Transcript of Pelosi, House Democratic Leaders Press Conference Today at Democratic Issues Conference

Contact: Drew Hammill, 202-226-7616

Washington, D.C. – Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Assistant Democratic Leader James Clyburn (D-SC), House Democratic Caucus Chairman Xavier Becerra (D-CA), Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Congressman Steve Israel (D-NY), Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), and Congresswoman Donna Edwards (D-MD) held a press conference today at the start of the "Grow America's Economy, Grow American Paychecks" Democratic Issues Conference. Below is a transcript of a question and answer session.

***

Q: I understand the DNC chairwoman got a tour of the city this morning ahead of the convention decision. Were any of you on the tour? If so, what did you see? What are your general impressions about holding the convention here?

Congressman Israel. None of us were on the tour.

Whip Hoyer. We can tell you one thing: the Mayor was very enthusiastic.

[Laughter]

Q: You're going to sit down, you're going to get to see it over the next couple of days. What are your impressions of this city for holding…

Leader Pelosi. We just got here.

Chairman Becerra. It's a great city.

Congressman Israel. We love it. We love it.

Chairman Becerra. LA's not in competition, so it's a great city.

[Laughter]

Q: Madam Leader, I wanted to get your opinion about the Netanyahu invite that Speaker Boehner gave to address the Congress.

Leader Pelosi. I'd be happy to answer that, but I'd like a question about what we're talking about here, if there are any other questions on point to what we're talking about – better infrastructure, bigger paychecks, middle class economy?

Q: You guys talked about rallying around certain messages. What's the team message here on fast track trade, and the President's request?

Leader Pelosi. What I've always said about that is that we'd like to see a path to yes. And until we see what the treaty would be, it's very hard to say, "We're going to give you fast track," until we see what that is. But there are serious questions that people have about what the impact is on the paychecks of American workers. And that's really the standard. And so, Members have concerns about currency, and those other issues. But the impact on the paychecks of America's workers is the standard that we will use. And we will have some discussions about that, maybe not so much here, but on ongoing. And basically, we want them to have that in their minds when they are negotiating the treaties, if they expect us to give them fast track on it. But as I have said over and over on it: I hope to see a path to yes. But the burden is on them to demonstrate that this is good for American paychecks. Anyone else on the subject at hand?

Q: Madam Leader, you said last November, just after the election, that one of your takeaways from that election was that House Democrats need to be more aggressive in setting your own agenda, separate from the Democratic Party. I'm wondering, at the start of the year now, given as aggressive as the President has been coming out of the gates as well, how much of what you'll talk about at this conference will be distinct from what the President is proposing? And also, Mr. Israel, you mentioned the improved polling numbers. I'm wondering how that improves your standing, or trickles down.

Leader Pelosi. Well, I didn't say separate from the Democratic Party. I said we will clearly have our agenda, so people know what difference a Democratic House would make in their lives. And on the rest of it, I'm going to yield to Mr. Israel.

Congressman Israel. Well there's no question. The President, in his State of the Union – he set the table. And now we've got to dish out the meal, legislatively, every day at a time. And that was the perfect launch for a message that we can all galvanize around and mobilize around. And that's precisely what we're going to do now. In the polling, if you take a look at it, there's no question – actually, House Republican numbers have dipped since the election. They spiked a little bit after the election; they have since dipped. They've gone a little lower since the State of the Union. And Democratic favorability is increasing. That's very interesting. And it's very entertaining.

But what is more important is that we fortify the sense – every single day, with our legislative program, and with debate on the floor, and with our message to the American people, magnified and amplified over all of our messengers – that we got their back, and that we are fighting for sustained growth for everyone, not just a few.

Leader Pelosi. And you'll be hearing more from all of us on this subject. We just didn't think you wanted to hear 10 of us every time. So, to be continued. Mr. Clyburn?

Assistant Leader Clyburn. Yes. We've been talking a lot about 50th anniversaries. This – 1965, the Voting Rights Act – this being the 50th anniversary this year. But you know what? We're celebrating a couple other fiftieths that we aren't talking a whole lot about. And we are going to spend some time this year talking about what else happened in 1965. All this discussion about whether the Great Society programs, the War on Poverty really worked. The fact of the matter is, they worked well. Medicare worked well. I opened up today talking with folks from Head Start. They're celebrating their 50th anniversary. Head Start works well. And for us to be talking about the level of poverty – here in Philadelphia and elsewhere – and not talking about how we educate children, and what Head Start does for children – we're going to be talking this year about Head Start. Medicare. This is the 50th anniversary for a lot of good things that Democrats brought to the American people. We're going to remind them of that this year. And those are the kinds of things we're going to be taking to the public when we leave here.

