that even with these higher prices economists and investors like warren buffett believe we should still expect

solid growth and strong private sector job creation this year. now, the hard truth is, is that as long as our economy depends on foreign oil, we'll always be subject to price spikes. we've got to get moving on a comprehensive strategy that pursues more energy production and more energy conservation. we need continue to crease our access to secure energy supplies in the near term. and we've got to make our economy more energy efficient and energy independent over the long run. me be more specific. first, we need to continue to boost domestic production of oil and gas. last year american oil production reached its highest level since 2003. let me repeat that. our oil production reached its highest level in seven years. oil production from federal waters in the gulf of mexico reached an all-time high. for the first time in more than

a decade imports accounted for less than half of what we consumed. so any notion that my administration has shut down oil production might make for a good political soundbite, but it doesn't match up with reality. we are encouraging offshore exploration and production. we're just doing it responsible. i don't think anybody's forgotten that we're only a few months removed from the worst oil spill in our history. so what we've done is to put in place common sense standards like proving that companies can actually contain an underwater spill. and oil companies are stepping up. we've approved more than 35 new offshore drilling permits that meet these new safety and environmental standards. there is more we can do however. for example, right now the industry holds leases on tens of millions of acres both offshore and on land where they aren't producing a thing. so i directed the interior department to determine just how

many of these leases are going undeveloped and report back to me within two weeks, so that we can encourage companies to develop the leases they hold and produce american energy. people deserve to know that the energy they depend on is being developed in a timely manner. we're also taking steps that will enable us to gather data on potential gas and oil resources off the mid and south atlantic. and we're working with industry to explore new frontiers of production, safety measures, and containment technology. we're looking at potential new development in alaska both onshore and offshore when it comes to imported oil, we're strengthening our key energy relationships with other producer nations, something that i will discuss with the president of brazil next week. all of these actions can increase domestic oil production in the short and medium term. but let's be clear. it is not a long-term solution. even if we started drilling new

wells tomorrow that oil isn't coming online overnight. and even if we tap every single reserve available to us, we can't escape the fact that we only control 2% of the world's oil, but we consume over a quarter of the world's oil. mr. pickins who made his fortune in the oil business and i don't think anyone would consider unfriendly to drilling, was right when he said this is one emergency we can't drill our way out of. we can't place our long-term bets on a finite resource that we only control 2% of. especially resources vulnerable to hurricanes, war, and political turmoil. so beyond increased domestic production, if we want to secure our long-term prosperity and protect the american people from more severe oil shocks in the future, the way to do it is to gradually reduce demand and then do everything we can to break our dependence on oil.

for example, last year we established a groundbreaking national fuel efficiency stand yard for cars and trucks. it's going to save consumers money while conserving about 1.8 billion-barrels of oil. and we're working with automakers, auto workers and states to ensure that the high quality fuel-efficient cars and trucks of tomorrow continue to be built right here in the united states of america. to satisfy our broader energy needs we're working to diversify our entire portfolio with historic investments in clean energy. right now all across america our farmers are producing home-grown fuels. our scientists are looking for the next breakthroughs. and our workers are back in factories manufacturing wind turbines, solar panels, advanced batteries that will help our cars get hundreds of miles to the gallon. these are jobs that didn't exist two years ago. we want to create millions more of these jobs. and in this year's state of the union address, i set a goal for

america. by 2035, 80% of our electricity will come from a broad array of clean energy sources from renewables like wind, solar, and home-grown biofuels along with natural gas, clean coal, and nuclear power. so these are just some of the steps that we've already tyne secure america's -- already taken to secure america's energy future. and over the course of the weeks and months ahead, we will take more. the bottom line is this. we've been having this conversation for nearly four decades now. every few years gas prices go up, politicians pull out the same old political playbook, and then nothing changes. and when prices go back down, we slip back into a trance. and then when prices go up, suddenly we're shocked i think the american people are tired of that. i think they're tired of talk. we need to work together, andcrats, republicans, everybody in between to finally

