Transcript of Pelosi Press Conference Today

Contact: Drew Hammill/Caroline Behringer, 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. Good morning everyone. I'm running a little bit late because the Prayer Breakfast ran over. Earlier this morning, as you know, we gathered for the National Prayer Breakfast, a time-honored tradition to gather in faith, fellowship, and humility, as well as prayer. The values expressed by many people at the prayer breakfast, as they led us in prayer, were in stark contrast with the President's unconstitutional, immoral, and dangerous ban on refugees and citizens of Muslim countries coming into the United States.

The President claims this is about security, but national security experts are urgently speaking out. The President's cruel and reckless ban makes America less safe. Over 900 American diplomats have risked their careers to send a message that the President's ban makes America less safe, again, in protecting our nation, and that's our first responsibility: to protect and defend our Constitution and the American people. It requires us to be smart and strong, not reckless and rash.

Three times House Republicans have blocked our emergency bill to rescind the ban. It is called the Statue of Liberty Values Act. We are continuing to explore all of our legislative and legal options to overturn this dangerous ban.

What is making America less safe is to have a white supremacist named to the National Security Council as a permanent member, while the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Director of National Intelligence are told, "Don't call us, we will call you. You are no longer permanent members. We will call you when we need" whatever judgment they make about when they want them to come back.

It's a stunning thing that a white supremacist, Bannon, would be a permanent member of the National Security Council and dismissing the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Director of National Intelligence as permanent members.

You probably are aware of this, but I found it intriguing that House Oversight Committee Chairman John Chaffetz told the Washington Post that he was weighing legislation that, in essence, says: If you're going to have your hands on the nuclear code, we should probably know what mental state you're in.

I can't wait until he introduces that legislation, to be able to join and be a co-sponsor of that. As Mr. Cummings has also said, I think it's a very good idea. I think it's a very good idea.

Again, the public outcry over the President's dangerous ban over the weekend was massive, and the President is clearly eager to shift attention away. You notice that every time something gets hot, he changes the subject. He changes the subject. He's an illusionist: Now you see it; now you don't. So when the heat was turned up by people turning out at airports throughout the country, probably surprised him, he decided to move up his announcement of the Supreme Court Justice from Thursday to Tuesday.

So, on Tuesday night, the President announced his pick for Supreme Court: Judge Gorsuch. He is far outside the mainstream of American judicial thought. In terms of women's rights and Hobby Lobby, the judge singled out women's health for discrimination and enabled employers to meddle into their workers' most intimate reproductive health decisions. When it came to workers and consumers, as a judge and in private practice, he consistently sided with powerful corporate interests against consumers.

If you care about clean air, clean water, food safety, safety of medicine, workers' rights, shareholders' rights, class action suits against fraud in the securities industry; if you care about the enforcement with the values of IDEA, addressing the concerns of children with disabilities and saying, in this case, children with autism should not have access to the same opportunities to reach their intellectual and personal best, this is what he has chosen.

Elections have ramifications. You will all recall what a triumph the marriage equality decision was in the courts. That took action going through the courts. And he has criticized the progressives and condemned those who have turned to the courts to advance LGBT equality. But, again, elections have ramifications. And as he has said, the President has said as far back as June, he saw a list of people who met the standard of the far right for issues that relate to a woman's right to choose, marriage equality, and more, and he made that commitment, which he honored in the worst possible way.

Tuesday, that same day that he made that announcement, also marked the end of the enrollment period for the insurance marketplace under the Affordable Care Act. By Christmas Eve, just to go back a few weeks, 11.5 million people were already signed up, outpacing the year before. And California even extended the deadline for enforcement until February 4th to accommodate the large surge in enrollment. You had to sign up, but you could complete your application another few days.

Republicans continue to try to create uncertainty and sabotage the marketplace. Last week, the Trump Administration abruptly canceled much of the advertising and outreach efforts that helped remind Americans that time was running out for them to complete their applications. This never, contrast this with, many of you weren't here, but when Medicare part D was debated in the Congress under President George W. Bush, we overwhelmingly opposed it, overwhelmingly. It was a giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry, and one of the reasons why our deficit was increased, our national debt was increased take that from the Congressional Budget Office, not from me, because of the high cost and the giveaways to the pharmaceutical companies.

