Transcript of Pelosi Press Conference Today

Contact: Drew Hammill, 202-226-7616

Washington, D.C. – Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi held her weekly press conference today in the Capitol Visitor Center. Below is a transcript of the press conference:

Leader Pelosi. Good afternoon. As we all know, in recent weeks the eyes of the world have been on Ukraine. There on the streets of Kiev, people rose up to demand the basic rights and their fundamental freedom. Yet, they were brutally oppressed and their protests were violently repressed. There, in the center of Kiev, a coalition of young and old alike gathered in the name of democracy and economic empowerment. Their own government refused to listen – their public officials tried to silence them. In the United States, in Europe, across the globe we all saw what transpired, we all witnessed the dramatic seemingly sudden changes take hold. We all watched with awe as men and women who were protesters one day rose to the highest levels of power the next. We all saw a nation transform in search of a future of prosperity and justice, democracy, and human rights.

What happened next was troubling, to say the least. Russia's action was a blatant and flagrant violation of international law and of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Following the lead of President Obama and Secretary Kerry – and working with our allies – it must be the position of the United States to continue to lead the response to support the new Ukrainian government and to move Ukraine on a path toward democracy, economic growth, and political reform, and that we just heard from the President is a path that we are on.

Today's bill on the floor of the House takes a critical – that we passed; well, we will pass when we go to the floor – takes a critical step in the right direction with significant loan guarantee for Ukraine. This action, alongside the steps of our allies, will help move Ukraine toward economic security and political progress. Economic security is important everywhere. It will make all the difference in the world in the Ukraine.

But I am disappointed that the measure on the floor does not support the Obama Administration's efforts to work through the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to provide a comprehensive financial aid package to Ukraine to help restore the country's economic health through robust economic reforms. This is important to us for our economy. The IMF supports U.S. jobs, exports, and financial markets. During financial crises abroad, the U.S. leverages the IMF as the first responder to protect our domestic economy by promoting global growth and stability.

The United States led the effort in 2010 to strengthen the IMF after the global financial crisis. Now we are the only country holding back implementation. Congress needs to act. Implementation of the 2010 IMF quota and governance reform will enable the United States to continue to shape global rules and norms that advance U.S. economic interests. All of these efforts are in support of the global economy. Many of them will be helpful to the people of Ukraine, and that is what we want to do: enable them to make their own decisions about their relationships with the European Union and their relationships with Russia. But, it is the decision of the Ukrainian people.

Yesterday in Connecticut, the President powerfully articulated why raising the minimum wage is good for our economy, good for our workers, and good for our long term growth. Increasing the minimum wage to $10.10 would increase wages for nearly 25 million working men and women, lift almost one million people out of poverty, and generate $22 billion in new economic activity. Economists and experts agree that when Americans earn higher pay, businesses benefit, communities thrive, and our nation prospers.

This week the number of Americans cut off from emergency unemployment insurance crested two million people – two million men and women who work hard, play by the rules, and lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Two million people cut off from unemployment benefits. Among those two million were close to 200,000 of our veterans who put their lives on the line to serve our country. We owe them a future and an economy worthy of their sacrifice. More than 150 Members have signed a letter asking Speaker Boehner to allow a vote, just give us a vote on UI in the name of our veterans struggling to find work.

I didn't think we would be talking about this today, but yesterday, the Republicans, just when you think you have seen it all – you have seen a government shutdown, you have seen 199 Republicans vote to default on the full faith and credit of the United States, and now they are bringing it closer to home – they are shutting down debate, and they are trying to shut down achieving anything meaningful for the American people. We have to be creating jobs. That is what the American people want us to focus on. And instead, we are stifling even debate, not bringing bills to the floor like raising minimum wage or extending unemployment benefits. But yesterday was totally outrageous when the Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, Chairman Issa – whose behavior has been outrageous, but even for him, this crossed the line, completely in violation of House rules, totally disrespectful of Ranking Member Cummings. But again, it was about the rules of the committee, it was about shutting down debate. It was disrespectful, and I am pleased that our colleagues today put forth a privileged resolution calling for condemnation of that kind of behavior in the Congress. I can't see how the Republicans wouldn't be running forward to disassociate themselves from such behavior.

In any event, we will be voting on Ukraine, maybe we will be voting on the privileged resolution, but for these and other reasons, I will take any questions you have now because I may have to go to the floor in a moment.

***

Leader Pelosi. Yes, ma'am?

Q: You mentioned the privileged resolution. It was offered by the Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, and Congresswoman Fudge also sent a letter to Speaker Boehner calling on him to remove Issa as Chair. Do you believe there is any element of race in this controversy involving Mr. Issa and Mr. Cummings?

Leader Pelosi. Well, let's just say the behavior was totally out of the question. It was inappropriate and impolite. These are gentle words. This was in violation of the rules and, again, disrespectful of a Member. You would have to ask Mr. Issa what his motivation is except for perhaps arrogance and that – but I know that in the Congressional Black Caucus, there is concern because a previous occasion such as this was when Mr. Rangel was the Ranking Member on Ways and Means, and as you recall, Bill Thomas was crying on the floor as he apologized for what he did that was inappropriate in that committee, and I think that many of the Members of Congress are still stung by the inappropriateness of comments to President Obama on the floor of this House.