secure america's energy future. i don't want to leave this for the next president. and none of us should want to leave it for our kids. so with that, let me take a few questions. and i'm going to start with mr -- [inaudible] >> thank you, mr. president. you had said that you want to see gaddafi leave power, leave office. are you prepared to use any means necessary in the united to make thatment happen? and if not, why not? i know in the cases of some of these other uprisings there's been a careful consideration not to take sides, let the libyan -- let the people in those countries make this decision. but in this case it does seem we have taken sides. so what's the red line? >> first of all, let's take a at what we've already done. my first priority, obviously, was getting out american citizens and embassy personnel out of libya. we got that done. the very next day we had already

instituted the largest financial seizure of assets in our history. and the day after that we had imposed sanctions and mobilized the international community through the united nations so that across the board we are slowly tightening the noose on gaddafi. he is more and more isolated internationally both through sanctions as well as an arms embargo. addition to that, we provided a host of humanitarian aid measures to make sure that people are not adversely affected as they cross the borders into tuneesha or egypt. we will continue to do that. and what we've done is we've organized in nato a series of conversations about a wide range of options that we can take. everything from 24-hour surveillance so that we can monitor the situation on the ground and react rapidly if conditions deteriorated, to

further efforts with respect to an arms embargo, additional efforts on humanitarian aid. but also potential military options including a no-fly zone. nato will be meeting on tuesday to consider a no-fly zone. and we've been in discussions with both arab countries as well as african countries to gauge their suppor support for such an action. in addition, secretary hillary clinton will be meeting with the the next several days. and we have determined that it's appropriate for us to assign a representative whose specific job is to interact with the opposition and determine ways that we can further help them. so we're going to be in close consultation with them. so the bottom line is that i have not taken any options off the table at this point. i think it is important to understand that we have moved about as swiftly as an

international coalition has ever moved to impose sanctions on gaddafi. i am absolutely clear that it is in the interest of the united states and more importantly in the interest of the libyan people for mr. gaddafi to leave. and i have not foreclosed these options. now, i do take very seriously making sure that any decisions i make that involve u.s. military power are well thought through and are done in close consultation with secretary gates, chairman of the joints chiefs of staff, admiral mullen, and all relevant personnel. anytime i send the united states forces into a potentially hostile situation there are risks involved, and there are consequences. and it is my job as president to make sure that we have considered all of those risks. it's also important from a political perspective to as much

as possible maintain the strong international coalition that we have right now. >> are you concerned that because you've imposed all of these sanctions that gaddafi feels cornered, has no other noption his -- option in his mind but to keep fighting? and in the words of your international intelligence, he have the fire power to potentially win this standoff with the rebels? >> i am concerned, absolutely. i think that's why it's so important for us not to stop where we are but to continue to find options that will add additional pressure, including sending a clear message to those around gaddafi that the world is we're paying attention. and that there have been referrals to the international criminal court. part of what we're wanting to do is to change the balance not just militarily inside of libya, but also to change the balance in terms of those who are around

gaddafi and are thinking about what their future prospects are if they continue down the course that they're on. but, chuck, there's no doubt that i am concerned about it. gaddafi has, you know, a stash of weapons. he not only has some troops that remain loyal to him, but there have been reports that he's also been hiring mercenaries. even with the financial freeze that we've imposed, he still has some assets. the rebel groups are just now getting organized. so we're going to have to continue to apply pressure. and that's why i say we have not taken any options off the table at this point. mimi hall? >> thank you, mr. president. just to follow-up on libya and also a budget question. you say you're concerned, but is gaddafi staying an acceptable option for you ever?

and my question on the budget is, there's been some criticism from members of your own party about your leadership on negotiations on spending. and i'm wondering given that if can you talk about where you stand on a three-week c.r., on longer term priorities, and what you would and would not accept uncut? >> back to the gaddafi question, as i said before, it is in the united states' interest and in the interests of the people of libya that gaddafi leave. and we are going to do -- we're going to take a wide range of actions to try to bring about that outcome. when you say, is it ever acceptable? i think what you're asking is, are we going to engage in any potential military action to make that happen? and as i said before, when it comes to u.s. military actions, whether it's a no-fly zone or

