Transcript of Pelosi Press Conference Today
Leader Pelosi. I would say good morning. I know it's not morning, but I haven't been to sleep yet since Tuesday morning – Tuesday night. So beware.
As you all know, because you've been there, when we get sworn-in to Congress, we take an oath of office to support and defend the Constitution and the American people.
Guided by the moral, moral strength of [Congressman] John Lewis, our sit?in on the Floor resonated around the world and focused the attention of the American people on the radical and reckless obstruction [of] bipartisan, very popular gun safety bills.
When the Republicans turned off the microphones, we raised our voices. They turned off the cameras; we went to Periscope. They tried to shut down the discussion, and what resulted was a discussion heard 'round the world.
All this trouble just because Republicans refuse to give us a vote on commonsense gun violence legislation overwhelmingly supported by the American people – in the case of one bill, 85 percent, the other, 90 percent of the American people.
The Republican House should have the courage to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and suspected terrorists. No bill, no break.
Well, they then, in the dark of night, left the House, with two more days of work to do, and left it, what, for almost two weeks. Unbelievable. Well, it's not unbelievable.
The point is this. Members have just become totally tired and frustrated of every time we have a heart?wrenching tragedy in our country from gun violence, the carnage that it produces. Whether it's little children, six years old, in Newtown, whether it's these young people last week in Orlando, whether it's churchgoers in Charleston, across the country, you name it, it breaks your heart.
Those families suffer, that can never really be made whole, we hope to give them some hope that their grief and so many of them who are grieving have turned their grief into action in order to get some gun laws passed so that other families are spared.
Every time it happens, we have a moment of silence – a moment of silence that is indicative of the silence that will follow it. How many more times are Members expected to stand for a moment of silence? And we do so reverentially in a deep, prayerful way for the families. But that is not a substitute for the actions that are needed. Book of James, "deeds, not words."
And so you have seen with Orlando and the first anniversary of South Carolina, June 17th, the anniversary, we are stepping into a new world in terms of the struggle. Ever?widening universe of advocates, ever?widening circle of different sectors of our demographics in our country. Veterans forming committees, chaired by Mark Kelly and Gabby Giffords. Veterans – General McChrystal wrote the op?ed about the involvement of veterans in this fight. On any number of occasions during the night, I quoted some of these op?eds relating to the additional diversity engaged in the anti?gun?violence fight and the involvement of our veterans.
So, public safety, public health, protecting the American people is all related. And what do the Republicans do instead of giving us a vote on guns? They passed a really pathetic Zika bill.
It's been four months since President Obama submitted his emergency supplemental request for Zika, four months for emergency – think of that – four months for an emergency funding. And House Republicans have dawdled, delayed, and obstructed, trying to shortchange our response to this virus that threatens to do devastating damage to America's families and children.
You know, we've said it before, some of the children who might be affected by this might not be able to walk, talk, hear, or see. It costs about $10 million to sustain their lives for the short time that they will live – maybe 10 years old. This is malformations. It's sexually transmitted. It's very dangerous. We shouldn't be messing around with some kind of a bill that does nothing.
And it's so bad that they brought a rule to the floor that said no debate on the bill. They knew there was just no case to be made for it, and they knew there was a strong case to be made against it.
So here we have an appropriations bill, the Military Construction?VA bill; they attach this to that. They bring it to the Floor. It is required to have a recorded vote. There is a stipulation as to – there are requirements as to how you handle an appropriations bill on the Floor. They're usually all under an open rule so that you can amend. Now, this is a conference report, so that part is different – but I tremble at the thought of what they'll do next during regular standup bills – this conference report and no debate.
So what opportunity was there for debate on the rule? No debate on the rule. That is not only highly unusual, I have never seen that happen.
The dead of night, without debate, Republicans forced through a radical and reckless bill, more focused on attacking women's health in this bill than protecting America's families. It dangerously underfunds our fight against Zika. It cuts off women's access to birth control and undermines our veterans, as well.
