Transcript of Pelosi Press Conference Today
Contact: Drew Hammill/Evangeline George, 202-226-7616
Washington, D.C. – Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi held her weekly press conference today. Below is a transcript of the press conference.
Leader Pelosi. I'm just running a little bit late. I just came from a memorial service for Harry Wu. His passing in April took us all by surprise. We were shocked and saddened by it.
He was such a champion for human rights in China, always reminding us that we lose all moral authority to talk about human rights anywhere in the world if we do not talk about them in a place where we have a big commercial relationship, a place like China.
He also reminded us constantly as he worked to spread the word about the Laogai, the labor camps where torture, hunger, and forced labor were the order of the day, and making products for sale in our own country. He gave us evidence of that over and over again.
What he said was – he was a prisoner for 19 years – the most excruciating form of torture by the prison guards to the prisoners was to tell them nobody even knows you're here, they don't even remember you, they don't know why you came here. And for decades I had worked with him to make sure that the prisoners know that they are not forgotten.
Harry will not be forgotten. He will be sorely missed, Harry Wu.
So tomorrow, May 26, we are leaving again, not to come back again until June 7, without doing the job the American people expect us to do. I keep reading in the paper and see on TV about dysfunction in the Congress. This isn't about dysfunction in the Congress, it's about dysfunction in the Republican Party. It's about obstruction, reckless Republican obstruction of getting the job done for the American people.
Republicans are blocking any action on the subject of Flint: Republicans are blocking any action, including yesterday's vote to block consideration of the Families of Flint Act to help the thousands of children facing lifelong damage from drinking poisoned water.
On opioids, Republicans have voted twice to block the $600 million in fully paid for, vital new resources to address the opioid epidemic that kills 78 Americans every day.
They passed all these number of bills, which are nice, but as I said to you before, that's a conversation. What we need are the resources to implement the recommendations of the legislation that has passed here. We'll go to conference, and hopefully the necessity to add resources to the words, money to the words.
And this isn't about spending, it's about investing. It's about saving lives, saving money, and saving families from the horror of the family member dying from the opioid epidemic.
Zika. If you knew about something that could be very dangerous to the population of your country, if you knew from scientists that there were some actions that needed to be taken in order to stop it, if you knew further that this epidemic was something so new and strange, that it was spread sexually, that the mosquitoes that spread it didn't even have to bite other people, just other mosquitoes could bite you and spread it, this is really an amazing thing.
But most importantly, if you knew that being bitten by one of these mosquitoes, or another mosquito following up on it, your child would be born severely malformed, probably not be able to walk, talk, see, or hear, and that it would cost about $[10] million to care for that child, wouldn't you want to act upon that evidence? Wouldn't you want to do everything in your power to prevent the American people, and honoring our responsibility to the world, to stop an epidemic of that nature? You would, I think. And we would need to act immediately, because the mosquito season, the hotter it gets, the worse it gets in terms of mosquitoes breeding and spreading the epidemic.
Instead, we are in a conversation that is so unexplainable to anyone else, that we are going to take the money from Ebola, but it probably won't be ready until we finish the appropriation process, which could take months. And by the way, we are leaving again for another, May 16 to June 7.
I really call upon our friends in the media to be ambassadors for your own families, for your own children, for your own selves about this. There is no way to explain, except the anti‑science, anti‑evidence, anti‑data attitude that is rampant among the Republicans in Congress, that they would not act upon the best advice.
It's been how many, like 90‑some days since the President asked for the funding for Zika? How many days has it been, 87, something like that, since the President asked for this money for Zika? And we have this process‑oriented, I don't know what response to it. But every day we could save more lives, and we have to, we have to act upon that.
But as I say to all of you, you have a responsibility, too, to get the word out so that we can stop their obstruction of money to go forward, the investment that's going to save lives, save money, and save hardship for the American people. Again, it's more than 90 days between when the President submitted the emergency supplemental request to fight Zika. This should be an emergency supplemental we bring to the floor, pass the bill, have scientists act upon this.
Republicans, again, have had time for almost five weeks of recess in this spring period, no time to act on the crisis with the urgency and seriousness it deserves. And now they are prepared, the Republicans, to close down Congress again from May 26 to June 7.