other options, you've got to balance costs versus benefits. i don't take those decisions lightly. but let me be as clear as i can about the desired outcome from our perspective. and that is that gaddafi step down. we are going to continue to work with the international community to try to achieve that. and we are going to be in close consultation with these opposition groups as they get organized to see how we can bring about that outcome. now, with respect to the budget, i think it's important to understand that right now the discussion is about last year's business. we're talking about how to fund the remainder of this fiscal year. this is an appropriations task. and we have been in very close contact with all members of congress, both parties. i've had conversations with

mr. mcconnell. i've had conversations with mr. boehner, with nancy pelosi, and with harry reid about how they should approach this budget problem. know. what we the republicans in the house passed a budget that has been now rejected in the senate. they are not going to get 100% of what they want. the democrats have put forward spending cuts, many of them pretty painful, that give republicans already half of what they were seeking because it was to do.ht thing many of those cuts were ones that were already embodied in the budget that i proposed for 2012. now, that's been rejected as well. so here's what we know. both sides are going have to sit down and compromise on prudent cuts somewhere between what the republicans were seeking that's now been rejected and what the

democrats had agreed to that has also been rejected. it shouldn't be that complicated. so what i've done is every day i talk to my team, i give them instructions in terms of how they can participate in the negotiations, indicate what's indicate what's not acceptable. and our expectation is that we should be able to get this completed. now, because i think neither democrats nor republicans were the mood to compromise until their 100% max malposition was voted down -- maximal position was voted down in the senate, we lost some time. we may not be able to fully resolve this and meet next week's deadline for the continuing resolution, which means that there may be potentially one more short-term extension. but let me just make some broad points about this. number one, we can't keep

running the government based on two-week extensions. that's irresponsible. wove' got a war -- we've got a war in afghanistan going on. we've got a wide range of issues facing the country on a day-to-day basis. notion that we can't get resolved last year's budget in a sensible way with serious but prudent spending cuts, i think, defies common sense. so we should be able to get it done. point number two. there are going to be certain things that house republicans want that i will not accept. and the reason i won't accept them is not because i don't think we've got to cut the budget. we do and we've already put forward significant cuts in the discretionary budget. some of which have not made members of my own party happy.

but the notion that we could cut, for example, pell grants when we know the single most important thing to our success as a nation long-term is how well educated our kids are and the proposal that was coming out of the house would cut this year about $800 out of pell grants for eight million kids and if extended into the next year would cut in half the pell grants that they're receiving. that makes no sense. the notion that we would decide that under the republican budget proposal to eliminate 200,000 head start slots, that also would mean the layoffs of 55,000 teachers. that doesn't make sense. the principle that i've tried to put forward since the state of the union is we've got to live within our means, got to get serious about managing our

budget, but we can't stop investing in our people. we can't stop investing in research and development. we can't stop investing in infrastructure, those things that are going to make us competitive over the long term and help us win the future so i've communicated directly to speaker boehner as well as to republican leader mcconnell that we want to work with them to get to a sustainable, discretionary budget. and we think it is important for us to stop funding programs that don't work. but we're going to make sure that we hold the line when it comes to some critical programs that are either going to help us outeducate, outinnovate, or outbuild other countries. the last point i'll make on the

budget. the republican budget that passed out of the house included a whole range of what are called briariders. these aren't really budget items. these are political statements. i've said again directly to speaker boehner that we're happy to discuss any of these riders, but my general view is, let's not try to sneak political agendas into a budget debate. if republicans are interested in social issue that they want to promote, they should put a bill the floor of the house and promote it. have an up or down vote. send it over to the senate. but don't try to use the budget as a way to promote a political or ideological agenda. i think that's the american people's view as well. i think one of the messages that the american people have clearly sent is, get serious about living within our means and

managing our budget in a responsible way. and stop with the political bickering. and if we have that view in mind, then i think that not only can we get this short-term issue resolved, but i think we can actually solve the long-term budget issues as well. jake? >> thanks, mr. president. experts say they can't recall a time when the u.s. ever had to russia assistance to a nuclear power plant in another country before. what can you tell us about how serious this is with the u.s. rushing coolant to japan because of the nuclear plant there? and then a second question. the state department spokesman p.j. crowley said the treatment of bradley manning by the pentagon is ridiculous and counter productive and stupid.

