PRESIDENT OBAMA'S STATEMENT MONDAY ON THE GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE PRESIDENT OBAMA 
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

5:00 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:  Good afternoon, everybody.  Of all the responsibilities the Constitution endows to Congress, two should be fairly simple:  pass a budget, and pay America’s bills.

But if the United States Congress does not fulfill its responsibility to pass a budget today, much of the United States government will be forced to shut down tomorrow.  And I want to be very clear about what that shutdown would mean -- what will remain open and what will not.

With regard to operations that will continue:  If you’re on Social Security, you will keep receiving your checks.  If you’re on Medicare, your doctor will still see you.  Everyone’s mail will still be delivered.  And government operations related to national security or public safety will go on.  Our troops will continue to serve with skill, honor, and courage.  Air traffic controllers, prison guards, those who are with border control -- our Border Patrol will remain on their posts, but their paychecks will be delayed until the government reopens.  NASA will shut down almost entirely, but Mission Control will remain open to support the astronauts serving on the Space Station.

I also want to be very clear about what would change.  Office buildings would close.  Paychecks would be delayed.  Vital services that seniors and veterans, women and children, businesses and our economy depend on would be hamstrung.  Business owners would see delays in raising capital, seeking infrastructure permits, or rebuilding after Hurricane Sandy.  Veterans who’ve sacrificed for their country will find their support centers unstaffed.  Tourists will find every one of America’s national parks and monuments, from Yosemite to the Smithsonian to the Statue of Liberty, immediately closed.  And of course, the communities and small businesses that rely on these national treasures for their livelihoods will be out of customers and out of luck.

And in keeping with the broad ramifications of a shutdown, I think it’s important that everybody understand the federal government is America’s largest employer.  More than 2 million civilian workers and 1.4 million active-duty military serve in all 50 states and all around the world.  In the event of a government shutdown, hundreds of thousands of these dedicated public servants who stay on the job will do so without pay -- and several hundred thousand more will be immediately and indefinitely furloughed without pay.

What, of course, will not be furloughed are the bills that they have to pay -- their mortgages, their tuition payments, their car notes.  These Americans are our neighbors.  Their kids go to our schools.  They worship where we do.  They serve their country with pride.  They are the customers of every business in this country.  And they would be hurt greatly, and as a consequence, all of us will be hurt greatly, should Congress choose to shut the people’s government down.

So a shutdown will have a very real economic impact on real people, right away.  Past shutdowns have disrupted the economy significantly.  This one would, too.  It would throw a wrench into the gears of our economy at a time when those gears have gained some traction.

Five years ago right now, our economy was in meltdown.  Today, our businesses have created 7.5 million new jobs over the past three and a half years.  The housing market is healing and our deficits are falling fast.  The idea of putting the American people’s hard-earned progress at risk is the height of irresponsibility.

And it doesn’t have to happen.  Let me repeat this:  It does not have to happen.  All of this is entirely preventable if the House chooses to do what the Senate has already done -- and that’s the simple act of funding our government without making extraneous and controversial demands in the process, the same way other Congresses have for more than 200 years.

Unfortunately, right now House Republicans continue to tie funding of the government to ideological demands like limiting a woman’s access to contraception, or delaying the Affordable Care Act, all to save face after making some impossible promises to the extreme right wing of their party.

So let me be clear about this.  An important part of the Affordable Care Act takes effect tomorrow no matter what Congress decides to do today.  The Affordable Care Act is moving forward. That funding is already in place.  You can’t shut it down.  This is a law that passed both houses of Congress; a law that bears my signature; a law that the Supreme Court upheld as constitutional; a law that voters chose not to repeal last November; a law that is already providing benefits to millions of Americans in the form of young people staying on their parents’ plan until they’re 26, seniors getting cheaper prescription drugs, making sure that insurance companies aren't imposing lifetime limits when you already have health insurance, providing rebates for consumers when insurance companies are spending too much money on overhead instead of health care.  Those things are already happening.

Starting tomorrow, tens of millions of Americans will be able to visit HealthCare.gov to shop for affordable health care coverage.  So Americans who’ve lived for years in some cases with the fear that one illness could send them into bankruptcy, Americans who’ve been priced out of the market just because they’ve been sick once, they’ll finally be able to afford coverage -- quality coverage -- many of them for the first time in their lives.

Some of them may be sick as we speak.  And this is their best opportunity to get some security and some relief.  Tens of thousands of Americans die every single year because they don’t have access to affordable health care.  Despite this, Republicans have said that if we lock these Americans out of affordable health care for one more year -- if we sacrifice the health care of millions of Americans -- then they’ll fund the government for a couple more months.  Does anybody truly believe that we won’t have this fight again in a couple more months?  Even at Christmas?

So here’s the bottom line:  I’m always willing to work with anyone of either party to make sure the Affordable Care Act works better, to make sure our government works better.  I’m always willing to work with anyone to grow our economy faster, or to create new jobs faster, to get our fiscal house in order for the long run.  I’ve demonstrated this time and time again, oftentimes to the consternation of my own party.

But one faction of one party, in one house of Congress, in one branch of government doesn’t get to shut down the entire government just to refight the results of an election.

Keeping the people’s government open is not a concession to me.  Keeping vital services running and hundreds of thousands of Americans on the job is not something you “give” to the other side.  It’s our basic responsibility.  It’s something that we’re doing for our military, and our businesses, and our economy, and all the hardworking people out there -- the person working for the Agricultural Department out in some rural community who’s out there helping some farmers make sure that they’re making some modest profit for all the hard work they’re putting in.  They’re the person working for HUD who’s helping somebody buy a house for the first time.  They’re somebody in a VA office who’s counseling one of our vets who’s got PTSD.

That’s who we’re here to serve.  That’s why we’re supposed to be carrying out these responsibilities.  It’s why we should be avoiding these kinds of constant brinksmanship.  It’s something that we do in the ordinary process of this extraordinary system of government that we have.  You don’t get to extract a ransom for doing your job; for doing what you’re supposed to be doing anyway; or just because there’s a law there that you don’t like.

The American people sent us here to govern.  They sent us here to make sure that we’re doing everything we can to make their lives a little bit better -- to create new jobs, to restore economic security, to rebuild the prospects of upward mobility.  That’s what they expect.

And they understand that there are differences between the parties and we’re going to be having some tough fights around those differences.  And I respect the fact that the other party is not supposed to agree with me 100 percent of the time, just like I don’t agree with them.  But they do also expect that we don’t bring the entire government to a halt or the entire economy to a halt just because of those differences.

That’s what they deserve.  They’ve worked too hard, for too long to recover from previous crises just to have folks here in Washington manufacture yet another one that they have to dig themselves out of.

So Congress needs to keep our government open, needs to pay our bills on time, and never, ever threaten the full faith and credit of the United States of America.

And time is running out.  My hope and expectation is that in the eleventh hour, once again, that Congress will choose to do the right thing and that the House of Representatives, in particular, will choose the right thing.

Thank you very much.

                    END              5:12 P.M. EDT

President Obama's Bilateral Meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu | The White House

President Obama's Bilateral Meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu | The White House

THIS YEARS FLU VACCINE EXPANDS PROTECTION

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
New Vaccine Protects Against Additional Flu Strain
TRICARE Management Activity

FALLS CHURCH, Va., Sept. 26, 2013 - Each year, flu season affects millions of people. Flu season usually begins in October, so now is a great time to protect yourself and your family by getting vaccinated.

The flu shot is easy to get and inexpensive – often free – for TRICARE beneficiaries, and this year the flu vaccine offers even more protection.

Until now, seasonal flu vaccines have only protected against three strains of flu - two strains of influenza A, which usually causes more cases and more severe illness, and one of influenza B, which is less common but also circulates in multiple forms.

The new vaccines include protection against a second strain of influenza B, which experts expect will prevent the vast majority of type B infections.

The flu is a contagious respiratory illness caused by influenza viruses that infect the nose, throat and lungs. Symptoms include fever, cough, sore throat, stuffy nose, body aches, headaches and fatigue. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the flu virus can be more serious for young children, older adults, pregnant women and people with medical conditions. It can cause mild to severe illness, and at times can lead to death.

TRICARE covers both the flu shot and flu mist. Beneficiaries may be able get their flu vaccine, at no cost, from a military treatment facility, hospital or from a pharmacist at one of the 45,000 network pharmacies that administer vaccines to TRICARE beneficiaries.

CDC officials also recommend steps to prevent the spread of germs, which can lead to the flu:

-- Avoid close contact with people who are sick;

-- Stay at home when sick;

-- Cover mouth and nose when coughing or sneezing;

-- Wash hands often with soap and water; and

-- Avoid touching eyes, nose or mouth.

CDC officials also recommend getting plenty of sleep, being physically active, managing stress, drinking plenty of fluids and eating nutritious food.

