New York, NY, United States (AHN) – Bank of America (BAC Fortune 500) announced it is partnering with two other entities to develop solar energy from rooftop installations.

The project will ultimately produce about 733 megawatts of solar energy, which is enough energy to power 100,000 homes and represents about 50 percent of the energy output of a nuclear powered electric plant.

A federal loan guarantee through the Department of Energy will help to fund the $2.6 billion project. It will be the world’s largest single effort to install solar energy panels on rooftops. The panels will be installed on the rooftops of industrial buildings in several states. DOE will guarantee 80 percent of the $1.4 billion debt financing. The rest of the money will come from private loan and funding sources.

Other partners in the project include real estate owner Prologis (PLD) and utility NRG Energy (NRG, Fortune 500).

In a press release, Tom Doyle, president of NRG Solar, NRG’s solar subsidiary, put the project into perspective.

“NRG believes rooftop solar is a smart choice for industrial, commercial and residential property owners in markets around the country, and this program provides the commercial scale that will bring the benefits of solar power to customers across the country,” Doyle said. “This program will nearly double the amount of grid-connected solar online in the United States today and make another positive contribution to cleaner air and a healthy environment.”

View full post on Economy, Business And Finance Stories

United States (ProPublica) – by Marian Wang

While federal and state officials investigating flawed foreclosures have largely focused on holding the banks accountable and bringing relief to wronged homeowners, officials in a few states have begun targeting the more obscure middlemen of the foreclosure scandal.

Prosecutors in California and Illinois have sent subpoenas to Lender Processing Services, one of the largest firms that processed mortgage documents for the banks. (Read more about LPS in our guide to who’s who of the foreclosure scandal.)

As we’ve noted, the firm—which helps handle more than half of all U.S. mortgages—has been accused of using the same “robo-signing” practices as the major banks, such as signing and notarizing documents that appeared inaccurate or invalid. Bank employees have testified under oath that they relied on LPS to vet the information in foreclosure documents.

LPS has had its share of legal troubles over its mortgage processing. Michigan’s attorney general announced an investigation last month into potentially fraudulent mortgage documents processed by an LPS subsidiary. (LPS has said that it discontinued the practices used by the subsidiary.) Along with the big banks, the firm recently received an order from federal regulators to correct problems with its processing of mortgage documents. (Read that consent order.)

Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan also sent a subpoena to Nationwide Title Clearing, another firm contracted to provide mortgage services to banks. As we’ve noted, Nationwide Title Clearing employees have testified to robo-signing thousands of mortgage documents—known as assignments—that establish the ownership of a mortgage loan and are key to establishing who has the right to foreclose on a homeowner.

Nationwide Title Clearing said in a statement that its procedures have been “thoroughly audited and examined for accuracy” and that it would cooperate with any investigation. LPS declined to comment.

The latest actions on foreclosure problems as an attempted comprehensive settlement by all 50 state attorneys general has hit a few roadblocks. As we noted in our cheat sheet on bank investigations, the negotiations have been hampered by disagreement with the banks over the size of penalties as well as some disagreement among the attorneys general—at least eight of whom have opposed any settlement that would require banks to cut borrowers’ mortgage debt.

Bloomberg reports today that Bank of America has also received independent scrutiny from the attorneys general of Utah and Connecticut accusing the firm of invalid foreclosures and insufficient loan modifications. Utah warned that it would sue.

– Provided by ProPublica.org

View full post on All Stories

Washington, DC, United States (KaiserHealth) – On a near party-line vote delayed a half dozen times by protesters in the packed galleries, the Republican-controlled House passed a budget plan for the next decade that would dramatically shrink the role of the federal government. The controversial spending and tax blue print, designed by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, was approved 235 to’3, with no Democratic support and four Republicans voting against it.

U.S. House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) (C) speaks as (L-R) Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), Rep. Diane Black (R-TN), Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), and Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) listen during a news conference Wednesday on Capitol Hill. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

As the contentious day-long debate neared its conclusion, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, threw down the gauntlet to President Obama for the upcoming negotiations over raising the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling, which will become necessary sometime in the next several months. “The president wants a clean bill,” Boehner said, but “there will be no debt limit increase unless it is accompanied by spending cuts and real budget reforms.”

Though the House-backed plan stands no chance of passage in the Senate, much less being signed by the president, as a starting point for negotiations it sets a stake in the ground as far to the right as any political party has attempted since Barry Goldwater ran for president in’64. It calls for far-reaching changes to government programs – more extensive than what was proposed in the’94 GOP “Contract with America” — that affect about a fifth of the U.S. economy.

The fiscal 2012 budget resolution:

Cuts spending on domestic programs by over $100 billion next year and continues to add cuts to the environment, housing and education for the next decade, lowering domestic spending as a share of the economy to levels not seen since the first half of the 20th century.

Shrinks Medicare by giving seniors who turn 65 after 2023 a voucher that would cover about one-third of the cost of insurance-industry provided plans.

Turns Medicaid back to the states and cuts the federal contribution by $700 billion over the next decade.

Holds defense spending at levels that remain 20 percent above the last peak during the’80s.

Overhauls the tax code to lower taxes on wealthier Americans and some corporations.

The House-passed budget would cut all programs by $6.2 trillion over the next decade. By contrast, President Obama’s budget plan released this week would cut approximately $3 trillion over the next decade and nearly $4 trillion over 12 years. The Republican blueprint uses most of its budget savings to reduce tax collections by $4.2 trillion. The GOP plan would lower top tax rates on individuals and corporations and not allow the Bush-era tax cuts to expire.

Ryan, R-Wis., the plan’s architect, said of the House action today: “This is our defining moment.”

Four Republicans, who joined the 189 Democrats in the chamber, voted against the budget plan. The four were David McKinley, a freshmen from Wheeling, West Virginia who won election last November with 50 percent of the vote; Walter Jones, a nine-term member from Greenville, N.C.; Denny Rehberg, the sole representative from Montana whose two Senators and governor are Democrats; and Ron Paul, a libertarian gadfly from Texas who favors cuts in defense and reduced American commitments abroad.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the Budget Committee, led the Democratic opposition to the bill. In a preview of what is certain to be a top issue in campaigns across the country in the next election, he and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., repeatedly homed in on the dramatic changes to Medicare contained in the Republican approach to reducing deficits.