i'm wondering if you agree with that. thank you, sir. >> on point number one, when i spoke to prime minister kan, i specifically asked him about the nuclear plants and their potential vulnerability as a consequence of the earthquake. he indicated that they are monitoring the situation very closely. so far they have not seen evidence of radiation leaks. but obviously you've got to take all potential precautions. and i've asked steve chu, our energy secretary, to be in close contact with their personnel to provide any assistance that's necessary, but also to make sure if in fact there have been breaches on the safety system of these nuclear plants, that they're dealt with right away. with respect to private manning, i have actually asked the pentagon whether or not the procedures that have been taken in terms of his confinement are

appropriate and are meeting our basic standards. they assured me that they are. i can't go into details about some of their concerns, but some of this has to do with private safety as well. >> [question inaudible] >> i think i gave you an answer to the substantive issue. >> how did that happen? why -- don't yet have all the details, jake. i'll have to defer the question until we get more -- obviously the tragedy just happened a few hours ago. there's going to be a lot of fact finding that we're going to have to determine. chip reid? >> thanks mr. president. i'd like to go at the libya thing in a slight index way. in an interview with cbs news, gaddafi's son said, quote -- said the plan is quote, to squash the rebels with no mercy. if he follows through, if the

gaddafi regime follows through on that, can the united states simply stand by and do nothing? i say that in light of the fact that in the past you have said there are times when a brutal government is massacring its own citizens that the united states has a moral obligation to intervene militarily. >> i continue to believe that not only the united states but the international community has an obligation to do what it can to prevent a repeat of something what occurred in the balkans, in the 1990's what occurred in rwanda. and so part of, for example, maintaining 24-hour surveillance of the situation there is for us to have some sort of alert system. if you start seeing defenseless civilians who were being massacred by gaddafi's forces.

but obviously we're going to have to look at what develops on the ground on a case-by-case basis. i don't want to generalize right now and say that's what's happening and we're prepared to step in. it's going to require some judgment calls. and those are difficult ones. but we have sent a clear warning to the gaddafi government that they will be held accountable, particularly when it comes to assaulting civilians. and some of the rhetoric that you've seen -- for example, the gaddafi said they would be going door-to-door hunting for people who were participating in protests, you know, that implied a sort of lack of restraint and ruthles ruthlessness that i think raises our antenna. but as i said before, what i've got to do is make sure that

we're monitoring the situation and matching our actions with what we think will be helpful on the ground and also sustainable. and we've got to do so in consultation with the international community. >> do you agree with your top intelligence official who said before congress yesterday that it is likely the gaddafi regime will prevail in the long run and did he err by saying that in public? and if so, is this something he needs to be taken to the wood shed for? >> he was making a hard-headed assessment about military capability. i don't think anybody disputes that gaddafi has more fire power than the opposition. he wasn't stating policy so let me be clear, again, about what our policy, as determined by me, the president of united states, is towards the situation there. i believe that gaddafi is on the wrong side of history. i believe that the libyan people are anxious for freedom.

and the removal of somebody who has suppressed them for decades now. and we are going to be in contact with the opposition as well as in consultation with the international community to try to achieve the goal of mr. gaddafi being removed from power. zachery? >> thank you, mr. president. you talked about the option of tapping the strategic pe petrolm reserve. can you walk through what targets have to be hit before we do that, oil price, gas price? and how much would you want to release in any particular moment? and secondly, in relation energy thoughts what are the deepest threats to the recovery and what your administration is doing about it? >> the answer to your first question is, no, i will not go through the price that would trigger the release of the strategic petroleum reserve. but what i can do is to give you

a sense of how historically it's been understood. the idea behind the strategic petroleum reserve is if there was a severe disruption in supply. similar to what happened in the 1970's, for example, when you had the opec making a decision not to sell for a while. how would our economy continue to function, and making sure that we have sufficient supplies for that. another example would be during hurricane katrina when you have a whole bunch of refineries impacted and the production in the gulf impacted. that's another example where in a short term you can fill that hole. right now what we're seeing is not a shortage of supply. refineries are actually operating at fairly full capacity at the moment. the problem is, a great deal of the oil markets.