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AGEL MAKES REMARKS ON ROK-US ALLIANCE 60TH ANNIVERSARY

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
ROK-US Alliance 60th Anniversary Dinner
As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Seoul, South Korea, Monday, September 30, 2013

Good evening.  President Park, Minister Kim, General Paik, distinguished guests:  I am honored to be here in the Republic of Korea for this historic celebration.  I bring greetings, Madam President, from President Obama and the gratitude of the American people for your steadfast friendship.

This has been a year devoted to renewing our alliance of shared values and common purpose.  In May, I had the privilege of welcoming President Park on her first visit to the United States.  And in July, I was honored to join President Obama in hosting General Paik and many others at the Korean War Veterans Memorial in Washington, where we commemorated the 60th anniversary of the Korean War Armistice.

Tomorrow we will celebrate the 60th Anniversary, the hwan gap, of the signing of our Mutual Defense Treaty.  It is also Armed Forces Day, as Minister Kim noted, the day that South Korean forces punched back through the 38th parallel during the Korean War.

It is appropriate that these celebrations fall on the same day.  The unwavering alliance between the United States and the Republic of Korea has endured because it was forged through a history of shared sacrifice.

Those ties are embodied by General Paik Sun-Yup, in whose name we are presenting an award tonight, as well as its recipient, the late General Walton Walker, who led the defense of the Pusan Perimeter...Both generals were strong, decisive leaders during the war, and their courage has inspired and shaped our alliance.

In fact, General Paik was one of the first people to talk to President Eisenhower about the idea of a mutual defense treaty between our two nations – a treaty that became a linchpin of stability and prosperity throughout the region.

And that first word – mutual – is what makes it all work.  It's what's so important.

For sixty years, U.S. and South Korean forces have stood together against aggression on 'freedom's frontier.'  Earlier today, as Minister Kim noted, he and I visited with some of our troops stationed near the DMZ.  It was a chilling reminder of the threat North Korea poses not only to this country, but to the region, and to the United States homeland as well.  Yet we remain vigilant against any threat from the North.  The Second Infantry Division is proud, ready, and prepared to 'fight tonight' if it has to.

But our celebration tonight is about more than what we have accomplished here on this peninsula – including this country's transformation into an economic and military power.  We are also celebrating the reality that our alliance has grown into a global partnership that transcends national borders and regional boundaries.

When the United States Senate was debating whether to ratify our Mutual Defense Treaty with the Republic of Korea, the Senate Majority Leader, William Knowland, said he had "no doubt that if this nation ever became involved in a war anywhere in the world ... the Republic of Korea would be there."

In hindsight, these words could not have been more prescient.

In every major military engagement the United States has undertaken since then, we have lived by the motto "we go together."

We have gone together in Vietnam, where I served alongside South Korean soldiers.  They were some of the toughest, bravest fighting men I have ever encountered.  And they were some of the most dependable.

We have gone together in the Persian Gulf, where you deployed troops for medical and transportation support during Operation Desert Storm.

We have gone together in Somalia, in Lebanon, and Haiti, where South Korean troops helped with important humanitarian and peacekeeping missions.

We have gone together in Iraq, where you deployed thousands of combat medics and engineers to help with reconstruction and humanitarian aid.

And we have gone together in Afghanistan, where you have sent not only troops, doctors, and engineers, but also a full [Provincial] Reconstruction Team.  As we bring that mission to a responsible end next year, the U.S. military is proud to have served with our Korean allies once again.

For sixty years, the words katchi kapshida – we go together – have defined this alliance. But the threats in this increasingly complex and dangerous world demand that we continue to go together.  And we will.

Even though our alliance has never been stronger than it is today, that does not mean we cannot grow and mature.  While the root of our alliance will always be the defense of territory, building on that foundation will let us go together into the future as active strategic partners – both here on the Korean Peninsula, and around the world.  As two prosperous nations, and highly capable militaries, there is much we can do to contribute to the security of this region, and the world, if we continue to go together.

I am told that the hwan gap is not only a celebration of longevity, but also a reaffirmation of hope for an even longer, more secure, and more prosperous life.  Tonight and tomorrow, as we celebrate this special milestone, let us also rededicate our commitment to building a long, secure, and prosperous future together.

This alliance has changed a great deal over the past 60 years, and it will continue to change in the future.  But there should be no doubt – no doubt – that it will always change for the better.

The United States and the Republic of Korea have stood together in the past, we stand together today, and we will stand together in the future.

Thank you.

GSA ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BLUE'S STATEMENT ON CERTIFICATION IN REWARDING SUSTAINABLE FISHING

FROM:  U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 
The Role of Certification in Rewarding Sustainable Fishing
Statement of Darren Blue
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Facilities Management & Services Program
General Services Administration
Before the House Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation
Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard
September 24, 2013

Good morning Chairman Begich, Ranking Member Rubio, and members of the Subcommittee. I am Darren Blue, Assistant Commissioner for Facilities Management and Services Programs in GSA’s Public Buildings Service. I appreciate being invited here today to discuss GSA’s role in developing guidelines for healthy and sustainable food services in federal facilities.

Today I will speak to the GSA’s support of health and sustainability policies and practices within our inventory of Federal office space.

First and foremost, I’d like to establish GSA’s view that U.S.-managed fisheries do not require third-party certification to demonstrate responsible practices. GSA is working with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and other agencies to revise our Health and Sustainability Guidelines for Federal Concessions and Vending Operations to ensure they provide absolute clarity on this matter.

Development of GSA-HHS Health and Sustainability Guidelines for Federal Concessions and Vending Operations

In 2009, President Obama issued Executive Order 13514, “Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance,” directing Federal agencies to leverage acquisitions to encourage markets for sustainable products and services. As the Federal government’s landlord, GSA is well positioned to drive change by supporting sustainability in federal facilities and encouraging health and wellness among federal employees.

From 2009 to 2011, GSA and HHS jointly developed the Health and Sustainability Guidelines with a working group that included health and sustainability experts from several Federal agencies. GSA and HHS co-released the Guidelines in March 2011. NOAA did not participate in the development of the original Guidelines, but GSA and HHS have since been working with NOAA to develop revisions.

We designed the Guidelines to make healthy choices more accessible and appealing. As written, they serve as a practical guide and resource for vendors crafting proposals to provide concessions or vending services in federal facilities. Our intent was to broaden choices, not restrict choices.

GSA worked extensively with private industry in developing the Guidelines. In October 2009, prior to beginning our partnership with HHS, GSA released a Request for Information to gain valuable feedback and insight from concessions and environmental stakeholders on wellness and sustainability practices in food service delivery and concessions contracting. Some of the responses suggested the idea of third-party sustainable fishing certification programs as a guide for responsible seafood procurement.

GSA confirmed the recommendations generated through the RFI process, and during a subsequent industry roundtable with industry experts and our other federal agency partners, we developed Guidelines that cited a pair of third-party entities for sustainability certification. Specifically, the guidelines encouraged vendors to refer to the Monterey Bay Aquarium and the Marine Stewardship Council or other equivalent systems when developing proposals.

GSA and HHS intended the third-party groups cited in the Guidelines to be helpful examples for vendors, not eliminating factors. We now understand that these references have caused some confusion. GSA and HHS are now working with NOAA to develop revisions consistent with our intent to issue helpful, inclusive Guidelines that reflect federal fisheries management policy and practices. We expect to release the revised Guidelines in the coming weeks, and GSA anticipates that they will not include references to third-party certification systems.

Conclusion

Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today. Given GSA’s role in supporting sustainable workplaces and the health and wellness of federal employees across the country, we look forward to continuing this dialogue and updating the Subcommittee on the issuance of updated Guidelines. I am pleased to take your questions.

CENTRAL COMMAND COMMANDER GEN. AUSTIN SAYS DRAWDOWN IN AFGHANISTAN IS "HERCULEAN..."

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
Afghanistan Drawdown Proceeds on Schedule, Austin Reports
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Sept. 30, 2013 - Calling the drawdown in Afghanistan a "herculean undertaking," the U.S. Central Command commander overseeing it said he's applying some of the lessons he learned in Iraq, but that he recognizes there's no cookie-cutter formula that applies completely to the distinctly different operations.
Army Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III served as commander of U.S. forces in Iraq when Operation New Dawn concluded in December 2011. Former Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta praised him during a closing ceremony in Baghdad for his leadership in carrying out "one of the most complex logistical undertakings in U.S. military history."
"Your effort to make this day a reality is nothing short of miraculous," Panetta told him.

Two years later, Austin is in the midst of an even more daunting challenge in Afghanistan, as he oversees the drawdown of the largest coalition campaign in modern history.

"The biggest challenge is simply coordinating the many different activities involved in the transition," he told American Forces Press Service via an email interview. It is a herculean undertaking, he added, and it must be properly synchronized to achieve the stated objectives by the Dec. 31, 2014, deadline.

Complicating the process, Austin said, is the fact that the security environment remains volatile.