So we opposed it, but it became law, and our offices facilitated the opportunity for constituents to take advantage of it. Our responsibility is to our constituents. This is outrageous that they would say, "We're not even going to let you know what the law allows you to do because we are philosophically opposed."

This is just another example of they're not trying to Make America Great Again; they're trying to Make America Sick Again. This will lead to suffering, death, disability. It is a tragedy. But we are going to make that fight. But, in the meantime, the disruption to the marketplace, because this is a free marketplace oriented event, the exchanges, and any additional uncertainty that is injected there by this administration, it is not constructive. And they want it to be a self-fulfilling prophecy . "See, we did this, so it didn't work, and therefore, it didn't work" not having anything to do with what we did. Make America sick again.

Any questions? Let me see. Let me see a new person. Okay. You.

Q: Have you had any conversations with GOP leaders about the Obamacare replacement and possibly finding ways that Democrats could work with Republicans?

Leader Pelosi. No.

Q: None?

Leader Pelosi. We're waiting to see what they have to offer. The repeal and replace, as I said before, has alliteration, but it doesn't really have the votes. And we haven't seen anything yet. The President says, "It's going to be beautiful, we're going to see it any minute, any second, any nanosecond," but we haven't seen anything yet. But, hopefully, we will, and then we can act upon that, but we haven't seen anything yet.

In the meantime, what is happening across the country is Members of Congress are hearing from their constituents. And it is one thing to pass a bill and say, "This will be good for you." It is another thing to say, "We are taking this away from you." And I think that some of their vocabulary is changing on the subject. They are using words like "rebuild" or those kinds of words rather than – you will hear less and less of "repeal." That is the Tea Party orientation, but not really what we think will happen.

The other part of it is people are seeing the connection between the Affordable Care Act, Medicare, and Medicaid. And in the Affordable Care Act, we prolong the life of Medicare; we provide additional benefits to seniors for free exams that help them be healthier, intervening sooner, closing the donut hole. That means lowering the cost of their prescription drugs. And if you repeal that again, prolonging the life of Medicare for 10 years more of solvency. If you repeal that, you seriously undermine Medicare.

At the same time, in their budget, they want to turn Medicare into a voucher. In other words, remove the guarantee. Medicare is a guarantee. You remove the guarantee, you remove Medicare.

And then, in terms of Medicaid, which is a very important part of this, people think of it in the good way that it is about helping poor children and working parents and the rest, and that is a good thing. But probably a large number of children are taken care of, but probably one fifth of the money is spent on children, because a large amount of money is spent on seniors. Half the dollars spent in nursing homes are Medicaid dollars. This is for middle income families who have spent down their assets and now qualify for Medicaid, and they are in these hospitals. You can also, in case you have grandparents who fall into this category, you can also have daycare. You can drop off your elderly parents or grandparents for daycare under all of this.

But what the Republicans want to do is block grant, shrink Medicaid, and that is something that the Republican Governors in many of the states are arguing against.

So it's not just about poor children and their parents. It is not just about people with disabilities, however worthy. That would be justification enough. It's also about seniors. And it's also about opioids. Don't take it from me. The Governor of Ohio has said, "Thank God for Medicaid because that is going to help us address the opioid addiction."

So, again, I think the Tea Party probably wants to get rid of Medicaid, but I think that that will be problematic in the discussion. But the public has to understand what this means to them, not as public policy or their ideology about no role of government, but what it means to you and to your family and in terms of all of this.

Now, I won't go into all of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act, not only the 20 million people, and growing, who now have access who didn't have access before. But the over 150 million people who get their health insurance in the workplace who now have no preexisting condition being a barrier to insurance, no lifetime limits, or annual limits on their care. Being a woman is no longer a preexisting condition. Kids can stay on the policy until 26 years old. Insurance companies are required to spend 80 percent of the money they receive on health care and meeting the needs of their policyholders, and not advertising, CEO pay growing, and the rest of that.