Now, on the subject of it undermining our fight against – it's a false dichotomy to say "I'm not going to pay to prevent and contain Zika," because you're going to have to spend much more money dealing with the after?effects, which are tragic, in people's lives.
So Dr. Fauci said on this subject: If we don't get the money that the President's asked for, the $1.9 billion, that is going to have a very serious negative impact on our ability to get the job done. So that was disappointing.
But, again, I cannot conceal the satisfaction that Democrats have, and, again, working with John Lewis, with the actions of [Congresswman] Katherine Clark and [Congressman] David Cicilline, with the management of it all by [Congressman] John Larson all day and [Congressman] Steve Israel all night, with the Periscope to give us access to the outside world – or the outside world, give them access to us – [Congressman] Beto O'Rourke – let's see – [Congressman] Scott [Peters] and [Congressman] Mark Takano – yeah, Mark Takano.
So our Members were very resourceful. And that just turned us up to a tree that has fallen in the wilderness that no one could hear, we'd just be talking to ourselves in the Chamber, to something that – I think it was 2.6 billion – what was the figure? – contacts, one way or another. So technology has enabled us to communicate [with] social media.
All of this would not have been possible without the activism of the outside groups, whether it's Everytown, whether it's Moms Against Guns; of course, the Brady Campaign, really the leader of all of us in this; Gabby Giffords' group. The list goes on and on. In fact, I was on the phone with a hundred of the groups on last Sunday in preparation for the communication and activism we needed.
So, with that, I'd pleased to take any questions you may have.
Q: Leader Pelosi?
Leader Pelosi. Yes? If I don't associate your voice in your direction, it's because I haven't been to sleep yet.
Q: I'm right there with you on that.
Leader Pelosi. Did any of you get any sleep last night either?
Q: Not much. Representative Lewis said last night that you guys crossed the first bridge, that when you guys come back on July 5th you expect to continue this…
Leader Pelosi. That's right.
Q: …fight in some capacity. Speaker Ryan said earlier this morning that it sets a dangerous precedent for the minority party to –
Leader Pelosi. "Dangerous."
Q: …hijack the floor. What is the next step? Is civil disobedience still on the table? What are you planning on doing when you get back?
Leader Pelosi. Well, our Members – we will be meeting to determine how we go forward. But we are still here. And we will be, as we had ended the debate on the Floor, spoke to our folks outside, and we're so proud of them. Many of them were there overnight and even in the rain, large crowds of people who had been communicating with Congress to the tune of hundreds of thousands of calls and visits.
We'll finish here. Then we have our activism for all of next week. Because we cannot let this – let me be really clear about this. We cannot stop until we get a bill, until a law is passed.
This isn't about politics. It's not about elections. It's not about campaigns. It's about the safety of the American people. We want this off the table. We want to issue a values victory and hope that the Republicans could agree to that. We're watching carefully what's happening on the Senate side now.
So, again, we're a very, shall we say, democratic, with a small "D" as well as big "D," group, and Members will decide what form, what manifestation of opposition to the status quo and positive initiatives. As we go home, something different in different groups, but stay tuned.
Q: Leader Pelosi?
Leader Pelosi. Yes, ma'am.
Q: Democrats obviously reached a new level with the sit?in, in terms of, like, vocalizing your frustration with Republicans and calling for a vote. But you guys have also been vocal on the floor related to the Maloney amendment on LGBT rights…
Leader Pelosi. Right.
Q: …and just standing up more vocally to…
Leader Pelosi. Yeah.
Q: …speak over Republicans. Does this represent a shift in terms of the minority party here in the House and how you guys are going to get your message across?
Leader Pelosi. No. I think you have to just take it on a day?to?day basis.
The effort yesterday, again, inspired by John Lewis, orchestrated by some of our Members, was a reflection of the frustration that we have had and the complete insistence that we cannot go through another moment of silence without taking action – a moment of silence just left there as a moment of denial of the need to do something more.