“The Republican plan disconnects the amount we give seniors from rising health care costs,” Van Hollen said. “That’s why seniors wind up paying more and more and more.” Democrats repeatedly referred to a Congressional Budget Office analysis released last week that showed seniors who turn 65 after 2023 will pick up 68 percent of their health care costs compared to 20 to 25 percent today.

“Do you realize your Republican leadership is asking you to cast a vote today that abolishes Medicare as we know it?” Pelosi asked in her final comments on the bill. Responded Ryan: “The biggest threat to Medicare is the status quo. … What we say is that in the future people who are wealthy do not need as much subsidy. People who are sick and who are poor get more.

The House-backed plan now goes to the Senate, where it stands no chance of passage since it is controlled by Democrats. A bipartisan group of six Senators, including several who served on the president’s fiscal commission, have been meeting for weeks to craft an alternative.

Their efforts were largely overshadowed this week when President Obama shifted sharply to the right by endorsing much of what was contained in his deficit commission’s plan released last November. The president proposed cutting deficits by $4 trillion over the next dozen years by cutting both domestic and defense spending, and raising taxes on well-off Americans through tax reform and ending the Bush-era tax cuts for those earning over $250,000 a year.

The Republicans who rose in support of the bill repeatedly castigated the president for proposing higher taxes in what is likely to be one of their major election-year themes. “The debt and deficit problem we have today is not because we have taxed too little, but because we have spent too much,” said second-term Rep. Tom Graves, R-Ga.

But Democrats continually linked their tax increases to the cuts in Medicare. “The question is not whether to reduce the deficit, but how,” said Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Cal., who served on the deficit commission. “This plan gives $130,000 in tax cuts for millionaires while eliminating the guarantee for Medicare beneficiaries to choose doctors [and] adds $6,000 in health care costs. We don’t think Americans should get a coupon instead of a guarantee.”

– Provided by Kaiser Health News.

View full post on All Stories

United States (ProPublica) – by Marian Wang

A provision within the financial reform bill that would regulate debit card transaction fees could be postponed by a year or two following fierce objections from banks. Specifically, banks large and small are objecting to a Fed proposal to limit what are known as interchange fees — the fees they collect from merchants every time a customer uses a bank-issued debit card to make a purchase.

Lawmakers in both houses of Congress last week drafted legislation to postpone writing new debit interchange rules for one to two years. According to Dodd-Frank, the rules were supposed to be finalized by April 21 and to go into effect by July 21.

Consumer groups have decried the delay, saying it would postpone much-needed reform to a system that is “uncompetitive, non-transparent and harmful to consumers” . At the same time, these groups voiced concerns that if interchange reform passes, banks will levy other charges on consumers — something many banks have warned they may do.

Given the controversy, we’re taking a closer look at how interchange works and what’s at stake for banks, for businesses and for consumers.

How interchange works

Many consumers are only vaguely aware of the existence of the interchange fees — or “swipe fees” — but they’re still paying for them because the costs are ultimately passed on to consumers in the form of higher retail prices. The fees often cause retailers to offer discounts for cash or set minimums for credit and debit purchases.

Aside from the argument that paying with plastic is convenient for both consumers and merchants, the justification for interchange fees is partly that banks assume some risk in these transactions, particularly with credit purchases. But because debit transactions are simpler — a matter of moving money from one account to another — some have argued that debit interchange fees are unjustifiably high.

The Dodd-Frank financial reform bill takes aim at only these debit interchange fees. It tasked the Federal Reserve with adopting standards to determine whether interchange fees are “reasonable and proportional” to the cost of processing the transaction.

What the Fed came up with was a plan to cap debit interchange fees at 12 cents per transaction — a proposal that banks appear to uniformly hate. They currently get about 1 to 2 percent of each debit transaction, which averages out to about 44 cents.

The exact numbers are squishy here and are negotiated between merchants and payment networks like Visa and Mastercard, but generally fees for credit cards are higher than for debit cards — and they get even higher if the cards have fancy reward programs. (The card networks also collect their own “network fees”from merchants, which they keep, but as the New York Times has noted, those fees are smaller, and they’re not particularly controversial.)

Some have pointed out that this means merchants—and customers, in the form of higher prices—essentially subsidize the purchases and perks of card-users. According to an analysis released last year by the Boston Federal Reserve, such subsidies average more than $1000 for card-using households each year.

It’s also worth noting that debit card payments with PIN numbers are less costly for merchants than debit card payments with signatures. The larger fees are why some banks have tried to encourage customers to use signature debit instead of entering their PINs, even though PIN transactions are more secure and cost businesses less.

The debit transaction themselves, as the Washington Post has pointed out, only cost a few pennies each to conduct if you don’t count the infrastructure costs. (As it happens, the Fed isn’t counting infrastructure costs in calculating the fee cap. Costs like network connectivity or overhead costs, “cannot be attributed to any particular transaction, given that they could not be avoided if any particular transaction did not occur,” Federal Reserve Governor Sarah Bloom Raskin testified last month.)

As Reuters columnist Antony Currie points out in his handy FAQ, Visa Europe has capped its debit card interchange fees at 0.2 percent of each transaction, and U.S. interchange rates currently average about six times that.

Billions at stake for banks, which in turn warn of impact on consumers

In their lobbying pitches to regulators, banks and merchants have both argued their positions by citing the effect of the proposed rule on consumers.

“The concerns that we have raised revolve around how this is going to impact basic free checking accounts, particularly for low-income Americans,” a spokesman for the American Bankers Association recently told the St. Petersburg Times.

The banks’ professed concern for the low-income is interesting: As financial blogger Mike Konczal has pointed out, there really is no such thing as “free” checking. There’s just “a monthly fee that is waived if you do certain things” and meet certain requirements, like a direct deposit or minimum balance—which low-income people are the least likely to be able to meet, anyway.

The big banks—whose cards account for 80 percent of debit transactions—stand to lose billions in revenue each year. (The amount has been pegged at anywhere from $12 billion to $20 billion.) The New York Times points out that debit transactions are forecasted to overtake cash purchases by 2012.