Instead, House Republicans have been focused on a pesticide Trojan Horse bill, call it one thing, have it do another, reviving something they called the Zika Vector Control Act, a longstanding and really cravenly repackaged Republican effort to gut the Clean Water Act that will do nothing to protect Americans from Zika. Just say the Freedom to Consume Pesticides Act for your children.
They found time to strip D.C.'s budget autonomy, forcing the Republicans' dysfunction onto the people of D.C. When Republicans can't pass a budget themselves, they want to force their dysfunction on the District of Columbia.
They find time for their select panel to attack women, continuing a Republican campaign of misinformation and intimidation which has not been seen in Congress in, I will say it again, since the days of Joseph McCarthy. I am so proud that yesterday 181 House Democrats called on Speaker Ryan to disband this panel.
And then they have their systematic attack on the LGBT community, breaking their own procedures. They are now saying that they are changing the rules, that you have to go up in advance and print it before someone can bring an amendment to the floor. This is supposed to be an open rule. So, again, what are they hiding? What do they want to obstruct? Again, obstruction. Apparently want advance notice any time there is a vote about where they stand on LGBT bigotry.
On Friday, I am so proud of our President, will again show the power of his moral courage when he visits Hiroshima. I had the privilege when I was Speaker to go in 2008 to Hiroshima as part of the Speakers of the G8 countries, all of us plus – then it was G8, and then plus the European Union Parliamentarian – to lay a wreath at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park.
It's so in keeping with his work, his global leadership to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. It's testimony to the U.S.‑Japan friendship, which has been advanced by the relationship between President Obama and Prime Minister Abe. I'm very proud that the President is doing that.
I'm pleased to take any questions.
***
Q: Madam Leader, some of your colleagues in the Senate, through reports, have expressed that Debbie Wasserman Schultz as chairperson of the DNC is perhaps too toxic for that position. A lot of are worried that she can't unify the party after what has been a very divisive primary. Are you confident in the abilities of Debbie Wasserman Schultz to be the DNC chairperson?
Leader Pelosi. I put out a statement yesterday that said that Chairwoman Wasserman Schultz has the respect of her colleagues for her efforts and her leadership to unify the party and to win the election in November.
Q: And for you as well?
Leader Pelosi. That was my statement.
Q: Madam Leader, on the issue of Representative Maloney's amendment that he plans to reoffer on the Energy and Water bill, I wonder if Democrats see this as an opportunity to draw specific attention to another split within the Republican Party and force Republicans on the record specifically on this issue ahead of the election.
Leader Pelosi. No, I think it's an attempt on the part of the Democrats to honor what the President did. I think the President, rightfully so, put forth, took his administrative action to make sure to end discrimination in terms of government contracting, and we support that. And that's what Congressman Maloney's initiative is about.
I'll be very honest with you, when he put it out the first time and then he announced plans to do it the second time, this is his initiative, his courage, and we support him in it. But this isn't the plan of Democrats.
Q: What do you say about Republicans who worry about adding this onto the appropriations process complicates the ability to pass appropriations bills?
Leader Pelosi. Oh, my goodness, I'm so glad you asked that question. They of the poison pills? They of the so many poison pills that it's almost like an opioid? I don't mean to make light of that. It's almost its own epidemic of poison pills in the Congress. They wouldn't think of saying that. They would not think of saying that. Well, you never know. No, I don't think that's a legitimate thing for them to say. That's what I think of it.
Q: Madam Leader, I wanted to follow up on Luke's question here. Look, the Sanders wing of the Democratic Party is really clashing with so‑called the establishment wing. Do you think Debbie Wasserman Schultz has done a proper job of sort of navigating that and quelling unnecessary conflict?
Leader Pelosi. I think that some of the unrest and unease that is out there among some people, and I don't see it as Bernie versus Hillary, I think it's just some unease that is out there, some of it spoken by one side or the other. But there is unease about this election process.
You don't want to go down this path with me because I have chaired a convention, I have chaired a host committee for a convention, I have chaired the Delegate Selection Compliance Review Commission, before your time, but that's really what's called the Delegate Selection Commission now. I have chaired a platform. I have done everything you could do for a convention. And there is always unease in the ranks – what's in the platform, how the delegates are selected, who calls the shots as to who gets seated. That's part of the Democratic Party.
I do think that this unease says that the Party should revisit the delegate selection process.
Q: Right. So has the chairwoman fallen short in her role…
Leader Pelosi. I don't know why we're spending so much time on the chair of the Democratic National Committee. I don't know what the point is. I haven't had the conversations with both Senators.