"We must keep in mind that we are conducting this transition while facing a determined and formidable enemy," he said. "And, the enemy undoubtedly has a vote in determining the course of events going forward."

As they work to meet President Barack Obama's directive to reduce the force to 34,000 by February and to complete the drawdown by the end of 2014, Austin said, he and his staff are drawing on the experience they gained in Iraq.

"Transitioning from a theater of war represents a complex undertaking that, unfortunately, does not have a 'one size fits all' solution," he said.

"However, there are a number of lessons learned from our experiences in Iraq that are being applied in Afghanistan," he said. "We were successful in conducting the transition from Iraq, and we are now doing a good job of applying the knowledge and experience gained there toward efforts in Afghanistan."

Particularly valuable, he said, are insights into best practices in logistics to ways to more seamlessly transfer responsibilities across the interagency community and to the host nation.

"The process of moving a mountain of equipment and tens of thousands of people out of that country, gradually reducing our physical footprint and transferring responsibilities to our Afghan and U.S. State Department partners is a carefully orchestrated effort," Austin said.

In many ways, Austin called the challenge of transitioning from Afghanistan "even more difficult than Iraq."

"The major difference between the two countries can be summed up in two words: geography and infrastructure," he said. "In Iraq, we were fortunate to have access to a single ground route to the port city of Kuwait, which was a relatively short distance from Iraq."

Not so in land-locked Afghanistan. The transition there requires equipment to be moved over several ground routes that are considerably longer and in some cases, less developed than in Iraq, he noted.

"The terrain in Afghanistan is also much harsher and more difficult to negotiate," he said, noting that some of the ground routes traverse multiple nations, requiring highly detailed coordination.

"While we are doing well in our efforts to move equipment out of the country using various ground and air assets, the magnitude of the task at hand will continue to present a challenge and require significant resources in order to meet the desired timeframe for completion," Austin said.

Austin visited Afghanistan personally to assess progress, and said he's pleased with what he found.

Marine Corps Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., commander of the International Security Assistance Force, and his team "are among the best we have ever had there, and they are doing a truly phenomenal job," Austin reported.

CHEMISTRY: THE ANIMAL LANGUAGE OF THE SEA

Credit:  NOAA

FROM:  NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 
Chemical ecologists translate the language of the sea

If Dr. Dolittle could talk to the animals, it's more likely he was a chemical ecologist than a linguist, says marine scientist Mark Hay of the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta--at least when it came to talking to the animals (and plants) of the sea.

Chemical signals are the primary "language" used by ocean organisms. Using a kind of extra-sensory perception of the deep, marine animals and plants react to other species and to their environment based on these cues.

Humans are poorly designed to understand such chemically-driven interactions "because we sense the world primarily via visual and auditory input," Hay says.

"In contrast, many ocean species lack eyes and ears. They sense much of their world via chemical signals. In the sea, even species that see and hear rely on chemical cues."

Dark New York City streets--in the sea

Imagine walking along a bustling New York City street at night. Suddenly, the boulevard goes pitch-black and deathly silent--permanently.

How would you find food, a mate or protect yourself against thieves and murderers? What if you had to rely on detecting chemicals produced by other people and other animals to survive?

"For ocean animals and plants, it's like that every minute of every day," says Hay. For most marine species, chemical cues determine whether they consume, fight with, run from or mate with the creatures next to them--and whether they are eaten by, infected by or overgrown by natural enemies.

Welcome to New York City...eerily silent and utterly dark...beneath the waves.

Dead ahead are the shapeshifters, marine denizens that use chemical cues to change their outward appearances.

Facing the shape-shifters

When the bloom-forming phytoplankton Phaeocystis globosa chemically senses its next-door neighbors under attack by ciliates, which feast on small foods like phytoplankton, it shifts shape and grows in colonies too big for the ciliates to consume.

Then when the phytoplankton's neighbors are attacked by copepods, says Hay, which feed on large foods, Phaeocystis globosa suppresses colony formation and grows as single cells too small to interest the copepods.

"These shifts could alter energy flow, nutrient cycling and patterns of carbon sequestration in the sea," says Hay. "Chemical cues affect not only individual behavior and population-level processes, but also community organization and ecosystem function."

Finding food: no clues but molecules

What if you had to fly a plane over an area the size of Canada to locate a grocery store with no cues but a few simple "fresh food" molecules wafting through the air?

Tube-nosed seabirds--storm-petrels, albatrosses, petrels, shearwaters and others--do exactly that. They use a chemical cue to track high-productivity areas in open seas where they forage on zooplankton, fish and squid.

They're responding to the presence of dimethyl sulfide (DMS), produced when zooplankton feed on blooms of phytoplankton then excrete this substance.

"At scales of thousands of square kilometers, DMS may function as an olfactory landscape," says Hay, "indicating ocean areas where phytoplankton and zooplankton accumulate and where the search for prey should be most successful."

Chemical cues: from oceans to human health

To discover how chemical signals play a part in ocean ecosystems, and perhaps human health, Hay and colleagues are studying marine organisms and how they produce and deploy their chemical arsenals.

Understanding substances that cloak seaweeds and other species could allow scientists to adapt these compounds for use against microbial pathogens, HIV, cancer and other human diseases.

As part of a project supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF), Hay and colleagues have analyzed compounds from more than 800 species in the waters around Fiji Islands like Yanuca. The project is co-funded by the National Institutes of Health's International Cooperative Biodiversity Group program.

"The study of chemical signaling on Fiji Island coral reefs will help us better understand the interactions that keep the oceans healthy," says David Garrison, program director in NSF's Division of Ocean Sciences, which funded the research.

One species has emerged as a frontrunner in Hay's investigations: the red seaweed Callophycus serratus.

The alga is adept at fighting infections. Chemical extracts from Callophycus serratus fend off disease-causing microbes. The compounds are among the largest groups of algal antifungal chemical defenses discovered to date.

"We're in effect ‘listening in' on the fight between this red seaweed and a fungus that's trying to attack it," says Hay. "What we hear may allow us to translate the language of the sea into that of human biomedicine."

Tuning into The Deep

He may be tuning in for some time. Callophycus serratus produces at least 28 bioactive compounds.

Why would a single species of seaweed produce so many bioactive substances? The compounds may work together against a host of enemies, says Hay. "Or they may have separate uses we don't yet comprehend."

Hay is busy deciphering. He and colleagues have found that Callophycus serratus contains bromophycolides--in ocean-speak, chemicals that have shown promise as new treatments for infectious diseases.

Whether working along the shores of Fiji or in the seas around Florida, Panama or the Caribbean Islands, Hay is proving that we can interpret the language of marine organisms.

"Knowing what's being communicated will provide a deeper understanding of marine ecosystems," says Hay, "and improve our ability to serve as wise stewards of these natural resources."

DEFENSE OFFICIAL SAYS GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN IS "STUPID"

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Carter Says Shutdown Would Be 'Disruptive, Stupid'
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Sept. 30, 2013 - The shutdown that looms if the government isn't funded beyond the end of the fiscal year at midnight tonight would be "disruptive and stupid," Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter said here today.

Carter preceded a scheduled speech on India at the Center for American Progress with his thoughts on the impending shutdown.

"Let me just emphasize that the administration firmly believes that a shutdown can be avoided, should be avoided, and while we in the Department of Defense are fully prepared to deal with the shutdown if it occurs," he said, "it will be extremely disruptive and unfortunate, especially for the men and women who are defending this country who now have to worry about receiving their paychecks on time."

About half of the Defense Department's civilian personnel will be placed on no duty-no pay furloughs if the shutdown occurs, the deputy secretary said, noting that they already had been furloughed for more than a week earlier this year.

"This is no way to treat patriots working in our department and will cause serious harm to productivity and morale," Carter said.

Planning for the shutdown is itself disruptive, he added.

"We're spending thousands of hours on complex planning for a shutdown instead of spending this time more wisely and efficiently on addressing our national security challenges," he said.

The Defense Department is prepared to deal with the shutdown if it occurs, Carter said, just as it was prepared to deal with sequestration spending cuts.

"But a shutdown will be disruptive and harmful to the national security mission," he added. "We strongly urge the Congress to pass a budget and avoid a disruptive and stupid shutdown of the federal government."

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY AND ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU MAKE COMMENTS BEFORE MEETING

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Before Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
September 30, 2013


SECRETARY KERRY: Good afternoon, everybody. It’s my great pleasure to welcome the Prime Minister of Israel here and to the State Department. I think – (audio feedback). Ta-da. (Laughter).
Obviously, I’ve had a number of very generous, warm welcomes as I have visited Israel and the Mideast frequently. I think I’ve been probably the most frequent visitor; I should get frequent flyer miles for my visits to the Prime Minister’s office.

PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: We couldn’t afford it. (Laughter.)