Many banks say they will forced to cut rewards programs or eliminate services such as free checking. Some, like JPMorgan Chase, are even considering putting a cap on the size of debit purchases.

Despite an exemption, community banks say they’re concerned too

Big banks aren’t the only ones complaining. Even though the Fed’s proposal exempts banks with less than $10 billion in assets from the interchange cap and Visa has said it will implement a two-tier system to protect small banks, community banks have argued that the exemption won’t work because merchants will discriminate and refuse to accept their cards, forcing them to lower their fees in order to remain competitive with the big banks.

“This rule will unquestionably lead to more consumer fees, fewer product choices and greater consumer confusion regarding card acceptance,” the trade group Independent Community Bankers of America has stated.

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has said “it is possible” that the exemption won’t work, but Sen. Richard Durbin—who proposed the community bank exemption in the Dodd-Frank law—has said Bernanke is wrong. He pointed to “very strong” rules by card companies that bar merchants from refusing cards within their networks.

Some advocates of interchange fee reform, including Durbin, suspect the bigger banks are manipulating the community banks and credit unions to raise their objections. Durbin called it “one of the most active lobbying efforts I’ve ever seen.”

“The fact is credit unions and smaller banks are just more effective spokesmen on this issue right now,” Politico quoted an anonymous executive at a large bank as saying.

Retailers argue current system gives banks and card networks too much power

The National Retail Federation, a trade group for retailers, has argued that the current payment system is not competitive, and that Visa and Mastercard—the two major networks in the debit world—have too much power to control and inflate fees.

And while banks have argued that competition between Visa and Mastercard is strong and enables merchants to apply pressure to drive down fees, a piece in the New York Times from January suggests the competition actually goes the other way: Payment networks compete to keep the banks happy with higher fees. From the Times:

As debit cards became the preferred plastic in American wallets, Visa has turned its attention to PIN debit too and increased its market share even more. And it has succeeded — not by lowering the fees that merchants pay, but often by pushing them up, making its bank customers happier.

In an effort to catch up, MasterCard and other rivals eventually raised fees on debit cards too, sometimes higher than Visa, to try to woo bank customers back.

Even the federal government—which some have argued should be able to negotiate rock-bottom interchange fees because the risk the banks front for the feds is next to nothing—has had trouble controlling the millions it pays in fees deducted from debit and credit transactions.

“Some federal entities have attempted to negotiate with the card networks to lower interchange rates applicable to their transactions, but with limited success,” read a 2010 Government Accountability Office report. An earlier GAO report found that non-government merchants also had little success.

Merchants promise they’ll pass savings onto consumers

Small business owners and major retailers have argued that the Fed plan to cap interchange fees is a pro-consumer move, according to Bloomberg, which reported that about 170 small business owners recently flew into D.C. to relay that message.

Several retailers supporting the cap have promised to share their savings. Here’s the Wall Street Journal:

Retailers maintain that most of their fee-cut windfall would be shared with customers. Home Depot, among those lobbying most aggressively for the cuts, said: “Any relief as it pertains to these fees will give the Home Depot the ability to reduce our cost of doing business…Such benefits are likely to include lower prices and investment in the business to better serve customers.”

There’s nothing in the proposed rule or in Dodd-Frank, however, to ensure that savings are passed on.

A 2009 government report found that even if interchange fees were to be capped, “the ability of merchants to pass on their savings from lower interchange fees would depend heavily on the respective merchants’ size and market share.”

The fight continues as lawmakers consider a time-out

In addition to heavy lobbying on Capitol Hill, banks have taken their pleas directly to consumers by setting a website called Don’t Make Us Pay. It warns consumers that “Congress and the Federal Reserve want to force YOU to pay more to use your debit card.”

“NO MORE REWARDS,” “MORE RESTRICTIONS,” “HIGHER FEES,” “END OF FREE CHECKING,” the website warns. “TELL CONGRESS NO!” (Hat tip to Slate for flagging the site.)

The group behind the website is the Electronic Payments Coalition, whose members include the major banks, bank trade groups, and both Visa and Mastercard. Politico reported that the coalition has also been running television ads and placing ads in D.C. subway cars.

The Hill reported that merchant groups have also taken out ads to promote interchange fees, though between banks and merchants, NPR notes that banks have the edge in the fight based on financial heft:

Commercial banks, credit unions, and Visa and MasterCard — who run the biggest debit card networks — spent a combined $75 million lobbying on all issues in Washington last year, nearly double the retail industry’s $40 million, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks such spending.

Financial firms’ campaign contributions during the 2009-2010 cycle also were twice those of merchants, according to NPR.

View full post on All Stories

Near-record ROA. Loan growth. Addition of services. What the industry can learn from a Midwestern credit union….[ Read Article ]

View full post on Credit Union Stories

Washington, DC, United States (AHN) – A study released 12 months after Congress passed the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act found that the law had stopped credit card companies from increasing interest rates on cardholders’ existing balances, cut penalties and practically removed overlimit charges.

However, credit card companies continued to use new tactics designed to go around the CARD Act, which prompted recommendations for a new approach to regulate the industry.

According to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau survey of nine of the largest card issuers in the U.S. representing 90 percent of the market, because of the Act the number of accounts that had interest rate hikes on existing balances dropped to 2 percent from 15 percent. One bank regularly reviews accounts to check on new purchases on which higher interest rates can be imposed, while five banks instead hiked rates on delinquent accounts.

Because of the Act’s cap on $25 on the first violation and $35 on the second violation on late fees, total late fees paid by delinquent cardholders dropped to $427 million in November from $901 million in January 2010.

Despite the drop, Consumers Union asked the CFPB, which will administer the CARD Act, to further lower penalties for late fees to $10 for first violation and $15 for the second offense.

Bank of America said Monday that the Act had such an adverse impact on the credit card industry that the bank had to double its write-down funds on its FIA Card Services unit to $20.3 billion to reflect industry regulation and the deterioration of credit quality. The write-down covered 2009 and 2010, but Bank of America said it does not affect the institution’s consolidated financial results or capital reserves.