part of it prompted by the fact that the economy is growing faster in some places than others. but you've got china, india, brazil and other emerging nation that are using more and more energy as their economies advance. we already saw that trend in 2008. because of the worldwide recession, oil prices went back down. but to some degree a lot of what's happening in prices is a consequence of economic growth. and countries, the economy, starting to use more oil. part of it, though is also uncertainty in terms of what's happening in the middle east. so one of the messages that i want to send today is that we about our ability to fill any potential gaps in supply. libya, for example, does not account for a large portion of overall world production. they provide a type of oil that is highly valued, and there's a

high premium on it. but basically even if libyan oil production was suspended for a significant period of time because of the unrest there, we'd be able to fill that gap. so a lot of this has to do with uncertainty in the market. and part of what i want to the market is that we're going to do what we need to do in consultation with both other producer nations as well as in consultation with our allies, who also have reserves, to make sure that oil supplies remain stable and that economic growth is going to continue. i do want to repeat the point that i've made, though, that -- look, the american people feel this pretty acutely.

i mean, we can talk all we want in the abstract about world oil markets. what they're concerned about is, this is money out of my pocket. some of the steps that we've already taken are making a difference. but obviously if you are in a house that requires you to commute 50 miles every day to your job, you know, you're not going to be able to sell your house immediately, particularly in this market, and move closer. you may want to buy a fuel-efficient car but you may not be able to afford it and so you're stuck with the clunker that's getting eight or 10 miles a gallon. and in fact, a lot of folks who are having the toughest time, who are either unemployed or have low-wage jobs, they're the ones more severely affected because they're using a higher portion of their income just to fill up the gas tank. so we're going to try to do everything we cannot ownly to stabilize the market, as i said, to the extent that we see any

efforts to take advantage of these price spikes through price gouging, we're going to go after that. if we see significant disruptions or, you know, shifts in the market that are so disconcerting to people that we think a strategic petroleum reserve release might be appropriate, then we'll take that step. and we'll monitor it very closely. and obviously we have it teed up. so this isn't a situation where it would take a big bureaucracy and several weeks for us to implement. this is something that would take several days. with respect to the overall economy, i think my assessment and the assessment of most economists is that although gas prices are hurting individuals right now and obviously taking

some of that tax cut that we gave them and forcing them to use it on gas as opposed to buying other items, that in part because of the steps we took, both democrats and republicans during the lame duck session, that the economic growth continues in a positive trend. we saw that in the jobs report which in the private sector, at least, was better than expected. we've seen the unemployment rate drop a full point. and so overall i'm positive about the fact that we're moving slowly but surely into positive job growth over the next several months. there are some areas we're still concerned about. housing is one that i just mentioned. we've got a lot of folks who because housing prices have fallen so steeply are still hu hurting. some of them are threatened with

foreclosure. maybe because they lost a job. in some cases they want to sell their house so they can move to a new job and their house is under water, essentially their mortgage is higher than what the house would sell for right now. have a number of steps to encourage loan modifications, to banks to take steps that would alleviate some of that burden and start clearing some of those homes on the market. but it's a slow process. you're talking about $5 trillion worth of product out there. and i mentioned that i had this conversation with warren buffett a couple of weeks ago when i was giving him the medal of freedom. and his point was, look, i'm bullish about this economy when it comes to the housing market it just takes some time to work itself out because we had such a housing bubble. we had so much construction, particularly in certain states that are harder hit than others,

that was then compounded by the overall recession. and it's going to take some time for the housing market to improve. but we're continuing to take a range of steps to try to strengthen that process of recovery in the housing market. the last point i'll make on the economy overall relates back to the budget issues that we talked about. if you looked at the last jobs report, growth in the private sector is very strong. 222,000 jobs created. where you lost jobs was in state and local government. and that means teachers being laid off, firefighters being laid off, police officers being laid off. now, we were able to cushion some of that over the first two years of this recession through the recovery act. and it made a huge difference all across the country. but now states are continuing to

cut, local governments are continuing to cut. i think it's very important when we think about the budget to understand that our long-term and deficits are not caused by us having head start teachers in the classroom. our long-term debt and deficit are caused primarily by escalating health care costs that we see in medicare and medicaid that's putting huge pressure on the overall budget. and that's why i think it's going to be important for to us have a conversation after we get the short-term budget done about how do we really tackle the problem in a comprehensive way. and that means not just going after headstart or corporation for public broadcasting. that's not where the money is. what it means is that we've got to make sure that we're tackling defense spending, tackling tax expenditures and tax loopholes,