So maybe it is just who they are, I don't know. But I don't want to get into whether it is race or not. It doesn't matter who was the Ranking Member. The behavior was totally inappropriate. Yes, sir?

Q: Thank you. There has been a lot of – I know the position of the Democratic Party on all these bills to take care of the health care bill, and so on and so forth – but there is a plan by Pete Roskam now that he has brought to have an inspector general overlooking this. He said there is a lot of money involved in the health care bill. We have had inspectors general for TARP and Hurricane Katrina and so on. Do you think that that would be appropriate? And if not, why?

Leader Pelosi. No. Each of the committees of jurisdiction has oversight, so the congressional oversight is something that I support. Each of the agencies of government that are implementing the law, the Affordable Care Act, have their own inspectors general. I think that the system has enough appropriate oversight. I don't see any reason to go to that point.

Q: Do you think that would just load it up too much?

Leader Pelosi. I think what we are talking about now is 50 times now they have come to the floor with their really relatively – what would you call them? – nuisance, unproductive, do anything but put a jobs bill on the floor – just undermine the Affordable Care Act. And every time the committee acts, and this is appropriate for the committee to act, it is a call time on the agency of government that is supposed to be implementing the law. And part of what they want to do is so monopolize the time of the people who are supposed to be implementing and enforcing the law that it undermines the effectiveness or the timing of it. So I don't support that. I haven't seen it, but from what you describe, I don't support it. Yes, sir?

Q: Madam Leader, do you have an opinion on the sexual assault bills that are working their way through the Senate?

Leader Pelosi. Well, we had in the House what I thought was – Tammy Duckworth, we are very proud of her service in Congress and certainly before that, her service to our country as a member of the Armed Forces – and we had in our Motion to Recommit her two-pronged approach, which said that a person could have a path in terms of the process outside the chain of command or inside the chain of command. If a person felt that it was better outside, he or she could exercise that option, or they could go inside the chain of command. I thought that was the perfect compromise. I think that both of the bills that are on the floor in the Senate make progress.

I think that the chain of command has demonstrated that there is a problem with just strictly going that route. But nonetheless, the proposal that Senator McCaskill has put forth is a good path. I don't want to say that no good things happen under that because they do. But I do support going outside of the chain of command. Any other questions?

Q: When the Speaker was here, he said that he approved of Mr. Issa's action. What do you think about that?

Leader Pelosi. I guess that explains a lot of the behavior around here because you would think they would be heading to the hills away from any behavior like that. That is not who the Republican Party is. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party, we have confidence in who we are. We don't have to shut people down so their views aren't heard. And in fact, Mr. Cummings was speaking to elicit information that Mr. Issa supposedly wanted. Except it might not have been what he wanted to hear, so he shut it down. It wasn't just about being rude, it is about not hearing what you don't want to hear, and that is really abusive, that is abusive.

With all the respect in the world for the Speaker – I think he is a courteous gentleman – he must be under a lot of pressure if he thinks what Darrell Issa did was okay, because it certainly was not. But it is part of the pattern of abuse of power to shut down other views from being heard. It usually takes a more subtle form, which is people are only going to have the witnesses that we know what they are going to say and that that is what we will hear. We are allowed one, sometimes by rights we are allowed one witness, but frequently, the application of time and the rest is such that you have to be very resourceful to have a fair shot in one of their committees.

We did yesterday in the Education and the Workforce Committee. I just reference you that. It is too long to go into here, but I think the Republicans were kind of shocked at the fact that the testimony that came forth was quite different than what they imagined. But, you know, it all fits into their pattern. They are indifferent to the needs of the American people. The people who need unemployment insurance, raising minimum wage and the rest are invisible to them, so it doesn't matter how they conduct business here, because it is not a priority for them to get a job done, to create jobs, to have fairness in their pay and in our workplace.

So that is what the fight is about here. And I am really sorry about Mr. Issa's behavior. I am sorry for him and I am sorry for the Republicans if they think that is okay, but it is totally unacceptable. We look forward to seeing how many Republicans want – when the vote comes up – how many Republicans want to associate themselves with that behavior and think that that is okay.

Q: Do you think it will be ruled in order?

Leader Pelosi. No. No, they will take…

Q: I know, but it has to be – the parliamentarian has to rule if it is in order, first of all.

Leader Pelosi. I think that the people who wrote the resolution knew that it would be in order. I mean, you don't bring a resolution to the floor without consulting with the parliamentarian in advance. They didn't just slam something down and say: it has to be appropriate. That relates to the rules, the facts, and what the suggested comments are on that. I think this one says that his actions should be condemned. It talks about the rules of the Committee and the House, the facts of what happened, and the recommendation, and that is pretty – I think it will be ruled in order. That would be interesting, too, if they were not ruled in order because, again, it conforms to what a Privileged Resolution should measure up to. Thank you all very much.

# # #