The CFPB study also found that fewer than 50 percent of consumers are very or somewhat familiar with the CARD Act, while 30 percent admitted they were not familiar with the one-year-old law at all.

View full post on Economy, Business And Finance Stories

$20.3b to reflect increased defaults, two-year-old change in rules

View full post on All Stories

February 18, 2011, Alexandria Va. – National Credit Union Administration Chairman Debbie Matz encourages credit unions to help their members to assess and take action to increase savings as preparations proceed for America Saves and Military Saves Week. The week begins Sunday, February 20, 2011, and runs through Sunday, February 27, 2011.

View full post on Credit Union Stories

Washington, DC, United States (AHN) – Remarks of President Barack Obama – As Prepared for Delivery

State of the Union Address. Tuesday, January 25, 2011

As Prepared for Delivery—

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, Members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:

Tonight I want to begin by congratulating the men and women of the 112th Congress, as well as your new Speaker, John Boehner. And as we mark this occasion, we are also mindful of the empty chair in this Chamber, and pray for the health of our colleague – and our friend – Gabby Giffords.

It’s no secret that those of us here tonight have had our differences over the last two years. The debates have been contentious; we have fought fiercely for our beliefs. And that’s a good thing. That’s what a robust democracy demands. That’s what helps set us apart as a nation.

But there’s a reason the tragedy in Tucson gave us pause. Amid all the noise and passions and rancor of our public debate, Tucson reminded us that no matter who we are or where we come from, each of us is a part of something greater – something more consequential than party or political preference.

We are part of the American family. We believe that in a country where every race and faith and point of view can be found, we are still bound together as one people; that we share common hopes and a common creed; that the dreams of a little girl in Tucson are not so different than those of our own children, and that they all deserve the chance to be fulfilled.

That, too, is what sets us apart as a nation.

Now, by itself, this simple recognition won’t usher in a new era of cooperation. What comes of this moment is up to us. What comes of this moment will be determined not by whether we can sit together tonight, but whether we can work together tomorrow.

I believe we can. I believe we must. That’s what the people who sent us here expect of us. With their votes, they’ve determined that governing will now be a shared responsibility between parties. New laws will only pass with support from Democrats and Republicans. We will move forward together, or not at all – for the challenges we face are bigger than party, and bigger than politics.

At stake right now is not who wins the next election – after all, we just had an election. At stake is whether new jobs and industries take root in this country, or somewhere else. It’s whether the hard work and industry of our people is rewarded. It’s whether we sustain the leadership that has made America not just a place on a map, but a light to the world.

We are poised for progress. Two years after the worst recession most of us have ever known, the stock market has come roaring back. Corporate profits are up. The economy is growing again.

But we have never measured progress by these yardsticks alone. We measure progress by the success of our people. By the jobs they can find and the quality of life those jobs offer. By the prospects of a small business owner who dreams of turning a good idea into a thriving enterprise. By the opportunities for a better life that we pass on to our children.

That’s the project the American people want us to work on. Together.

We did that in December. Thanks to the tax cuts we passed, Americans’ paychecks are a little bigger today. Every business can write off the full cost of the new investments they make this year. These steps, taken by Democrats and Republicans, will grow the economy and add to the more than one million private sector jobs created last year.

But we have more work to do. The steps we’ve taken over the last two years may have broken the back of this recession – but to win the future, we’ll need to take on challenges that have been decades in the making.

Many people watching tonight can probably remember a time when finding a good job meant showing up at a nearby factory or a business downtown. You didn’t always need a degree, and your competition was pretty much limited to your neighbors. If you worked hard, chances are you’d have a job for life, with a decent paycheck, good benefits, and the occasional promotion. Maybe you’d even have the pride of seeing your kids work at the same company.

That world has changed. And for many, the change has been painful. I’ve seen it in the shuttered windows of once booming factories, and the vacant storefronts of once busy Main Streets. I’ve heard it in the frustrations of Americans who’ve seen their paychecks dwindle or their jobs disappear – proud men and women who feel like the rules have been changed in the middle of the game.

They’re right. The rules have changed. In a single generation, revolutions in technology have transformed the way we live, work and do business. Steel mills that once needed 1,000 workers can now do the same work with 100. Today, just about any company can set up shop, hire workers, and sell their products wherever there’s an internet connection.

Meanwhile, nations like China and India realized that with some changes of their own, they could compete in this new world. And so they started educating their children earlier and longer, with greater emphasis on math and science. They’re investing in research and new technologies. Just recently, China became home to the world’s largest private solar research facility, and the world’s fastest computer.

So yes, the world has changed. The competition for jobs is real. But this shouldn’t discourage us. It should challenge us. Remember – for all the hits we’ve taken these last few years, for all the naysayers predicting our decline, America still has the largest, most prosperous economy in the world. No workers are more productive than ours. No country has more successful companies, or grants more patents to inventors and entrepreneurs. We are home to the world’s best colleges and universities, where more students come to study than any other place on Earth.

What’s more, we are the first nation to be founded for the sake of an idea – the idea that each of us deserves the chance to shape our own destiny. That is why centuries of pioneers and immigrants have risked everything to come here. It’s why our students don’t just memorize equations, but answer questions like “What do you think of that idea? What would you change about the world? What do you want to be when you grow up?”

The future is ours to win. But to get there, we can’t just stand still. As Robert Kennedy told us, “The future is not a gift. It is an achievement.” Sustaining the American Dream has never been about standing pat. It has required each generation to sacrifice, and struggle, and meet the demands of a new age.

Now it’s our turn. We know what it takes to compete for the jobs and industries of our time. We need to out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build the rest of the world. We have to make America the best place on Earth to do business. We need to take responsibility for our deficit, and reform our government. That’s how our people will prosper. That’s how we’ll win the future. And tonight, I’d like to talk about how we get there.

The first step in winning the future is encouraging American innovation.

None of us can predict with certainty what the next big industry will be, or where the new jobs will come from. Thirty years ago, we couldn’t know that something called the Internet would lead to an economic revolution. What we can do – what America does better than anyone – is spark the creativity and imagination of our people. We are the nation that put cars in driveways and computers in offices; the nation of Edison and the Wright brothers; of Google and Facebook. In America, innovation doesn’t just change our lives. It’s how we make a living.