So, there is a lot of merit in the Affordable Care Act of itself. It is being wedded to Medicare and Medicaid as it was in the legislation. Now, the states, there are only like 111 Members, Republican Members, who are in states that had expanded Medicaid, and they're going to see something snatched away from their constituents. They need to know about that. Some of their Governors are arguing, "Don't touch that."

Q: Leader Pelosi, I wanted to ask you about the Trump Administration's first national security operation overseas in Yemen. I know you get briefed on these things, and you can't talk about classified material, but based on what you know about the operation, are you satisfied with sort of what happened and the green light to go ahead with the raid even though it did result in the death of an American soldier?

Leader Pelosi. Well, Deirdre, I'm looking for more information. The Department of Defense has put out a pretty thorough after action review, which is what you do – the after action review on it.

But I haven't been briefed directly on it with questions that I may have, and I look forward to that. So I don't want to say anything about that right now, except to be sad about the loss of life that happened there and to say that intelligence matters, in terms of actions taken, timing, and the rest of that. You have to be ready.

Q: Do you get the sense that they weren't ready?

Leader Pelosi. I don't know. That's what I'm looking to see. Yes, Chad.

Q: Thank you. I know on opening day or the Inauguration Day, you and the other Congressional leaders were with President Trump in the – over on the Senate side thing there, and one thing I noticed is everyone seemed to be cheery and optimistic and things.

And in the past 14 days, can you kind of describe – and you went through a number of policy areas, ideological areas, Steve Bannon – how has your crest fallen over those 14 days? And is there something specific that is where you're the most disappointed in this President?

Leader Pelosi. Well, it isn't a question of crestfallen. My crest fell on election day. But you're ever hopeful. I don't have great expectations, from what I've heard. But that day was a matter of courtesy. The peaceful exchange of power is a question of courtesy. There wasn't anything jovial or lighthearted about it. It was a question of courtesy. Please don't mistake courtesy for approval or anything else positive.

The next day, I was less crestfallen when – on January 20th, we had the peaceful transfer of power with the inauguration of a new President. The next day, we had the peaceful show of power with millions of women, men, and families turning out across our country and across the world to say: Here we are, we are paying attention, and we have concerns.

Many of them marched to protect our care, so I was very happy about that, but they had other issues as well. It was organic. It was spontaneous. It wasn't organized by any elected officials or political party. It was the people turning out. I thank them for that show of: We are listening, we are watching, look at us.

But, also, I think that that led to people showing up at the airports last weekend. They saw their power, they knew their power, and they said, okay, we'll show up again. Thousands of people across the country and into airports that really didn't have some of the challenges that we have, for example, in San Francisco, Kennedy, and other places.

So that is where you're less crestfallen. And then, of course, on the steps of the Supreme Court, we just had a press conference and thousands of people showed up there.

So I think that you were – you've heard me say it over and over. President Lincoln said, "Public sentiment is everything," and the more the public shows that they are aware of what is happening, the more they hold us all accountable, Democrats and Republicans alike – this isn't political. It's about America. It's about our patriotic duty to be informed and to weigh in and hold people accountable whose decisions affect their lives.

So that is what lifted my spirits, the Women's March, certainly not the Inauguration.

Q: Regarding Rex Tillerson, are you concerned, now that he's been confirmed, that they'll be moved by the White House or the State Department to lift sanctions on Russia?

Leader Pelosi. Well, I would be concerned about it. I don't know – I mean, what the President has to understand is that, when you're President of the United States, your words weigh a ton. So even with your administration putting out "we're going to review that" is really staggeringly dangerous, because the sanctions on Russia because of their aggressive military behavior are very important to our allies in Europe and to global security.

I've visited Ukraine, I've visited the countries and talked to members of the EU about this, and this would so seriously undermine our NATO alliance, as well, if – these sanctions have to be multilateral. And they're hurtful, especially to the Europeans, who have proximity, but the fact is they are necessary.