SECRETARY KERRY: But it is more than safe to say that the Prime Minister and I are every meeting forging a better and better relationship, a stronger and stronger friendship on a very personal level. And I’m very grateful to him for his very generous welcomes to me, the amount of time he has spent with me in Jerusalem working through very complicated but very, very important issues.

Israel, as everybody knows, is a very special friend to the United States of America. And we have just had a very constructive luncheon with the President and a very important meeting before that with a larger group of people. And now the Prime Minister and I will talk about both Iran, the Middle East peace process, Syria, and issues of concern.

We are committed to continuing to work constructively to move forward on the peace process, though it is always difficult, complicated. We know that. But we’re working in good faith. I have confidence in the Prime Minister’s commitment to this effort, and I also want him to know that as we reach out to respond to Iran’s efforts to purportedly change its relationship with the world, we do so very aware of and sensitive to the security needs of Israel and the demands for certainty and transparency and accountability in this process.

So I look forward today to furthering our conversation, and I’m very, very happy to finally welcome the Prime Minister here to the State Department.

PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: Mr. Secretary, thank you. John, it’s good to be with you. We have if not the whole world, a good chunk of it to discuss, and we do so as friends and as people seriously committed to both achieving security and a durable peace. These are hard things to achieve, but none better than you and us to try to do it together.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you. Thanks, partner.

DOJ ANNOUNCED ENHANCED ONLINE RESOURCES FOR U.S. VICTIMS OF OVERSEAS TERRORISM

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Justice Department Announces Enhanced Online Resource for U.S. Victims of Overseas Terrorism

The Justice Department today announced an enhanced online resource designed to support American victims of overseas terrorism.  The site, sponsored and maintained by the National Security Division’s Office of Justice for Victims of Overseas Terrorism (OVT), will expand the public’s ability to obtain information about the types of support available to help victims of overseas attacks and their loved ones in the aftermath of acts of international terrorism, including information about programs available to assist victims in connection with foreign criminal justice proceedings.  In addition, the website provides greater information about OVT’s establishment and services, for victims and others interested in OVT’s work.

“This enhanced website will serve as an important resource for U.S. victims of overseas terrorism and their loved ones,” said John P. Carlin, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security. “The Department remains committed both to seeking justice for Americans victimized by terrorism, whether at home or abroad, and to providing victims the information and support they deserve.”

The Attorney General established the OVT on May 6, 2005.  It is now a component of the Justice Department’s National Security Division.  The primary purpose of the OVT is to ensure that the investigation and prosecution of terrorist attacks against American citizens overseas remain a high priority within the Department of Justice.

The OVT is responsible for monitoring the investigation and prosecution of terrorist attacks against Americans abroad; working with other pertinent Justice Department components to ensure that the rights of victims of such attacks are honored and respected; establishing a Joint Task Force with the Department of State, to be activated in the event of a terrorist attack  in which Americans are harmed; and serving as an information resource to American victims of overseas terrorism including, as appropriate, information about ongoing foreign investigations and prosecutions.

“It is crucially important that any Americans attacked while traveling or living outside of our borders receive the support of our government as they pursue justice in the aftermath of the tragedy of terrorism,” said Heather Cartwright, Director of the Office of Justice for Victims of Overseas Terrorism.  “This online resource gathers in one place important information for American victims of overseas terrorism and provides assistance as they seek accountability for these crimes.”

ETHANOL TRADER CHARGED BY CFTC WITH SCHEMING TO CONCEAL TRADING LOSSES

FROM:  U.S. COMMODITY FUTURE TRADING COMMISSION
CFTC Charges Ethanol Trader John Aaron Brooks with Fraud for Scheming to Conceal Trading Losses

Washington, DC – The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) today filed a civil injunctive enforcement action charging John Aaron Brooks with defrauding an affiliate of a large commercial bank where he then worked by scheming to conceal trading losses from the bank and its affiliate.  As alleged in the CFTC’s Complaint, Brooks effectuated his scheme by inflating the value of New York Mercantile Exchange Chicago Ethanol (Platts) Futures contracts to conceal trading losses he was incurring.  The losses concealed ultimately grew to cause the bank and its affiliate to suffer over $40 million in realized losses before Brooks’s fraud was detected, leading to his termination, according to the Complaint. Brooks resides in Houston, Texas.

The CFTC’s civil complaint, filed September 27, 2013, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleges that for the majority of the days for nearly eleven months beginning in or about November 2010, and continuing through on or about October 20, 2011, Brooks, then employed as Director in the commodities business of the bank affiliate, knowingly entered false inflated prices into an internal trade booking and valuation computer software system to effectuate his scheme to conceal trading losses.

In its continuing litigation, the CFTC seeks a civil monetary penalty, restitution, trading and registration bans, and a permanent injunction prohibiting further violations of the federal commodities laws, as charged.

CFTC Division of Enforcement staff responsible for this case includes Janine Gargiulo, Michael Geiser, Trevor Kokal, David Acevedo, Lenel Hickson, Stephen J. Obie, Manal Sultan, and Vincent McGonagle.

CONGRESSMAN DAVE CAMP REPORTS ASIAN CARP FOUND NEAR LAKE MICHIGAN ACCESS RIVER

FROM:  U.S. CONGRESSMAN DAVE CAMP'S WEBSITE 

Last week, Wisconsin Public Radio reported that the White House Council on Environmental Quality Asian carp director John Goss recently told a group in Milwaukee that a 53 inch, 82 pound Asian carp had been found in Flatfoot Lake, Illinois in August.  Flatfoot Lake is land-locked, but located less than a quarter mile from the Calumet River, which has direct access to Lake Michigan as well as Lake Calumet, where a live Asian carp was discovered in 2010.

Following the report Camp said, “News that a live Asian carp was found dangerously close to Lake Michigan, in Flatfoot Lake, is another reminder that we must find a permanent solution to protect the Great Lakes.  Incidents like this underscore the fact that hydrological separation is the only real way to keep Asian carp from destroying the Great Lakes.”

On the topic, The Lansing State Journal wrote, “Kudos to Michigan Rep. Dave Camp, R-Midland, and other Michigan officials for their ongoing efforts to prevent the potential crisis of an Asian carp invasion of the Great Lakes. They fight an uphill battle, and Michiganders should support their efforts in every way possible.”

In  2012, Camp championed legislation that is now law, The Stop Invasive Species Act, which requires the Army Corps of Engineers to complete a study on hydrologically separating the Great Lakes and Mississippi River basins by January 2014.

OVER $13 MILLION AWARDED IN GRANTS TO SUPPORT PRINCIPAL DEVELOPMENT

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 
Education Department Awards $13.3 Million in Grants to Support Principal Development
SEPTEMBER 27, 2013
Contact:   Press Office, (202) 401-1576, press@ed.gov 


U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan announced today that more than $13 million in grants has been awarded to 20 projects under the School Leadership Program (SLP), which supports the development, enhancement, and expansion of innovative programs to recruit, train, and mentor principals and assistant principals for high-need schools and districts. Grantees include school districts, institutes of higher education and non-profit organizations.

"There are no great schools without great principals and teachers," Secretary Duncan said. "High-quality examples of leadership can help shape a school's culture and create an environment where students are excited to learn. These grants aim to support the development of these leaders, ultimately improving the effectiveness of educators and the academic achievement of students."

These five-year grants will help prepare individuals to meet state certification requirements to become principals or assistant principals. Projects will also provide professional development to current principals and assistant principals, serving over 1500 aspiring and current school leaders in 98 high-need school districts, including six rural areas, across 15 states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

Grantees will use the funds for a variety of activities to promote effective leadership, such as stipends to principals who mentor new principals, financial incentives to aspiring new principals, training specific to a charter school environment, use of school-based data to develop turnaround practices, and tracking student achievement data.

Grants have been awarded to Green River Regional Educational Cooperative, California State University, Dominguez Hills, The Board of Education of the County of McDowell, The New Teacher Project, Inc., New Leaders, Inc., The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, Region 5 Education Service Center, Wheaton R3 School District, Georgia Leadership Institute for School Improvement, Inc., Center for Collaborative Education, Delta State University, Foundation for Educational Administration, North Carolina State University, William Paterson University, Relay Graduate School of Education, Western Michigan University , Granite School District, Tulsa Independent District No. 1 Tulsa Public Schools, Illinois State University, and Universidad del Este.