Our free enterprise system is what drives innovation. But because it’s not always profitable for companies to invest in basic research, throughout history our government has provided cutting-edge scientists and inventors with the support that they need. That’s what planted the seeds for the Internet. That’s what helped make possible things like computer chips and GPS.

Just think of all the good jobs – from manufacturing to retail – that have come from those breakthroughs.

Half a century ago, when the Soviets beat us into space with the launch of a satellite called Sputnik¸ we had no idea how we’d beat them to the moon. The science wasn’t there yet. NASA didn’t even exist. But after investing in better research and education, we didn’t just surpass the Soviets; we unleashed a wave of innovation that created new industries and millions of new jobs.

This is our generation’s Sputnik moment. Two years ago, I said that we needed to reach a level of research and development we haven’t seen since the height of the Space Race. In a few weeks, I will be sending a budget to Congress that helps us meet that goal. We’ll invest in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology – an investment that will strengthen our security, protect our planet, and create countless new jobs for our people.

Already, we are seeing the promise of renewable energy. Robert and Gary Allen are brothers who run a small Michigan roofing company. After September 11th, they volunteered their best roofers to help repair the Pentagon. But half of their factory went unused, and the recession hit them hard.

Today, with the help of a government loan, that empty space is being used to manufacture solar shingles that are being sold all across the country. In Robert’s words, “We reinvented ourselves.”

That’s what Americans have done for over two hundred years: reinvented ourselves. And to spur on more success stories like the Allen Brothers, we’ve begun to reinvent our energy policy. We’re not just handing out money. We’re issuing a challenge. We’re telling America’s scientists and engineers that if they assemble teams of the best minds in their fields, and focus on the hardest problems in clean energy, we’ll fund the Apollo Projects of our time.

At the California Institute of Technology, they’re developing a way to turn sunlight and water into fuel for our cars. At Oak Ridge National Laboratory, they’re using supercomputers to get a lot more power out of our nuclear facilities. With more research and incentives, we can break our dependence on oil with biofuels, and become the first country to have 1 million electric vehicles on the road by 2015.

We need to get behind this innovation. And to help pay for it, I’m asking Congress to eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but they’re doing just fine on their own. So instead of subsidizing yesterday’s energy, let’s invest in tomorrow’s.

Now, clean energy breakthroughs will only translate into clean energy jobs if businesses know there will be a market for what they’re selling. So tonight, I challenge you to join me in setting a new goal: by 2035, 80% of America’s electricity will come from clean energy sources. Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all – and I urge Democrats and Republicans to work together to make it happen.

Maintaining our leadership in research and technology is crucial to America’s success. But if we want to win the future – if we want innovation to produce jobs in America and not overseas – then we also have to win the race to educate our kids.

Think about it. Over the next ten years, nearly half of all new jobs will require education that goes beyond a high school degree. And yet, as many as a quarter of our students aren’t even finishing high school. The quality of our math and science education lags behind many other nations. America has fallen to 9th in the proportion of young people with a college degree. And so the question is whether all of us – as citizens, and as parents – are willing to do what’s necessary to give every child a chance to succeed.

That responsibility begins not in our classrooms, but in our homes and communities. It’s family that first instills the love of learning in a child. Only parents can make sure the TV is turned off and homework gets done. We need to teach our kids that it’s not just the winner of the Super Bowl who deserves to be celebrated, but the winner of the science fair; that success is not a function of fame or PR, but of hard work and discipline.

Our schools share this responsibility. When a child walks into a classroom, it should be a place of high expectations and high performance. But too many schools don’t meet this test. That’s why instead of just pouring money into a system that’s not working, we launched a competition called Race to the Top. To all fifty states, we said, “If you show us the most innovative plans to improve teacher quality and student achievement, we’ll show you the money.”

Race to the Top is the most meaningful reform of our public schools in a generation. For less than one percent of what we spend on education each year, it has led over 40 states to raise their standards for teaching and learning. These standards were developed, not by Washington, but by Republican and Democratic governors throughout the country. And Race to the Top should be the approach we follow this year as we replace No Child Left Behind with a law that is more flexible and focused on what’s best for our kids.

You see, we know what’s possible for our children when reform isn’t just a top-down mandate, but the work of local teachers and principals; school boards and communities.

Take a school like Bruce Randolph in Denver. Three years ago, it was rated one of the worst schools in Colorado; located on turf between two rival gangs. But last May, 97% of the seniors received their diploma. Most will be the first in their family to go to college. And after the first year of the school’s transformation, the principal who made it possible wiped away tears when a student said “Thank you, Mrs. Waters, for showing… that we are smart and we can make it.”

Let’s also remember that after parents, the biggest impact on a child’s success comes from the man or woman at the front of the classroom. In South Korea, teachers are known as “nation builders.” Here in America, it’s time we treated the people who educate our children with the same level of respect. We want to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones. And over the next ten years, with so many Baby Boomers retiring from our classrooms, we want to prepare 100,000 new teachers in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math.

In fact, to every young person listening tonight who’s contemplating their career choice: If you want to make a difference in the life of our nation; if you want to make a difference in the life of a child – become a teacher. Your country needs you.

Of course, the education race doesn’t end with a high school diploma. To compete, higher education must be within reach of every American. That’s why we’ve ended the unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that went to banks, and used the savings to make college affordable for millions of students. And this year, I ask Congress to go further, and make permanent our tuition tax credit – worth $10,000 for four years of college.

Because people need to be able to train for new jobs and careers in today’s fast-changing economy, we are also revitalizing America’s community colleges. Last month, I saw the promise of these schools at Forsyth Tech in North Carolina. Many of the students there used to work in the surrounding factories that have since left town. One mother of two, a woman named Kathy Proctor, had worked in the furniture industry since she was 18 years old. And she told me she’s earning her degree in biotechnology now, at 55 years old, not just because the furniture jobs are gone, but because she wants to inspire her children to pursue their dreams too. As Kathy said, “I hope it tells them to never give up.”