Q: What is distinct or different about the message you're hoping to come out with now that's different than what you ran on a few months ago, that didn't work out so well?

Leader Pelosi. The fact is, as Mr. Israel said earlier, it's not that the Democrats don't have a message. It's that we had too many. The public didn't see the clarity and the focus of the message. This will be more like what we did in "Six for '06," where we had clarity of message, where we had consensus, and we had priorities, and that's how we will go forward. It is going to be a Presidential year. So we have to put on the table what we see as the big contrast in the House of Representatives. The Presidential candidate will go forward with whatever agenda she has…

[Laughter]

Or he. But nonetheless, we feel very excited about the priorities, about the commitment, the unity, the spirit of the Caucus in this – and the understanding that we do not have the luxury of multi-, multi-, multi-message, that the clarity and the precision that we have to have to reach the American people is what is going to make the difference. Because so much is at stake. I think Mr. Hoyer wants to add to this.

Whip Hoyer. Well, I quoted the Governor: "Confidence in our policies, and confidence in our values." Those have not changed. They are consistent. And for the last 75 years, they have made a real difference in the lives of average, working Americans. They were angry in 2014. And they knew that this economy that was growing wasn't working for them. Now, frankly, we were very frustrated about that as well. We wanted to pass a minimum wage bill; we couldn't get it to the floor. We wanted to pass comprehensive immigration reform; we couldn't get it to the floor. We wanted to extend unemployment insurance; we couldn't get it to the floor. And Americans said: "It's not working for me."

What Mr. Israel is saying is that we are going to focus like a laser on making sure Americans know that we are working for them – not for us, not for the government, not for the big high-rollers, but for them. But we have confidence in our policies, and we have confidence in our values. And that's what Mr. Clyburn was talking about, when he looked back at the efforts we have made over decades, and generations, to make sure that we grow paychecks, and grow a better quality of life working people in this country. And that's what we're going to focus on.

Q: I was just wondering, as you focus on, I think middle class, is there an income range that you have in mind? What group specifically are you targeting this message at?

Leader Pelosi. We're talking about the middle class and all who aspire to it. So it's a big range. But let me just say, as we are talking about these things – the elections are challenging, because so much money comes in to suffocate the airwaves with misrepresentations. And it really deters people from coming to the polls. So part of our challenge in the last election was that only one-third of the electorate voted. So the point is that we have to reach people. When they know the distinction, we think they will vote accordingly. Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. talked about, in San Francisco in 1956, about the importance of legislation and, therefore, the ballot. Walter Reuther said that the ballot box and the bread box cannot be separated. Any gains that you might make at the negotiating table can be erased depending on the results of an election.

So we have to show people the connection between the election and their lives. And the fact that a third of the people voted in our country, the greatest democracy that ever existed in the history of the world, the leader, is something that must be addressed, and again, we have to give people a reason to register and a reason to vote. And that doesn't mean giving people a reason to register Democratic and a reason to vote Democratic. It just means to let people who are running for office know that you are watching, and what your priorities are, and that they relate to your income security.

Chairman Becerra. Very quickly, on this point on middle class, because it's a great issue – what is middle class? I don't think we're putting walls up, and saying anyone outside this range of income is not middle class, or is above middle class. It made me think. When I was growing up, my three sisters and I were growing up in a home that was under 700 square feet. I thought I was middle class until the day I drove with my mother to start my first day at Stanford University, and I went through Palo Alto, California. And then I realized, "I still have a lot to hope for to get to middle class." But you know what? You could not have dissuaded me from the thought that, in America, I was in the middle class. And what we're trying to do is, as the Leader said – it's not that you're in the middle class; it's that you aspire to be in the middle class. It's the belief in the American Dream. And that, if you have the chance to get to that American Dream, you're going to be in the middle class, or beyond.

And I think all of us hope that we can go beyond. But we don't exclude anyone. My parents were in the middle class because they could feed us and they could ultimately make sure their four kids could go on to college. But I don't know how many construction workers today could aspire to send their four kids to college the way my father was able to, and that's because the paychecks aren't growing. And that's what we're talking about is – maybe in the mind, but one of these days, you're going to drive and go to college and you're going to see what middle class could look like if we're not careful because everyone should have that chance, not just to aspire, but to be a part of the middle class.