The SLP program is funded through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

Following is a list of grantees and first-year funding amounts:

Applicant Name State Funding for FY2013
Green River Regional Educational Cooperative Kentucky $1,000,000
California State University, Dominguez Hills California $1,166,492
The Board of Education of the County of McDowell West Virginia $816,915
The New Teacher Project, Inc. New York/New Jersey $1,000,000
New Leaders, Inc. New York/Maryland $130,443
The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois Illinois $369,609
Region 5 Education Service Center Texas $725,463
Wheaton R3 School District Missouri $428,734
Georgia Leadership Institute for School Improvement, Inc. Georgia $725,901
Center for Collaborative Education Massachusetts/California $863,083
Delta State University Mississippi $200,124
Foundation for Educational Administration New Jersey $1,000,000
North Carolina State University North Carolina $529,309
William Paterson University New Jersey $520,620
Relay Graduate School of Education New York/Louisiana $395,285
Western Michigan University Michigan $927,274
Granite School District Utah $996,743
Tulsa Independent District No. 1 Tulsa Public Schools Oklahoma $990,874
Illinois State University Illinois $263,629
Universidad del Este Puerto Rico $314,247

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS ON CLIMATE CHANGE AT PACIFIC ISLANDS FORUM

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks at a Meeting of the Pacific Islands Forum
John Kerry
Secretary of State
New York City
September 27, 2013

Welcome, everybody, and thank you for – sorry, I’m a moment late. I apologize. I’m very happy to be meeting today with Marshall Islands President Loeak and with the Samoan Prime Minister Malielegaoi and other Pacific Island leaders. We’re very happy to have all of you here.

This week these leaders and other leaders from around the globe have come to New York during the UN General Assembly to discuss some of the issues of greatest challenge to everybody, life and death issues that impact millions of people around the world. Climate change is one issue that absolutely impacts millions of people around the world, and no one knows just how deeply serious and present, how now this challenge is and its impacts than the people of the vulnerable Pacific Islands. They have experienced both historic droughts and the highest rates of sea level rise in the world.

So the science is clear and irrefutable, and today the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirmed for the fifth time in 20 years that climate change is real, is happening, and is in large part caused by human activity. The IPCC findings have stressed that if we continue down our current path, the impacts of climate change, including sea level rise, could be even worse than previously expected.

So as we work with our international partners to prepare for the impacts of climate change and the impacts that we’re already witnessing, we have an urgent responsibility to try to work together even harder to be able to change the way we’re doing things. I’ve been following this issue since, what, 1988 when then-Senator Al Gore and I held the first hearings in the United States Senate. And Jim Hansen came before our committee and said climate change is happening now. That was 1988. Everything has confirmed that ever since, but we still have a small window of time to prevent the very worst impacts of climate change from catching up to us. But that window is closing.

So we know that no one nation has the ability to address climate change alone. The United States, which is together with China a large proportion of emissions, if we acted all by ourselves and went to zero tomorrow it wouldn’t do the job. So we all are in this. We all have to figure out how to proceed forward. And between President Obama’s Climate Action Plan and the important Majuro Declaration the Pacific Islands nations signed at the 44th Pacific Islands Forum earlier this month, between those things our countries have made clear our commitments to address what is one of the defining issues of our time. We’re equally committed to working toward a comprehensive UN climate agreement that takes into account the unique circumstances and capabilities of each nation.

I know I also speak for President Obama when I say that I – we stand with the Pacific Islands in the fight against climate change. And I’m looking forward to our discussion today, and most importantly, I’m looking forward to continuing our very important work as we together try to guarantee the future of our nations and indeed the future of the planet.

DOD PLANS FOR GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
DOD Spells Out Closure Contingency Plan Guidance
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Sept. 27, 2013 - DOD officials today issued guidance to the force in the event appropriations lapse Oct. 1 and a government shutdown results.

Officials emphasize they still hope Congress can avoid that but say it is prudent to take such steps.

The eight-page document gives basic guidance to commanders and directors on how to handle everything from personnel matters to contracts to medical concerns.

Even if the government runs out of money, military personnel will report to work as normal. This includes active duty personnel and reserve component personnel on active Guard or reserve status.

DOD can also maintain police, fire, and emergency medical protection. These activities -- and some others -- are labeled as excepted and protected from stoppage. Non-excepted activities must generally stop.

In the event of a funding lapse, DOD civilians who support excepted activities -- military operations, emergency services, or other designated activities -- would be directed to continue working.

For pay purposes, military personnel will be paid retroactively once the appropriation is passed or the continuing resolution signed. DOD-excepted service personnel will also receive retroactive pay.

Non-excepted DOD civilians will be placed on emergency, no-notice, non-pay furloughs. They would be required to report to work on Oct. 1 to receive their furlough notice. Civilians on emergency furloughs would be paid retroactively only if a law is enacted providing authority to pay them.

Training and travel of military and civilian employees would be disrupted unless it was connected to an excepted activity, officials said.

Those on travel would have to return to their duty stations in an orderly fashion.

SECRETARY KERRY'S RECENT REMARKS TO UN SECURITY COUNCIL ON SYRIAN CHEMICAL WEAPONS

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks at the United Nations Security Council
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
New York City
September 27, 2013

Thank you very much, and thank you, Mr. Secretary General, distinguished minister members of the Security Council.

Five weeks ago, the world saw rows upon rows of murdered children lying on a hospital floor alone or beside slain parents, all wrapped in un-bloodied burial shrouds. And the world’s conscience was shocked, but our collective resolved hardened. Tonight, with a strong, enforceable, precedent-setting resolution requiring Syria to give up its chemical weapons, the United Nations Security Council has demonstrated that diplomacy can be so powerful, it can peacefully defuse the worst weapons of war.

So tonight, we are declaring together, for the first time, that the use of chemical weapons, which the world long ago determined beyond the bounds of acceptable human behavior, are also a threat to international peace and security anywhere they might be used, anytime they might be used, under any circumstances. As a community of nations, we reaffirm our responsibility to defend the defenseless, those whose lives remain at risk every day that anyone believes they can use weapons of mass destruction with impunity. Together, the world, with a single voice for the first time, is imposing binding obligations on the Assad regime requiring it to get rid of weapons that have been used to devastating effect as tools of terror. This important resolution reflects what President Obama and President Putin and colleagues around the world set out to do.

I want to thank Foreign Minister Lavrov for his personal efforts and cooperation, beginning before Geneva and continuing through this week, so that we could find common ground. I also want to thank my good friends and counterparts, Foreign Secretary Hague and Foreign Minister Fabius, who have been partners every step of the way.

Our original objective was to degrade and deter Syria’s chemical weapons capability, and the option of military force that President Obama has kept on the table could have achieved that. But tonight’s resolution, in fact, accomplishes even more. Through peaceful means, it will for, the first time, seek to eliminate entirely a nation’s chemical weapons capability, and in this case specifically Syria’s. On-site inspections of the places that these weapons are stored will begin by November, and under the terms of this agreement, those weapons will be removed and destroyed by the middle of next year.

Our aim was also to hold the Assad regime publicly accountable for its horrific use of chemical weapons against its own people on August 21st. And this resolution makes clear that those responsible for this heinous act must be held accountable.

In this resolution, the Council has, importantly, endorsed the Geneva Communique, which calls for a transfer of power to a transitional governing body, paving the way for democratic elections and a government that can be chosen by the people of Syria to represent the people of Syria.

We sought a legally binding resolution, and that is what the Security Council has adopted. For the first time since Syria’s civil war began, the Security Council is spelling out in detail what Syria must do to comply with its legal obligations. Syria cannot select or reject the inspectors. Syria must give those inspectors unfettered access to any and all sites and to any and all people.

We also wanted a resolution that would be enforced. And again, that is what the Security Council has adopted. We are here because actions have consequences. And now, should the regime fail to act, there will be consequences. Progress will be reported back to the Security Council frequently, and in the event of noncompliance, the Council will impose measures under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter.

Just two weeks ago, when the Syrian regime would not even acknowledge the vast supply of chemical weapons and say that they existed, this outcome, frankly, would have been utterly unimaginable. But thanks to the cooperation within the P-5 of the United Nations, and thanks to our friends and partners around the world, many of whom are here in this room, the Security Council has shown that when we put aside politics for the common good, we are still capable of doing big things. Provided this resolution is fully implemented, we will have eliminated one of the largest chemical weapons programs on earth from one of the most volatile places on earth.

The Assad regime carries the burden of meeting the terms of this agreement. And when it comes to those who murder their own citizens, the world’s patience needs to be short. But make no mistake: The rest of the world still carries the burden of doing what we must do to end mass killing by other means. We must work together with the same determination and the same cooperation that has brought us here tonight in order to end the conflict that continues to tear Syria apart even this very day. We must continue to provide desperately needed humanitarian aid. And neither Assad nor anyone else should stand between that aid and the people who need it. Only when we do these things will we have fulfilled our responsibility to the Syrian people and to ourselves. Only then will we have advanced our own interests and our own security and that of our allies in the region. Only then will we have shown that the UN Security Council is meeting its responsibility to enforce international peace and security.

So we are here united tonight in support of our belief that international institutions do matter, that international norms matter. We say with one voice that atrocities carried out with the world’s most heinous weapons will not be tolerated. And when institutions like the Security Council stand up to defend the principles and values that we all share, when we put violent regimes on notice that the world will unite against them, it will lead not only to a safer Syria, but it will lead to a safer world.

Thank you.