I thought it was one Senator. You're saying Senators. I thought it was one Senator, who shall remain nameless. I don't want to engage in a conversation about what one Senator, who shall remain nameless. All I'm just saying is in our caucus we see a hard‑working chairman.
Now, I have been a long time, for 20 years, a member of the Democratic National Committee. We thought we had some influence as to who would be the chairman of the party. We know it's up to the nominee. I think that this is not helpful in terms of unifying the party.
Q: Madam Leader, on Medicare drug spending, the administration proposed a plan to deal with Medicare drug spending. Some House Democrats wanted to join Republican efforts to kill that proposal. Did you discourage House Democrats from signing on to that letter with Republicans?
Leader Pelosi. Well, we had a better path. We had Richie Neal, who has been an expert on this subject for a long time, put forth another letter which really did address the situation. And there is some education that needs to be done among all of us. We can learn from each other on this subject about it.
But you know what the point is. The point is that nothing is increasing the cost of health care in our country more than the escalating cost of prescription drugs. That is one place where we can do more. We should have done more in the Affordable Care Act. The Senate went its own way on that.
It's a complicated issue, but now the administration is trying to contain the costs of prescription drugs and in a way that may or may not be understood fully by everyone, and that's what we have to meet and talk about. Some hospitals are affected, but other hospitals are saying the cost of prescription drugs is what drives up their cost. So this is a conversation we have to have.
But one thing is for sure: The cost of prescription drugs must be contained for the good health of the American people.
Q: Madam Leader, you might not have seen the report from the State Department Inspector General, but it does raise some questions about whether or not Hillary Clinton should have had this server and so on. Obviously, Republicans are piling on. It does say that there are issues where she followed some of the same practices of previous Secretaries of State.
Leader Pelosi. That's right.
Q: But what is your take? I mean, what are Republicans going to do with this issue, number one, and what should she have been doing in good conscience regardless of what the State Department rules?
Leader Pelosi. Well, I think that Secretary Clinton did act in good conscience. I haven't seen the report because it just came out this morning, but I do see a statement from the ‑‑ what I see in what you all are writing and also what the Government Reform Committee has said, and that is that what Secretary Clinton did was consistent with what other Secretaries of State have done, including Colin Powell. The report itself references longstanding systemic weaknesses that go well beyond the tenure of any Secretary of State.
And she has released, by the way, she has released her emails. The others have not.
Yes, sir?
Q: On Zika, you have these two bills in two different chambers with two very different numbers. A compromise was suggested that you would fall somewhere in‑between. I know you have said that even the higher number is not enough. And you have said that is half a shoe, so it's unpalatable. Is half a shoe not better than zero shoes? I mean, what if you get nothing?
Leader Pelosi. Would you want to walk across anyplace with half a shoe? You just can't do it. People like to say half a loaf, oh, well, half a loaf. No, you can't get there from here. The administration asked for a number that had a scientific justification and urgency about it. So for the Republicans to take it down to one‑third of what the administration asked for is ridiculous. And also to say it has to be paid for, take it from Ebola, take it from other things, that's just not right. That's not good for the good health of the American people, and it's not a good investment that will ultimately save us money by keeping people well.
In terms of the Senate, the 1.1, it's 1.9. That's what the scientists tell us they need for prevention, for vector control, for research. So why are we talking about a lower number? And why are we talking about doing it in the appropriations process, which takes a long time? Eighty‑seven days, almost 90 days the President asked us. We should have had an emergency supplemental which took this forward. And now they're saying all this has to, you know, on the House side, all this has to come under the caps.
To its credit, the Senate bill at least makes it emergency spending. But it's not enough. It's not enough. So it's not a question of I'll low ball it and then we'll compromise somewhere in between so we'll get to, like, 40 percent of what we need. It's just not right. What is the justification for that? What is the scientific justification for doing less than we need to do to protect the American people?
They're telling people, women of child‑bearing age, cover yourself up, go buy a mosquito net, cover yourself up with it all summer, wear long sleeves, long pants, and a mosquito net so that you don't get bitten by one of the Zika mosquitoes or another mosquito who bit somebody who was bitten by a Zika. This is very dangerous, sexually transmitted. Just to get right down into it, you don't know how long that Zika virus lives within the male of the species. That means, gentlemen, [you here], and how long that could be sexually transmitted.