Congressman Israel. Let me just – on that point. Look: the word is "aspirational". Our message will be built on a foundation of aspiration. If you're not in the middle class, we want you to get in the middle class and we want you to move up. If you're in the lower-middle class, we want you to be in the upper-middle class and move up. If you're in the upper-middle class, we would love for you to be in the wealthiest one percent. We're for that; we're absolutely for that. So, it's about mobility more than the middle class. It's about moving you into the middle class and up. And if you are in poverty, we don't want you to fall down on a safety net, we want to build a trampoline for you that's going to spring you back into income security and get you on a track to the middle class.

Whip Hoyer. The point I wanted to make, and I think Xavier and Steve have both made it, but if you look at the past, all classes rose, all classes rose and America was better. What we see now and is a real problem…

[Technical Difficulties]

[Laughter]

That was certainly an accident, as the Leader says. Now, the challenge we have is – we see some of us dong very, very well while others of us – whatever we define them as – are not sharing in America's prosperity. We want to make sure they do.

Congressman Becerra. One last question.

Leader Pelosi. Yes, he has a question. An [economic question].

Q: The President is coming out with his budget on Monday, and I'm just wondering if you can talk about what you're expecting to learn from him about it here. Are you concerned that there will be some surprises in there such as taxing the ‘529' plan?

Leader Pelosi. No, we don't expect that to be in there.

[Laughter]

Congressman Van Hollen. I think – look: the President laid out a lot of his agenda in the State of the Union address. And it was exactly what we're talking about right here, right now, which is focusing on building an economy that works for the middle class and people working hard every day to become part of the middle class. In the State of the Union, we heard a lot of his tax proposals that will help working moms and dads who want to make sure while they're at work, their kids are in a safe and secure place, in a place where they can learn with a child independent tax credit expansion, which is worth $3,000 for every child they have in child care. That's a big deal if you're a middle income family. He has a dual-earner deduction, right, that says: if you're the second spouse, we want to reduce the marriage penalty; we want to make sure that the first dollar in income that you're taxed at is not the same as the last dollar of income your spouse worked at.

So those are all things to help empower people in the middle class and to help people grow into the middle class with respect to the President's investments, which are absolutely critical to growing our economy and growing bigger paychecks, investments in our kids' education, in modernizing our infrastructure for the 21st century, in science and research – whether it's in medical science or other areas – he's going to have a very robust agenda, and he mentioned some of the items in his State of the Union address. With respect to the particulars of his budget, just stay tuned until tomorrow, I'm sure we'll all have a better sense.

[Laughter]

Chairman Becerra. We're going to take only a few more, Madam Leader, because we have a dinner that Mr. Clyburn wants to get going to.

Q: Just quickly on the ‘529' – this is for Leader Pelosi and anyone else – can you talk about your role in helping, kind of nudge the White House away from that position of including ‘529'…

Leader Pelosi. No.

[Laughter]

Leader Pelosi. To be brief.

[Laughter]

Q: Can I get one more? You released a paper statement on the idea that the Republicans are going to sue the President over his executive action. But generally speaking – from your or any of the others – what is your take on House Republicans' approach to the immigration issue? We're talking about a party who said they wanted to expand their appeal to minorities and others. Are you guys secretly gleeful that they're making these moves that could actually hurt their standing?

Assistant Leader Clyburn. I'm not secret about it.

Chairman Becerra. You know, that construction worker I mentioned and his wife were immigrants. They worked very hard to make sure my sisters and I could move forward. That's the hope of every American family. It makes no difference what your background is. And for us to have glee because of anything political going on at the expense of families who are working very hard, that would be despicable. We want to get it done. We think the prescription to get it done right is on the table. Not only is it on the table, [but] it has bipartisan support. And so we would just like to get it done. What we do believe threatens the American family and the American economy and paycheck is these threats to shut down our national security – as Mr. Lujan said – for the purpose of having political security for the far right.

And so, we're ready. We said at the very beginning, we are ready to work with our Republican colleagues to get this done on immigration. Because the prescription is there before us and it's quite honestly not only good for American families, but it is great for the American economy if we get immigration reform done because everyone who studied it, including the Congressional Budget Office – our nonpartisan fiscal referee on these issues in Congress – you increase our GDP, you increase the number of jobs, and you increase the ability of Americans to have security on the job because we'll get rid of all that clutter that makes it impossible for a good employer to know whether you're hiring someone who has a right to work in the country or not. Let's just get it done. Don't play politics, just get it done.