België test beveiligd signaal van Galileo

België test beveiligd signaal van Galileo

UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HALE'S BRIEFING ON PLAN FOR GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Presenter: Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) Robert F. Hale September 27, 2013
News Briefing on the Department Of Defense's Plan for a Possible Government Shutdown


UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE ROBERT F. HALE: Ready to go? All right. So I think you know who I am. I'll say good afternoon. That's probably the high point of this discussion.



So I'm going to start with a few words, then I'll turn to your questions. Let me start by saying the administration firmly believes that a shutdown due to a lapse of appropriation should not occur.



The administration is working with Congress to try to prevent a lapse. Unfortunately, we may not know the outcome of those efforts until next Monday, conceivably even Monday night.



So we have to be prudent and plan for a lapse of appropriations. So what is involved in this planning? As I answer this question and everything I say today, let me say I'm going to focus on the Department of Defense, solely on DOD., but other federal agencies are definitely affected. I just don't -- I know less about them, so I'll focus on DOD.



First it's important to recognize that if DOD's appropriations lapse, we can only conduct limited activity specifically authorized by law. The lapse could lead to civilian furloughs, it will, in fact.



But these furloughs are very different than the sequester furloughs that occurred this summer. The sequester furloughs sought to reduce costs. And we had the authority to design them to reduce costs and to reflect policies like minimizing effects on readiness.



In the case of a lapse of appropriations, law governs, not policy. Specifically the law says that in the event of a lapse of appropriations, DOD can only conduct activities designed to protect safety of life and property and carry out a few other activities.



Administration lawyers interpret this to mean that DOD can support specific military operations that the secretary of defense has approved: Afghanistan, for example, and a number of others.



We can also maintain emergency services, police, fire, emergency medical. We label the activities that can continue as excepted activities, and you will hear me use that word repeatedly in the next couple of minutes.



So what would happen under a lapse of appropriations? First, government employees would be significantly affected. In the event of a lapse, all of our military personnel would be directed to remain on a normal duty status. Their military status means they can't be placed in a non-pay status, so we would direct them to continue in normal-duty status. Civilian workers who support these excepted activities, again Afghanistan emergency activities, they -- they would be directed to continue to work.



But all other civilian workers who do not primarily support excepted activities would be placed in a non-duty, non-pay status on an emergency no-notice basis at the time the lapse occurs. Based on planning in 2011, we would expect roughly half of our civilian personnel would go into this status, essentially a non-pay furlough status.



Pay of government employees could also be seriously affected, especially if the lapse continues for a period of time. During a lapse, DOD cannot pay military personnel and civilian personnel, even if they have been directed to work. Military and those civilians directed to work would be paid retroactively once the lapse of appropriation ends. Civilians on emergency furloughs, and those for the -- primarily doing non-excepted activities would be paid retroactively only if a law is enacted providing the authority to pay them.



Training and travel of military and civilian employees would be disrupted. Unless connected with excepted activities, training and travel would have to be stopped. It would either be stopped before it started, or if it's going on at the time the lapse occurs, then folks associated with -- on TDY associated with non-accepted travel would have to pack up and come home, although they could do that in an orderly fashion.



We would also be required to do some other bad things to our people. Just some examples, we couldn't immediately pay death gratuities to those who die on active duty during the lapse, we would have to close stateside commissaries, promotion boards and other similar important personnel activities would be disrupted, probably would have to be stopped, and a number of other actions.



DOD vendors would also be affected, especially if the lapse continues for a substantial period of time. Vendors working on contracts with funds obligated prior to the lapse in fiscal '13 or earlier funds could continue to work, assuming government personnel are available to provide any needed supervision. And, they could be paid for that work, but during the period of the lapse, we can't sign new contracts or extend old ones unless they're directly in support of excepted activities.



So if I haven't already confused you, let me try to sum up by saying how all these confusing actions affect the DOD mission. We can and will continue to support key military operations. We're allowed to do that by law, but the law would force us to disrupt many of our support activities. We wouldn't be able to do most training, we couldn't enter into most new contracts, routine maintenance would have to stop, we couldn't continue efforts to improve contracting and financial management, including our auto improvement efforts, for example. Even worse, a lapse of appropriations causes civilian furloughs and is one more blow to the morale of our civilian workforce, and that morale is already low and I think would get lower. And that adversely affects productivity and costs the taxpayers money.



Even if a lapse never occurs, the planning itself is disruptive. People are worrying right now about whether their paychecks are going to be delayed, rather than focusing fully on their mission. And while I can't quantify the time being spent to plan, it has or will consume a lot of senior management attention, probably thousands of hours in employee time better spent on supporting national security. For all these reasons, I very much hope that Congress acts to avert a lapse of appropriations, and though it will probably sound contradictory, I hope you will understand when I say that I hope we are all wasting our time planning for this lapse.



With that, I'll stop and I'll be glad to try to answer your questions. I'm going to get George, here.



Q: (inaudible), can you, since everyone lived through the furloughs recently, can you explain a little bit in detail the difference between the civilians who were furloughed under that, and the fact that there are fewer numbers being furloughed now?



If you could maybe give -- maybe an example, it would help so that people would understand what -- how that difference is, and I just have a second, one other, second question. I know contractors is a really hard thing to get your arms around, but is there any way to talk about the number of contractors as in people that could be affected by this?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Well, first on the furloughs. The ones we did in the summer were called administrative furloughs. It's a long notification process, if you remember, that we need to go through. They were designed to save money.



And, therefore, as I mentioned, we can -- we have the authority to design them based on criteria like readiness and cost-savings. These are specified by law. Anybody who is not -- any civilian not primarily working on an excepted activity has to be placed on furloughs.



Can I think of good examples for you? Well, here's one. Most of our working capital fund employees are going to not be furloughed immediately because the working capital funds have a cash balance that's based on funds obligated before the lapse, if you're following me. And so we have the funds and they don't have to be furloughed right away.



Now that would have to be gradually some of them if we run out of cash. Whereas most of our working capital fund employees were furloughed in the summer because we wanted to reduce costs.



As far as the contractors, just briefly, all of the ones working on contracts, as I said, that were obligated with money before the lapse would be able to continue if supervision was available.



I think in the early stages of a lapse, that would be the majority of our contractors because most are going to be working on contracts just almost by definition that were funded before. If the lapse continued, that number would fall. But I don't have specific numbers.



Q: I'm sorry, clarify on the difference between the contractors. If I'm not mistaken, there are about 650,000 that were affected over the summer. Now it's about 400,000. So a difference of a couple hundred thousand seems to be a lot. Am I...



UNDER SEC. HALE: Again, it's -- yes, the numbers are roughly right. I mean, I don't know exactly how many. Probably around half. So it will be close to that.



I mean, again, working capital funds alone are probably 100,000, 150,000 people that we'll keep this time and there are many others. And they're just totally different animals just because one is driven by law, one was driven by policy to save money. One is driven by law -- a specific law about excepted and non-excepted activities.



Q: But they weren't contractors, correct? I mean, these are government...



UNDER SEC. HALE: No. I'm talking government employees now. Contractors, most of them are probably going to be able to continue working if supervision is available because I think most of them would -- although I don't have numbers, most of them are going to be funded by contracts already that were funded with fiscal '13 or earlier money.



Q: For (OFF-MIKE) are looking towards that October 15th paycheck, can you give them a sense of how long this government shutdown might be able to go before their paycheck was definitely delayed? I mean, if Congress reached an agreement on the 4th, would these...



(CROSSTALK)



UNDER SEC. HALE: Yes, I think so. I think the earliest we'd start having trouble would be October 7th. And that's not a hard date. We'll push it as far as we can. But at some point we have to run the payroll.



Frankly, I'm in triage mode right now. I'm trying to help coordinate getting the department ready to shut down if we have to. And so I haven't focused on the problems that will occur if a lapse -- like that one, if the lapse occurs. I'll have to work with the Defense Financing and Accounting Service. We'll put it off as long as we can.



Clearly if the lapse extends to October 15th, there won't be a question. There may be some time prior to that when we'd be faced with either having to take a chance and go ahead and run the payroll and be ready, or delay it. But we have got a while.



Q: Can you talk about what happens to ships at sea, particularly those in the Mediterranean, and whether operations -- kinetic operations could be launched, such as by Special Operations Forces or even a hypothetical strike in Syria?



UNDER SEC. HALE: I mean, it would depend on whether it was a military operation. In the case you just mentioned, I think it surely would be and therefore it would be -- that is if we were -- hypothetically, the president were to authorize some action against Syria, it would be a military operation approved by the secretary and so it would be an excepted activity and, yes, we could go forward with it.



Q: And then ships at sea that are basically...



UNDER SEC. HALE: Well, again, the issue is, are they in direct support of excepted activities? I think many of them will be and therefore they will be excepted. And I might add the great majority of the people on there are military and they're going to remain at work. And so I don't think many of them will be disrupted.