If we take these steps – if we raise expectations for every child, and give them the best possible chance at an education, from the day they’re born until the last job they take – we will reach the goal I set two years ago: by the end of the decade, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world.

One last point about education. Today, there are hundreds of thousands of students excelling in our schools who are not American citizens. Some are the children of undocumented workers, who had nothing to do with the actions of their parents. They grew up as Americans and pledge allegiance to our flag, and yet live every day with the threat of deportation. Others come here from abroad to study in our colleges and universities. But as soon as they obtain advanced degrees, we send them back home to compete against us. It makes no sense.

Now, I strongly believe that we should take on, once and for all, the issue of illegal immigration. I am prepared to work with Republicans and Democrats to protect our borders, enforce our laws and address the millions of undocumented workers who are now living in the shadows. I know that debate will be difficult and take time. But tonight, let’s agree to make that effort. And let’s stop expelling talented, responsible young people who can staff our research labs, start new businesses, and further enrich this nation.

The third step in winning the future is rebuilding America. To attract new businesses to our shores, we need the fastest, most reliable ways to move people, goods, and information – from high-speed rail to high-speed internet.

Our infrastructure used to be the best – but our lead has slipped. South Korean homes now have greater internet access than we do. Countries in Europe and Russia invest more in their roads and railways than we do. China is building faster trains and newer airports. Meanwhile, when our own engineers graded our nation’s infrastructure, they gave us a “D.”

We have to do better. America is the nation that built the transcontinental railroad, brought electricity to rural communities, and constructed the interstate highway system. The jobs created by these projects didn’t just come from laying down tracks or pavement. They came from businesses that opened near a town’s new train station or the new off-ramp.

Over the last two years, we have begun rebuilding for the 21st century, a project that has meant thousands of good jobs for the hard-hit construction industry. Tonight, I’m proposing that we redouble these efforts.

We will put more Americans to work repairing crumbling roads and bridges. We will make sure this is fully paid for, attract private investment, and pick projects based on what’s best for the economy, not politicians.

Within 25 years, our goal is to give 80% of Americans access to high-speed rail, which could allow you go places in half the time it takes to travel by car. For some trips, it will be faster than flying – without the pat-down. As we speak, routes in California and the Midwest are already underway.

Within the next five years, we will make it possible for business to deploy the next generation of high-speed wireless coverage to 98% of all Americans. This isn’t just about a faster internet and fewer dropped calls. It’s about connecting every part of America to the digital age. It’s about a rural community in Iowa or Alabama where farmers and small business owners will be able to sell their products all over the world. It’s about a firefighter who can download the design of a burning building onto a handheld device; a student who can take classes with a digital textbook; or a patient who can have face-to-face video chats with her doctor.

All these investments – in innovation, education, and infrastructure – will make America a better place to do business and create jobs. But to help our companies compete, we also have to knock down barriers that stand in the way of their success.

Over the years, a parade of lobbyists has rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries. Those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all. But all the rest are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and it has to change.

So tonight, I’m asking Democrats and Republicans to simplify the system. Get rid of the loopholes. Level the playing field. And use the savings to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years – without adding to our deficit.

To help businesses sell more products abroad, we set a goal of doubling our exports by 2014 – because the more we export, the more jobs we create at home. Already, our exports are up. Recently, we signed agreements with India and China that will support more than 250,000 jobs in the United States. And last month, we finalized a trade agreement with South Korea that will support at least 70,000 American jobs. This agreement has unprecedented support from business and labor; Democrats and Republicans, and I ask this Congress to pass it as soon as possible.

Before I took office, I made it clear that we would enforce our trade agreements, and that I would only sign deals that keep faith with American workers, and promote American jobs. That’s what we did with Korea, and that’s what I intend to do as we pursue agreements with Panama and Colombia, and continue our Asia Pacific and global trade talks.

To reduce barriers to growth and investment, I’ve ordered a review of government regulations. When we find rules that put an unnecessary burden on businesses, we will fix them. But I will not hesitate to create or enforce commonsense safeguards to protect the American people. That’s what we’ve done in this country for more than a century. It’s why our food is safe to eat, our water is safe to drink, and our air is safe to breathe. It’s why we have speed limits and child labor laws. It’s why last year, we put in place consumer protections against hidden fees and penalties by credit card companies, and new rules to prevent another financial crisis. And it’s why we passed reform that finally prevents the health insurance industry from exploiting patients.

Now, I’ve heard rumors that a few of you have some concerns about the new health care law. So let me be the first to say that anything can be improved. If you have ideas about how to improve this law by making care better or more affordable, I am eager to work with you. We can start right now by correcting a flaw in the legislation that has placed an unnecessary bookkeeping burden on small businesses.

What I’m not willing to do is go back to the days when insurance companies could deny someone coverage because of a pre-existing condition. I’m not willing to tell James Howard, a brain cancer patient from Texas, that his treatment might not be covered. I’m not willing to tell Jim Houser, a small business owner from Oregon, that he has to go back to paying $5,000 more to cover his employees. As we speak, this law is making prescription drugs cheaper for seniors and giving uninsured students a chance to stay on their parents’ coverage. So instead of re-fighting the battles of the last two years, let’s fix what needs fixing and move forward.

Now, the final step – a critical step – in winning the future is to make sure we aren’t buried under a mountain of debt.

We are living with a legacy of deficit-spending that began almost a decade ago. And in the wake of the financial crisis, some of that was necessary to keep credit flowing, save jobs, and put money in people’s pockets.

But now that the worst of the recession is over, we have to confront the fact that our government spends more than it takes in. That is not sustainable. Every day, families sacrifice to live within their means. They deserve a government that does the same.

So tonight, I am proposing that starting this year, we freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years. This would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, and will bring discretionary spending to the lowest share of our economy since Dwight Eisenhower was president.

This freeze will require painful cuts. Already, we have frozen the salaries of hardworking federal employees for the next two years. I’ve proposed cuts to things I care deeply about, like community action programs. The Secretary of Defense has also agreed to cut tens of billions of dollars in spending that he and his generals believe our military can do without.