This is very dangerous. It's a small price to pay for the good health of the American people. Why are we nickel and diming a request that can stop the malformation of babies conceived at this time? Why are we nickel and diming that while we're giving tax cuts to the wealthiest people in our country so it can trickle down maybe, special interest tax cuts in our tax code, when we are talking about the appropriate amount of money to get this done.
Q: That all said, where is the leverage in your "no" vote if you oppose it? I mean, you've got this bipartisan proposal in the Senate.
Leader Pelosi. Whatever that is, it's not going to happen for months. Time is our leverage. You are our leverage, the American people understanding what this is.
We don't want to be fearmongers, we don't want people to be frightened. But the scientists are telling us the mosquitoes are coming, the Zika virus is coming. It's a virus transmitted by a mosquito. This is a whole sexually transmitted and causing malformation in babies. This is a big challenge.
And say the money, we're even, and they said we're going to give you all the money you want in October. What? Why? How do we expect to meet our responsibilities to the American people?
Anything?
Q: Leader Pelosi, I just want to follow up on the discussion about the DNC chair, because it is more than just one Democratic Senator, it's both campaigns now acknowledging…
Leader Pelosi. I don't know about that.
Q: Well, having the Congresswoman in that role, they're saying, is complicating their efforts to unite the party. Fair or not…
Leader Pelosi. Both campaigns are saying that?
Q: CNN is reporting it. Fair or not about whether…
Leader Pelosi. I'm not aware of that. I can't answer a question on something I'm not aware of.
Q: But if she is perceived to be not necessarily being fair, doesn't it hurt the party's efforts to unite, and isn't it time to put somebody in the role that both sides can accept?
Leader Pelosi. Let me just say this. We've got Zika, we've got Puerto Rico, we just finished with TSCA last night, which a million phone calls all weekend. We're trying to do the appropriations bill where we come to a beautiful agreement in a bipartisan way until they pile their poison pills in.
We on the Democratic side are trying to impact in a positive way for the American people what is happening here and to stop some of the dangerous proposals they have put forth in terms of pesticides in the water for our children, not adequately responding to Zika, et cetera.
I don't spend a whole lot of time on the Democratic Party politics. I haven't even gotten myself involved in the Presidential. So I'm not a good person to ask about this.
But I do know that what is going to unify our party, just as it unifies the Democrats in the House, is the values that we share, the concern that we have for the well‑being of the American people, that we are here to win the election, elect a Democratic President and Congress, so that we can give the leverage back to working families in our country. Give them the leverage instead of having it be always a trickle down at the mercy of the high end.
And this is about campaign finance reform to reduce the role of money in politics. This is about truly addressing the costs of higher education and addressing the needs of those who are carrying high interest rates. It's about protecting Dodd‑Frank from the daily assault that is made on it here to weaken it. It's about staving off attempts by some who would like to take us back to September 2008 when we had the serious meltdown as a result of the policies of the Bush administration, which they were trying to keep from the American people until a new President was elected and blame it on the new President.
So we have important challenges here that this election is about. I'm not going to get involved in conversations about personality. I told you that Debbie Wasserman Schultz has the respect of her colleagues in the House for her hard work to unify and to win the elections. The Democratic National Committee and the nominee of the party decide who will be the next chairman of the party.
I would suggest, as one who has some experience in the party, that they take a look instead at what the unease is about, and the unease is about how delegates have been selected and what weight they have.
And just to give you a little tidbit, for 30 years I have been against superdelegates. So that's my thinking on the subject.
In any event, I have to get back to work before we leave here again, but we will be working over the break to try to inform the American people.
And by the way, this is not about Democrats versus Republicans. This is about Congress doing the right thing by our responsibilities to the American people, for example, on Zika, on opioids, on Flint. These challenge us to do the right thing, to make investments that save money and save lives. We are determined to get that done.
I hope you can help us, especially on the Zika – I mean, all of them are equally important. The Zika is growing, and we have to put a stop to that. I'm very, shall we say, concerned, I'm concerned about it.
Thank you all very much.
Q: Not crowing about the Warriors. Did you talk to the Appropriations subcommittee chair, Tom Cole?
Leader Pelosi. I'm a believer. I'm a believer. I'm a believer. I'm a believer. I'm a believer.
Q: Thank you.
Leader Pelosi. Thank you.
# # #