But these are the sort of gray area decisions that our managers and commanders are making right now as they identify excepted and non- excepted. But I think most of the ships at sea would stay there.



If there were some that stayed strictly in training and weren't excepted, they would be able to stand down if they had to in an orderly fashion. And we'll have to make some judgment about what that means. Obviously you can't get the ship back immediately.



Q: Right. But obviously part of the mission at sea often involves planes going on training mission, it requires refueling, purchasing. Can those activities continue?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Again, and I don't want to sound like a stuck record. But it is going to depend on whether the judgment is that this is directly related to an excepted activity, which would be a military operation. I think in many cases, if they're in the Med, that's going to be true.



It would be harder if they're training off Newport -- or Norfolk, for example. That might not be true. Then the question is, are there civilians involved? Or can we go ahead and do it with the military? And I'm -- these are things that get delegated, and our commanders and managers are considering those issues right now.



(UNKNOWN): (OFF-MIKE)



Q: The memo talks about limiting movements from excepted areas. And I'm wondering if it could affect the draw-down from Afghanistan.



UNDER SEC. HALE: Well, Afghanistan is excepted. So let me think. I mean, the -- the PCS [Permanent Change of Station] is -- we can move to an excepted area, so the troops going over to Afghanistan would be OK. From an excepted area if the commander judges that there would be problems created if the move is not carried out.



So that's a judgment General Dunford and his staff will have to make. And I'm not sure where they are on that. Again, I'm sounding like a stuck record, but I don't have all these details. This is what we've passed out to our commanders, managers, and asked them to make these judgments.



Q: (OFF-MIKE)



UNDER SEC. HALE: Well, it's an excepted activity, so -- my lawyer here -- sounds like we should be able to go ahead with that.



Q: So just wondered if you could think back -- I don't know if you were comptroller in '95 and '96.



UNDER SEC. HALE: No.



Q: Probably not.



UNDER SEC. HALE: [inaudible]. I was the Air Force comptroller. (CROSSTALK)



Q: OK. So I know that in one of those shutdowns, Congress had passed an appropriation for DOD. And so -- but I can't remember which one. So just, could compare, you know, the two scenarios...



UNDER SEC. HALE: Yeah.



Q: ... and why this would be...



UNDER SEC. HALE: Well, we shut down in '95, if my memory serves me right, for about a week in DOD. It was longer in the non-defense agencies. So they passed, I guess it was a CR [Continuing Resolution] -- I can't remember -- or whether it was a full appropriations bill earlier for defense.



I mean, there was a lot of similarity. We went through all of these machinations that we are engaged in right now to decide what to do at that time, and then of course executed that plan.



One thing I distinctly remember is that it was a horrendous blow to the civilians. I mean, there was months after that that I was hearing from them. We used a phrase that we have stopped using because it was wrong, essential and non-offensial -- essential back then.



And it's just not right because it's not whether you're essential. It's whether the law says you're doing an excepted activity. There are lots of essential items to keep this military going that don't deal directly with excepted activities.



We've stopped that. Maybe it'll help, but not too much, I mean, especially coming on the heels of the summer furloughs. I am very concerned about the effect this is going to have on our civilian work force.



Q: Just one last -- one other related question is, the shut-down plans in 2011 versus what you're having to, you know, come up with now, are there, you know, differences in operations now that make those shut-down plans not a complete blueprint for what you're doing?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Not many differences. I mean, we made a few exceptions kind of based on recent events. For example, because of the potential flaws to our security system, we exempted the Navy Yard investigation. Obviously, in 2011, that wasn't an issue. But they were pretty minor. I'd say the vast majority of the guidance is the same.



Q: Just to confirm, like troop death benefits would be delayed? Can you provide a little more information about that?



UNDER SEC. HALE: If the -- if the death -- this is ghoulish, but it's the law, not policy. Remember that. If the death occurred after the lapse took place, then the money would be obligated after the lapse took place, and we would have no authority to pay based on that money until the lapse ended. So in that case, they could be delayed.



If the death occurred prior to the lapse, then I -- and assuming we had enough people to process the payment, then I think it wouldn't be delayed.



Q: If the government doesn't shut down, you're still gonna be stuck with a CR come next Tuesday. In the past, you've communicated to Congress provisions you'd like to see in the CR to -- so programs such as ship building wouldn't be hampered. Have you done anything like that? And what...



UNDER SEC. HALE: Yes, we always do through the Office of Management and Budget. I will say there are very few of them in the CR passed by the House and just passed by the Senate. But it's fairly short. This one I believe will go through November 15th.



So we can probably hold our breath for a while, but we would certainly appreciate it, and we would have liked more flexibility for new starts, for example, rate increases, and a variety of other activities that we won't be able to carry out under this CR. But yes, we did ask. We always ask.



Q: Also, if - if you do get funding, you will be facing sequestration again, right? How can you - have you thought about how that will affect?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Yes, potentially. I mean, this CR will be only through, if it - if it's passed as the Senate version, through November 15th, and if it were extended through the whole year in that form, yes, it would generate a sequestration in January, probably around 4 percent, so we could be facing it. Just in general, I think whereas a year ago we said, I think I may have stood at this podium and said we're not going to sequester ourselves, we really thought this would be resolved, I think this time we will start operating at a somewhat lower level than - than certainly than the President's request. The CR itself cuts the DOD budget, or would result in a cut of around $30 billion. The sequester would take out another $20 [billion] or so, so we will start at a level below the President's budget in order to conserve resources until we get a better sense of where we're actually headed.



Q: (inaudible).



Q: Just one quick clarification, so that October 1st, all paychecks will go out October 1st, right?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Correct. There's a payday today for the civilians that of course is not affected, and one on October 1st to the military, and it's not affected because it's all for time before any lapse would occur, and then the reserves are trickier because they are paid at various times, and we're already struggling with some of that, but I mean, I'm hoping we can minimize or avoid any disruptions there too.



Q: And then I (inaudible) clarification of, so one of the things that - that's listed as excepted, and I guess this is under the - this is under the law, (inaudible), but is activities necessary to continue recruiting? So are we talking like air shows, and that kind of ...



(CROSSTALK)



UNDER SEC. HALE: No, I mean, we'll be talking about probably recruiting offices, the military entrance examination centers, the things more directly related to it.



Q: And I mean I know this is a - this is a - putting a linear question on like - on a very three-dimensional problem here, but - but I - I mean, why is it that if there is money that would be available if something were to happen and - and there was a need to send a force to, we'll just say Syria since it's, you know, topic of the day, but to Syria, but there's not money that's available somewhere to pay people. Is there a good reason?



UNDER SEC. HALE: It's - it's the - yeah, it's the difference between obligations and our ability to disperse. The law says that in the lapse of appropriations, we can obligate money, which means we can enter into a contract and legally commit the government, we can obligate money for items related to safety of life, preservation of property, that's with all military operations, but we can't disperse anything, actually send a check until we get an appropriation, so we can go ahead with the operation, we'd be committing the government, but they're not going to get paid, or the - the personnel at least aren't going to get paid until we actually get an appropriation. Does that make sense?



Q: Yeah, absolutely. Thank you.



Q: Are there any specific upcoming multinational training exercises that would have to be canceled if there's a shutdown?



UNDER SEC. HALE: I don't know. My guess is, I don't know. As I say, you know, I assume nobody knows of it either. If we get into this, you know, we're going to have to go one level of indenture down. I mean, somebody knows, PACOM [U.S. Pacific Command] or EUCOM [U.S. European Command] they certainly would know, but I'm not aware of any.



(CROSSTALK)



Q: (inaudible) Roughly 400,000 DOD employees?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Based on - Tony, we don't have the numbers yet. We're still gathering them for this year, but it was around 50 percent of our civilians who were excepted two and a half years ago. I would expect it to be in that vicinity again. That would be around 400,000 maybe a little less. Our foreign national employees who are part of that 800,000 are excepted if they are paid by foreign governments, so we take them off the top, it would probably be a little less than 400,000 when we're done.



Q: They should be around 800,000 of which 400,000 potentially could be, and most of those are outside of the Washington, D.C. area, is that?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Eighty-six percent of our overall civilians are outside of Washington, so I think it's fair to say the majority of them will be.



Q: What is the thinking in terms of when RIF [Reduction in Force] notices or RIF packages would have to be pulled together, since you're not planning for furloughs in 2014?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Well, I mean, you will - we have planned some of them based on accommodating a $487 billion 10-year cut that we took in prior budgets, that - that over the next few months, I think some of those would be announced. The ones associated with these cuts takes awhile to formulate these, and - and so it will probably be a period of time and I'm not sure exactly when before we'll have those out. But you're going to see some reductions in force actions over coming months, and some involuntary separations in the military as we begin this drawdown.



Q: (OFF-MIKE) potentially it was like 6,200 a couple - back in early August you were thinking of -- you and the department, any rough number of potential RIFs?