I recognize that some in this Chamber have already proposed deeper cuts, and I’m willing to eliminate whatever we can honestly afford to do without. But let’s make sure that we’re not doing it on the backs of our most vulnerable citizens. And let’s make sure what we’re cutting is really excess weight. Cutting the deficit by gutting our investments in innovation and education is like lightening an overloaded airplane by removing its engine. It may feel like you’re flying high at first, but it won’t take long before you’ll feel the impact.

Now, most of the cuts and savings I’ve proposed only address annual domestic spending, which represents a little more than 12% of our budget. To make further progress, we have to stop pretending that cutting this kind of spending alone will be enough. It won’t.

The bipartisan Fiscal Commission I created last year made this crystal clear. I don’t agree with all their proposals, but they made important progress. And their conclusion is that the only way to tackle our deficit is to cut excessive spending wherever we find it – in domestic spending, defense spending, health care spending, and spending through tax breaks and loopholes.

This means further reducing health care costs, including programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which are the single biggest contributor to our long-term deficit. Health insurance reform will slow these rising costs, which is part of why nonpartisan economists have said that repealing the health care law would add a quarter of a trillion dollars to our deficit. Still, I’m willing to look at other ideas to bring down costs, including one that Republicans suggested last year: medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits.

To put us on solid ground, we should also find a bipartisan solution to strengthen Social Security for future generations. And we must do it without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans’ guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market.

And if we truly care about our deficit, we simply cannot afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans. Before we take money away from our schools, or scholarships away from our students, we should ask millionaires to give up their tax break.

It’s not a matter of punishing their success. It’s about promoting America’s success.

In fact, the best thing we could do on taxes for all Americans is to simplify the individual tax code. This will be a tough job, but members of both parties have expressed interest in doing this, and I am prepared to join them.

So now is the time to act. Now is the time for both sides and both houses of Congress – Democrats and Republicans – to forge a principled compromise that gets the job done. If we make the hard choices now to rein in our deficits, we can make the investments we need to win the future.

Let me take this one step further. We shouldn’t just give our people a government that’s more affordable. We should give them a government that’s more competent and efficient. We cannot win the future with a government of the past.

We live and do business in the information age, but the last major reorganization of the government happened in the age of black and white TV. There are twelve different agencies that deal with exports. There are at least five different entities that deal with housing policy. Then there’s my favorite example: the Interior Department is in charge of salmon while they’re in fresh water, but the Commerce Department handles them in when they’re in saltwater. And I hear it gets even more complicated once they’re smoked.

Now, we have made great strides over the last two years in using technology and getting rid of waste. Veterans can now download their electronic medical records with a click of the mouse. We’re selling acres of federal office space that hasn’t been used in years, and we will cut through red tape to get rid of more. But we need to think bigger. In the coming months, my administration will develop a proposal to merge, consolidate, and reorganize the federal government in a way that best serves the goal of a more competitive America. I will submit that proposal to Congress for a vote – and we will push to get it passed.

In the coming year, we will also work to rebuild people’s faith in the institution of government. Because you deserve to know exactly how and where your tax dollars are being spent, you will be able to go to a website and get that information for the very first time in history. Because you deserve to know when your elected officials are meeting with lobbyists, I ask Congress to do what the White House has already done: put that information online. And because the American people deserve to know that special interests aren’t larding up legislation with pet projects, both parties in Congress should know this: if a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it.

A 21st century government that’s open and competent. A government that lives within its means. An economy that’s driven by new skills and ideas. Our success in this new and changing world will require reform, responsibility, and innovation. It will also require us to approach that world with a new level of engagement in our foreign affairs.

Just as jobs and businesses can now race across borders, so can new threats and new challenges. No single wall separates East and West; no one rival superpower is aligned against us.

And so we must defeat determined enemies wherever they are, and build coalitions that cut across lines of region and race and religion. America’s moral example must always shine for all who yearn for freedom, justice, and dignity. And because we have begun this work, tonight we can say that American leadership has been renewed and America’s standing has been restored.

Look to Iraq, where nearly 100,000 of our brave men and women have left with their heads held high; where American combat patrols have ended; violence has come down; and a new government has been formed. This year, our civilians will forge a lasting partnership with the Iraqi people, while we finish the job of bringing our troops out of Iraq. America’s commitment has been kept; the Iraq War is coming to an end.

Of course, as we speak, al Qaeda and their affiliates continue to plan attacks against us. Thanks to our intelligence and law enforcement professionals, we are disrupting plots and securing our cities and skies. And as extremists try to inspire acts of violence within our borders, we are responding with the strength of our communities, with respect for the rule of law, and with the conviction that American Muslims are a part of our American family.

We have also taken the fight to al Qaeda and their allies abroad. In Afghanistan, our troops have taken Taliban strongholds and trained Afghan Security Forces. Our purpose is clear – by preventing the Taliban from reestablishing a stranglehold over the Afghan people, we will deny al Qaeda the safe-haven that served as a launching pad for 9/11.

Thanks to our heroic troops and civilians, fewer Afghans are under the control of the insurgency. There will be tough fighting ahead, and the Afghan government will need to deliver better governance. But we are strengthening the capacity of the Afghan people and building an enduring partnership with them. This year, we will work with nearly 50 countries to begin a transition to an Afghan lead. And this July, we will begin to bring our troops home.

In Pakistan, al Qaeda’s leadership is under more pressure than at any point since 2001. Their leaders and operatives are being removed from the battlefield. Their safe-havens are shrinking. And we have sent a message from the Afghan border to the Arabian Peninsula to all parts of the globe: we will not relent, we will not waver, and we will defeat you.

American leadership can also be seen in the effort to secure the worst weapons of war. Because Republicans and Democrats approved the New START Treaty, far fewer nuclear weapons and launchers will be deployed. Because we rallied the world, nuclear materials are being locked down on every continent so they never fall into the hands of terrorists.

Because of a diplomatic effort to insist that Iran meet its obligations, the Iranian government now faces tougher and tighter sanctions than ever before. And on the Korean peninsula, we stand with our ally South Korea, and insist that North Korea keeps its commitment to abandon nuclear weapons.