that we're tackling entitlements, and that we're thinking about how do we, you know, really get our arms around that are driving the debt and deficit in a serious way and in a bipartisan way. i'll make this last question. why don't you get a microphone so we can hear you. >> thank you, mr. president. did you have contacts with other leaders in the middle east? and when awe praise them for reforms, are you look at other options where other regions can stay in power in the middle east? >> i'm in constant contact with leaders throughout the middle

east. i've had a fairly consistent message to all of them. number one, the united states believes in the right of peaceful protests and the ability of ordinary people to express their grievances to their government. we oppose the use of violence in response to peaceful protests. so that's one clear message that we tried to send. the second message we tried to send is that it is in the interests of the entire region reform itself. to reform itself both politically and economically so that the incredible talents of young people throughout that be tapped. so that whether he's in tripoli or she's in cairo or amman that

they know that if they work hard, if they are getting an education that they have an opportunity to live a better life. that they can get a job that pays a good wage and supports their family. and that they can have the basic necessities of life. and that they have personal security and personal fretted yom. -- freedom. now, each country is different. so the evolution, the process towards that vision, is going to differ in each country. but my consistent message to leaders in the region is that, you know, this process of change can be a great opportunity for the middle east. because if you can tap into the talents of those young people, then can you start seeing the kind of economic growth in that region that you started to see in other places in the world. and there's no reason why

countries in the middle east shouldn't have the same kind of growth rates that you're seeing in china and india. there's nothing inherent about the people in those countries that would prevent that. what's preventing it is the fact that for many decades you've seen a lack of opening up that allows you to take advantage of the global economy. and i think that, as i said, each country will be different. and it's going to ultimately be up to the people in those countries to determine the best form for them to seize this opportunity. but we should be on the sides of those who want to seize this opportunity. ok? >> [question inaudible] >> from japanese media. because obviously we're concerned about what's happening in japan. >> thank you, mr. president. i'm with a japanese newspaper.

i have two questions on the tragedy in japan. only touched on the issue in your opening statement. i'd like to ask about your personal feelings on the situation. you went to japan last year. now tsunami hit the coast of japan and the waves washed away cars and houses, and japanese people are devastated. i just want to ask about your personal thoughts and feelings on that. and secondly, you also touched on possible assistance from the united states to japan. the japanese government publicly that japan asked for help from u.s. forces in japan. are you waiting to provide those assistance? to your second question is, yes. i already told prime minister will provide whatever assistance they need. my understanding is the main assistance we're going to be able to provide them is lift capacity. the ability for us to i think clean in the -- help in the cleanup.

obviously when you have a tsunami like this, as well as an earthquake, you have, you know, huge disruptions both in the infrastructure -- you have boats, houses, cars that are washed into main thorough fares. and that requires heavy equipment. so any assistance that we can provide we will be providing. i'm heart broken by this tragedy. i think when you see what's happening in japan, you are reminded that for all our differences in culture or language or religion, that ultimately humanity is one. and when we face these kinds of natural disasters, whether it's in new zealand or haiti or jap

japan, then you think about your own family. and you think, how would you feel if you lost a loved one or if your entire life savings were gone because of the devastation? the japanese people are such close friends of ours, and i have such a close, personal friendship and connection to the japanese people in part because grew up in hawaii where i was very familiar with japanese culture, that that just makes, you know, our concerns that much more acute. but i'm very confident, though, obviously, that the japanese people are so resourceful. japan is such a powerful economy. and such an advanced economy technologically that japan will successfully rebuild. and it has experienced dealing with natural disasters. it has dealt with them before and will deal with them again.

and japan, i'm sure, will colorado back stronger than ever -- will come back stronger than ever. hopefully with our help. thank you very much, everyone. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> today on c-span, "washington with yours next live phone calls. then the chairman on the national commission of the fiscal responsibility and reform testify at a senate committee hearing. and white house economist talks about the global economy. in about 45 minutes we'll discuss public transportation with american public sp