Q: But you know that the President will veto…

Congressman Van Hollen. If I could just add to this last point the chairman made because I really think it deserves emphasis; and I would refer all of you to the House Budget Committee Hearing we had on Tuesday – the first hearing with the new chairman. The first question he asked Doug Elmendorf, the director of the Congressional Budget Office, was: why does the GDP, why does economic growth, after going up – projected to go up in the next couple years – begin to taper off? And the answer from Director Elmendorf was: the major factor was the demographic shift in the United States; the fact that more and more Americans are going to be retiring and therefore retiring from the workforce. So, the obvious follow-up was: well, how can we generate more economic activity and deal with that demographic shift? And many of us pointed out exactly what Chairman Becerra did, which is – the Congressional Budget Office said that the bipartisan comprehensive immigration bill would boost economic growth over the next 10 years and over the 10 years after that, significantly reduce the deficit, and help shore up the solvency of Social Security. So I just want to emphasize that this immigration reform proposal is the right thing to do for individuals, but it's also the right thing to do if you want a growing economy.

Leader Pelosi. If I just may, I wanted to say: in terms of the middle class and all those who aspire to it and the rest, it's really important for their well-being and for the economic security of their families; it's really important for our economy as well. You will see that while so many indicators indicate what Mr. Hoyer talked about – the success that we've had and I won't go into it again in the interest of time – but the successes have been great, but they haven't hit home with many people, to working people [throughout the] country. And the fact that it hasn't has deterred further economic growth. When we give more purchasing power to working families in our country, they spend the money, we inject demand into the economy; it creates jobs. And you ask people who are objective about this and they will tell you that our economic recovery would be more fulsome – we're a consumer economy and we're deterring that by not increasing the paychecks by increasing the disparity in income of our families. But I know that Donna and Rosa have some things to say on this. They'll be talking more on the next [panel] as the rest of us will, but...

Q: On Benjamin Netanyahu…

Leader Pelosi. …Okay, let's hear the question.

Q: Will the invitation be rescinded now that he's speaking so close to the Israeli election?

Leader Pelosi. Well let me just say what the issue is at hand. The issue[s] at hand are the negotiations on Iran's nuclear capability. That is really important to us. Our friendship with Israel is a deep one that we all value. Our relations – U.S./Israel relations – are in our national security interest. Prime Minister Netanyahu is a respected leader, and we have welcomed him on more than one occasion with all of the honors that a guest at our Joint Session would have.

Right before us now, if Israel never existed, is the issue of Iran's nuclear capability. If Israel never existed – and thank God it does, I consider it the greatest political achievement of the 20th century – but if Israel never existed, it would still be a part of our national security interest to make sure that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon. We're in the process of the negotiations. The Administration deserves great credit for bringing together the P-5, the Permanent Members of the Security Council, plus Germany, in unity to participate in the negotiations. We want to give diplomacy a chance. It won't be until the end of March; the extension at this time is until the end of March. And we want to give diplomacy a chance.

The strength of the diplomacy is the unity among those countries, and the message it sends out to other countries. These sanctions are serious; they will be abided by; and our bilateral sanctions, of course, in terms of doing business with the US, strengthen the multilateral sanctions. So let us give that a chance. Now, we have confidence in the President and his negotiating team. We've all said that a bad deal is worse than no deal, that we have not taken any options off the table. This is deadly serious for our national security – stopping the spread of nuclear weapons is a pillar of our national security and our foreign policy. The fact that Israel has proximity makes it more urgent, and therefore, we are working together on that.

On the other hand, in terms of invitations to speak to Congress – the Prime Minister has spoken two times. The only person who has spoken more is Winston Churchill. One of the times, my father was in the room; December 26 – the day after Christmas – 1941, right when we were going into World War II. It's a serious, big honor that we extend. That it should be extended two weeks before an election in a country, without collaboration among the Leaders of Congress, and without collaboration with the White House, is not appropriate. It is not appropriate.

But the bigger issue is, what would that do to the direction we are in now to see how diplomacy will work or not. If it doesn't work, we have to determine a course of action. But our strength in determining whatever course of action that is, I think, springs from the fact that we gave diplomacy a chance. I think that such a presentation could send the wrong message in terms of giving diplomacy a chance. That's my view, and I shared that with the Prime Minister today.

# # #