So there should be no doubt in anyone's mind as to where we are on the sanctions. They're not – what was the statement they said? If they reduce their nuclear arsenal, then we'll lift the sanctions. Sanctions have nothing to do with their nuclear arsenal. They have to do what their military aggression. And that's where the relationship is.

So I'm concerned about it, but, as I've said before, I'm more concerned about what do the Russians have on Donald Trump that he's all of a sudden flirting with the idea that he might lift those sanctions.

Q: Has there been any discussion of legislation to codify the sanctions? I know that there's been discussion on the Senate side.

Leader Pelosi. I don't know of any – the sanctions exist, and I don't think there should be any doubt as to whether they will be enforced. The President has to make that clear. He has to make that clear. Otherwise, Putin will be laughing all the way to the bank and also to the military front.

Q: Thank you. I wanted to ask you about nondisclosure agreements and whether you believe it's appropriate for congressional staffers who are paid by the American taxpayer to sign them to work with the administration.

Leader Pelosi. The question is about nondisclosure agreements, in case you didn't hear that.

No, I don't think it is appropriate at all. And what bothers me, in addition to that, is that nondisclosure agreements on the part of the administration with members of the staff of the House of Representatives is a serious separation of power issue, A. B, it's in keeping with a nontransparency attitude of the administration, where they're saying no tweets from the EPA and other places, jeopardizing the rights of whistleblowers in our system.

And so transparency is a very important value that produces better results for the American people, and what they're doing is shutting down. In fact, they want to shut you down. And I think that our freedom of the press is our biggest guardian of our democracy. And you see this being heralded around the world as a concern that other journalists have in other countries, that nationalist governments coming in there might have the same attitude.

So we're all in this together about openness in government, transparency in what we do. And this nondisclosure is just another manifestation of their suppressing information.

I've had conversations with our ranking member on the committee, Mr. Conyers. They're having a hearing today. I don't know that it's not on this subject, but it may be brought up there. But we definitely cannot ignore what has happened there.

Q: Madam Leader, may I ask you about something that you just said? You mentioned a vocabulary change by the Republicans coming about health care…

Leader Pelosi. Yes, the ACA.

Q: A lot of discussion over this use of "repair." They are pushing back, the Republicans, and saying that's directed at the healthcare system, not the healthcare law. Do you buy that explanation?

Leader Pelosi. Well, the healthcare system is what it is. And the legislation – if we had no healthcare system, we probably would have had a single payer with community health centers all over the country as the bulk of delivery of service to our people. But we do have a healthcare system. And in some of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act, we attempted affect behavior, behavior of how doctors charge, behavior of how safety in hospitals is protected, and how we address disparities among minorities, how we address culturally appropriate approaches to health care, but also how we rely more on technology in terms of electronic medical records and the rest of that.

So the legislation, in order to honor our three pillars, our three goals – which were to expand coverage, which we have done by 20 million, at least, people, and improve benefits, which we have done for everyone in our country, including the 155 million who get their coverage through the workplace, and, third, to lower cost. In all of these areas, we have been successful.

We need to be more successful in lowering cost because – well, we have to address the prescription drugs, which are the biggest increase in our care. But the rate of growth of health care in our country is the lowest in the 50 years they have been measuring it.

So, certainly, as you expand, improve, and lower cost, you're addressing some of the systems of our health care. I named just a few, but the bill is fraught with things that improve – it's value, not volume. That is one of the important principles of the Affordable Care Act. Value, what is – it's not about procedures. It's about progress in the health of the person.

So, in other words, if you live in a place where a person goes in and they receive care but the care is not as value based as it should be and they're dismissed and then they come back – remittances caused a great deal of the cost, increased a great deal of the cost.

So the bill, again, has as one of its priorities value, not volume of services; progress, not number of procedures. So that's really written into the bill.

If they have any good ideas, we'd love to hear them. They've had 7 years to come up with it, and so far all we hear are vocabulary changes and the rest. But hopefully we can find some common ground to go forward.

But we will stand our ground to protect the Affordable Care Act because we believe that it's a right, health care is a right for everyone, not just a privilege for the few.

That's it. Thank you.

# # #