UNDER SEC. HALE: No, I don't want to give you a number, because I don't think we're far enough along to be specific. And that number is headline stuff. So I'd prefer not to.



Q: How will Arlington burials be affected?



UNDER SEC. HALE: Yeah, we will exempt -- Arlington is actually paid to the Army. And I believe it will stay open, but I'd kind of like to check that.



We have decided -- based on mental health and other reasons -- to except funerals and dignified transfers. And so the people supporting those would be excepted and they will continue.



Q: And then just a follow up on the civilians expected to work but no guarantee of pay, is that unless something is passed in Congress?



UNDER SEC. HALE: It comes in two flavors. The ones who are associated with excepted activities, they will be directed to work. They will be paid retroactively -- as soon as we get an appropriation. And that will be automatic. The ones who are put on furlough, that would require an act of Congress in order to pay them retroactively.



Q: Are there any very significant differences between this guidance and the guidance from April 2011 or any of the ...



UNDER SEC. HALE: No, it's pretty modest -- I gave you the one example of the Navy Yard investigation, and there may be a couple others, but they are very modest. Unfortunately, we're getting good at this.



Q: In addition to having to worry about FY [fiscal year] '14, you have to develop an FY '15 budget concurrently. Can you update us on how that's going, and is all the time and attention you have to deal with for planning for a shutdown taking away from that?



UNDER SEC. HALE: I mean, absolutely. It's taking away from everything we do, at least anything of the people who are related to budget. Yes, it's slowing it down.



But we have to press forward, and it's a particularly demanding task this year, because we really feel we have to plan for a range of outcomes. We just don't know where we're gonna end up. A decision the president will ultimately make in December as to the size of the '15 budget and the plan beyond. So we're really planning for a pretty wide range of spending.



Q: Have the services given you everything they need for that?



UNDER SEC. HALE: They are in the process of doing that. They have submitted briefings on what we call our program objectives memoranda, and are submitting detail data right now.



Q: You had mentioned some ability to do -- to sign new contracts in the event of a government shutdown. The guidance mentions that it would be allowed when delaying contracting would endanger national security, but I wonder for some of your bigger weapons programs and vehicles and things how would you legally be able to decide what delays would endanger?



UNDER SEC. HALE: I mean, we can (inaudible) sign new contracts or extend old ones if they are in direct support of excepted activities. I think it would probably be a stretch for a major acquisition to qualify there, although it's extremely important -- that's another good difference between excepted and non-excepted and essential and non-essential. I mean, we need these weapons, but they'd probably be hard to relate them directly to a current military operation.



Now, the good news is, this coming at the beginning of the year, you don't tend to have a lot of those decisions facing you early on. So -- and those that you have, you could delay. I think if a lapse occurs, I definitely hope it doesn't, but the severity of the effects would grow quickly as it - if it turns out to be long. If it's short, it will be damaging, but less so. If it's long, it will be increasingly so, because it will catch more issues like that.



Q: Can you talk some more about the extent to which you would expect military personnel to be performing the duties of furloughed civilians as opposed to their normal day jobs? And I guess the same question for any contractors who might be able to stick around because they're paid the prior years.



Well, on the military side, I mean, they would have their normal jobs and they would continue that. I think there could be circumstances, for example, if there was an important contract funded with money before the lapse, and supervision was needed and the civilian was furloughed that, maybe the person had the capability to do that, I could see them doing that. But I think for the most part they will be doing their same jobs.



Same with the contractors, in general, they're going to be doing the jobs they were assigned. They can't -- the contractors would never be allowed -- furlough -- shutdown or not, to do inherently governmental work. There could be some circumstances, an admin assistant who was a contractor answering phones because a -- a person – a civilian was furloughed. It could be some of that, but for the most part, they're gonna go ahead and do the jobs they were assigned to.



(UNKNOWN): Thank you very much. Mr. Hale, thanks.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS AT GLOBAL HEALTH EVENT WITH PARTNER COUNTRIES

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks at a Global Health Event with Partner Countries (PEPFAR)
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Waldorf Hotel
New York City
September 25, 2013

Well, good afternoon, everybody, and thank you very, very much for joining us here. It’s my great privilege to be joined by His Excellency, the President of Namibia, President Pohamba; His Excellency, the President of Rwanda, Paul Kagame; and His Excellency, the Ambassador to the United States, Ebrahim Rasool from South Africa. And we’re very honored to have each of them here to take part. As all of you, we want to have a good discussion. We’re going to open it up with a few opening statements while the press is here. And then when the press leaves, we’ll have a chance to just talk and have a great dialogue about the future here.

We’re really at the cusp of a very exciting new frontier with respect to the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, known to everybody as PEPFAR. And I’m very proud to be joined by our global partners as well as a group of stakeholders here as we hopefully embrace and implement all of the tools at our disposal to be able to achieve an AIDS-free generation and to improve global healthcare by strengthening our commitments to PEPFAR and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria.

This has been an extraordinary journey, and I think everybody at this table understands that. A decade ago, PEPFAR created the world’s largest and the most successful foreign assistance program ever. And now, a disease that at one time seemed to be unstoppable is actually in retreat.

I have been gratified to be part of this fight since the beginning, really, and particularly will say to you that I’ve never been more optimistic than we are today, and I think you may share that. I remember the days in Congress when the words “AIDS” was very rarely spoken. And often if it was spoken, it was spoken pejoratively. And I can remember the early days working with Senator Bill Frist or Barbara Lee on the earliest efforts to engage the United States Government on a major global commitment. And it is really heartening to know that now, 10 years after PEPFAR was launched, we are actually able to see and reach out and hopefully touch the prospect of an AIDS-free generation.

So our commitment to this has not only been strengthened by the progress that we’ve made and the lives that we’ve saved, but science has shown the way and has provided us with the tools that we need in order to be able to continue our collective pursuit of what has always been an ambitious goal, remains ambitious but not ambitious without the capacity to realize the ambition, which is particularly exciting.

Last year – I’m sure many of you were there – I was privileged to attend with you the first International AIDS Society conference to be held on American soil in more than two decades. And we all know why it couldn’t be for so long. We finally got that changed. And I’m especially proud to announce today that the United States will host the Global Fund’s Fourth Replenishment in December.

Since its inception, the Global Fund has been a vital partner in supporting country-owned – and this is very important – country-owned responses to address HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. And the United States is proud to be the Global Fund’s largest donor, and we’re challenging other donors to step up their commitments at this critical moment and make the replenishment cycle a success. We’re already encouraged by the increased pledges from the United Kingdom, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, as well as those from Germany and France earlier this year, who agreed to extend their already current high level of commitment.

So we’re now entering the second decade of PEPFAR. And as you’re aware, the program has taken steps over the past few years to move from an emergency program to a sustainable initiative. U.S. programs, I think it’s fair to say, are still absolutely critical. But now, wherever possible, those programs are going to support countries’ own initiatives against this epidemic, and that’s what’s really exciting about it. That’s, frankly, exactly what our foreign assistance is supposed to do, is to help other countries to be able to take the reins and empower them to be able to confront challenges like HIV and AIDS themselves.

South Africa, Rwanda, Namibia are all on the front lines of this effort. And in the face of one of the greatest moral challenges of our time, each of those countries have responded in extraordinary ways in order to care for your own people. You’re not just investing in your own health capacity, but you are helping to lead the charge to define a new model for U.S. assistance. And we thank you for that. It’s one that empowers and emphasizes co-investment, collaboration, and true partnership. And none of these things can work if it isn’t transformed into sustainability, if it doesn’t become, really, a country’s own initiative.

That’s what country health partnerships are all about. They are about shared responsibility, shared accountability, budget transparency, and a commitment to investing strategically based on what we’ve learned from improved data collection and analysis. These partnerships are country specific to ensure that we are responsive to local needs. And they’ll also benefit from shared decision-making on how PEPFAR resources are allocated as part of a national response.

So make no mistake, please. The United States will continue to be responsible for the stewardship of its funds, and congressional mandates will remain in effect. But we believe that by sharing more decisions with countries, we can advance the principles of country ownership that President Obama and I believe in so strongly. And that will allow us to continue to make progress on prevention, on treatment, and awareness.

Fighting HIV/AIDS isn’t just a first-tier priority of our foreign policy and public health initiatives. And I’m blessed, as I look around the table speaking— we have a group of unbelievably qualified, incredibly experienced, and amazingly capable people at this table. You are the people, all of you, who made this happen over these last years. But beyond being sort of that foreign policy initiative, it’s also a test of our values. And we have to reaffirm our moral obligation, and we have to acknowledge that our shared humanity mandates that we continue to challenge ourselves until we defeat this devastating epidemic.

So with that, I want to turn to our country partners here today and ask each of them if they would offer their perspective on exactly how we take the next step forward together. So let me first, if I may, introduce President Pohamba of Namibia.