This is just a part of how we are shaping a world that favors peace and prosperity. With our European allies, we revitalized NATO, and increased our cooperation on everything from counter-terrorism to missile defense. We have reset our relationship with Russia, strengthened Asian alliances, and built new partnerships with nations like India. This March, I will travel to Brazil, Chile, and El Salvador to forge new alliances for progress in the Americas. Around the globe, we are standing with those who take responsibility – helping farmers grow more food; supporting doctors who care for the sick; and combating the corruption that can rot a society and rob people of opportunity.

Recent events have shown us that what sets us apart must not just be our power – it must be the purpose behind it. In South Sudan – with our assistance – the people were finally able to vote for independence after years of war. Thousands lined up before dawn. People danced in the streets. One man who lost four of his brothers at war summed up the scene around him: “This was a battlefield for most of my life. Now we want to be free.”

We saw that same desire to be free in Tunisia, where the will of the people proved more powerful than the writ of a dictator. And tonight, let us be clear: the United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia, and supports the democratic aspirations of all people.

We must never forget that the things we’ve struggled for, and fought for, live in the hearts of people everywhere. And we must always remember that the Americans who have borne the greatest burden in this struggle are the men and women who serve our country.

Tonight, let us speak with one voice in reaffirming that our nation is united in support of our troops and their families. Let us serve them as well as they have served us – by giving them the equipment they need; by providing them with the care and benefits they have earned; and by enlisting our veterans in the great task of building our own nation.

Our troops come from every corner of this country – they are black, white, Latino, Asian and Native American. They are Christian and Hindu, Jewish and Muslim. And, yes, we know that some of them are gay. Starting this year, no American will be forbidden from serving the country they love because of who they love. And with that change, I call on all of our college campuses to open their doors to our military recruiters and the ROTC. It is time to leave behind the divisive battles of the past. It is time to move forward as one nation.

We should have no illusions about the work ahead of us. Reforming our schools; changing the way we use energy; reducing our deficit – none of this is easy. All of it will take time. And it will be harder because we will argue about everything. The cost. The details. The letter of every law.

Of course, some countries don’t have this problem. If the central government wants a railroad, they get a railroad – no matter how many homes are bulldozed. If they don’t want a bad story in the newspaper, it doesn’t get written.

And yet, as contentious and frustrating and messy as our democracy can sometimes be, I know there isn’t a person here who would trade places with any other nation on Earth.

We may have differences in policy, but we all believe in the rights enshrined in our Constitution. We may have different opinions, but we believe in the same promise that says this is a place where you can make it if you try. We may have different backgrounds, but we believe in the same dream that says this is a country where anything’s possible. No matter who you are. No matter where you come from.

That dream is why I can stand here before you tonight. That dream is why a working class kid from Scranton can stand behind me. That dream is why someone who began by sweeping the floors of his father’s Cincinnati bar can preside as Speaker of the House in the greatest nation on Earth.

That dream – that American Dream – is what drove the Allen Brothers to reinvent their roofing company for a new era. It’s what drove those students at Forsyth Tech to learn a new skill and work towards the future. And that dream is the story of a small business owner named Brandon Fisher.

Brandon started a company in Berlin, Pennsylvania that specializes in a new kind of drilling technology. One day last summer, he saw the news that halfway across the world, 33 men were trapped in a Chilean mine, and no one knew how to save them.

But Brandon thought his company could help. And so he designed a rescue that would come to be known as Plan B. His employees worked around the clock to manufacture the necessary drilling equipment. And Brandon left for Chile.

Along with others, he began drilling a 2,000 foot hole into the ground, working three or four days at a time with no sleep. Thirty-seven days later, Plan B succeeded, and the miners were rescued. But because he didn’t want all of the attention, Brandon wasn’t there when the miners emerged. He had already gone home, back to work on his next project.

Later, one of his employees said of the rescue, “We proved that Center Rock is a little company, but we do big things.”

We do big things.

From the earliest days of our founding, America has been the story of ordinary people who dare to dream. That’s how we win the future.

We are a nation that says, “I might not have a lot of money, but I have this great idea for a new company. I might not come from a family of college graduates, but I will be the first to get my degree. I might not know those people in trouble, but I think I can help them, and I need to try. I’m not sure how we’ll reach that better place beyond the horizon, but I know we’ll get there. I know we will.”

We do big things.

The idea of America endures. Our destiny remains our choice. And tonight, more than two centuries later, it is because of our people that our future is hopeful, our journey goes forward, and the state of our union is strong.

Thank you, God Bless You, and may God Bless the United States of America.

###

View full post on All Stories

Seattle, WA, United States (AHN Sports) – Washington solidified its place on top of the Pac-10, as the Huskies “Big Three” combined for 62 points to roll their team past Arizona 85-68 Thursday at Bank of America Arena.

Isaiah Thomas once again led Washington’s offensive charge with 22 points, 10 points, and 6 boards, while Justin Holiday delivered 22 points, 3 assists, 2 steals, and a shot block.

Matthew Bryan-Amaning also delivered 18 points, 7 boards, and 3 blocks to give Washington a firm grip on the Pac-10 standing with a 6-1 record (14-4 overall).

It was another highly-competitive Pac-10 match, as the teams traded baskets in the first 10 minutes of the game.

However, Holiday scored five straight points to ignite a 15-5 run, padding the Huskies lead to 10 with 5 minutes left in the first half.

Arizona then responded with a 10-4 spurt to cut Washington’s edge to three points 32-29, but Thomas nailed a momentum-breaking trey to pace his team to a 36-31 cushion at the break.

The second half was a different story though, as Washington began to clog the middle, forcing Arizona to shoot from the outside.

Led by Thomas’ resiliency, Washington simply outhustled Arizona almost every play.

Bryan-Amaning, who scored just four points in the first 20 minutes of play, dropped 14 of his total points in the second half to lead Washington’s big second-half run.

Washington outscored Arizona 49-37 in the final half to secure their sixth win in Pac-10 conference play.

Wildcats leading scorer Derrick Williams recorded a team-high 22 points and 11 boards, while Solomon Hill netted 12 markers for Arizona (4-2), now 1 1-2 games behind Washington in the Pac-10 regular-season title race.

View full post on All Stories