So I think that you will see more spontaneity as to the form things will take. On the Floor of the House, we were responding, in terms of the Maloney amendment – and, by the way, the Maloney amendment, for those of you who don't know, President Obama issued an Executive Order enabling otherwise?qualified LGBT [workers] to participate in government contracts. Republicans put in their bill a reversal of that, codifying discrimination, in fact. We won on the Floor to remove that until they reversed the vote.
And that's when the activism started. We didn't go to the Floor intending to do anything, except hopefully win the vote. But when they, in a very contrary?to?regular?order way, did what they did, then that evoked a response. So, again, it's the setting that we're in.
But we have to recognize, times have changed. Anything that anybody wants to talk about that happened then and now, it's all different. Technology has made – and you know that better than I, generationally and in your professions – has made a tremendous difference in how, in real time, information is conveyed to the largest number of people, evoking a response. And that's what you saw yesterday.
So we'll take it one issue at a time.
Q: Leader Pelosi?
Leader Pelosi. Yes, ma'am.
Q: Does your agenda on pushing gun legislation supercede the need to finish or continue work on appropriations bills? And if so, where does the process stand as the fiscal year is drawing to a close?
Leader Pelosi. Well, the problem with the appropriations bill is this bill that they brought to the floor was a terrible bill, with or without the gun issue. And they insist on putting poison pills in the appropriations bills, knowing that they are doomed, that the President will not sign them and that we will sustain a veto.
So it really behooves them – and this is contrary to our tradition. As you know, or you may know, for many years I was an appropriator, so I'm of that culture. We try to find compromise, we try to find sustainability. I might like my way better, but if we change it a bit, is it more sustainable, is there more a sense of community in getting the job done? It's always been the Appropriations Committee, but it's always been the appropriations community. Now it's become a policy vehicle for poison pills.
And so that's not about guns. It's about what the bills are. And, in the past, our appropriators have always been able, including last year, to come up with bipartisan appropriations bills, of the bills that we passed, and then a higher pay grade weighs in and sprinkles it with poison pills. And that's the problem. But appropriators have usually done a good job to be appropriate in what they do.
Let's see. All right, yeah. I'm trying to, in some ways, reward those who are around on all these issues and not newcomers.
Yes, sir.
Q: Madam Leader, you condemned the Republican Party for inability to govern because of Tea Party activists.
Leader Pelosi. Yes.
Q: Are you worried that you're opening the door to a similar activism among your party…
Leader Pelosi. No.
Q: That wouldn't be able to govern?
Leader Pelosi. No. I think almost every Member, except maybe just a handful of our colleagues, participated in this. This is not a fringe element, as the Tea Party – I say it's a fringe element. I think it probably has more element than fringe. But, in our party, this was consensus on the part of our Caucus to go forward.
There were those who were prepared to go to jail. I mean, there were other suggestions along the way. But this worked better. This worked better.
No, I'm proud of our Caucus. And as I said to you before, when people ask me all the time, how do you keep the Democrats unified when they're so different from each other, I say, I don't unify them, our values unify them. And our values unified us on the floor of the House all night.
Yes, sir. What do you got?
Q: Madam Leader, thanks for taking the question. This is something you can particularly answer, as we reminisce about when you turned the cameras off on the Republicans. Do you think that rule is obsolete?
Leader Pelosi. Well, you know, we allowed them a lot of time. What we were doing yesterday was largely in recess because they just weren't…
Q: Well, the question is about the rule itself, though. Should the Speaker have the control of the cameras?
Leader Pelosi. I'm sorry?
Q: Should the Speaker have the control of the cameras?
Leader Pelosi. Well, it's almost irrelevant now because technology enables Periscope to take us out. But the control of the House [cameras], yeah, that belongs to the Speaker. But the Speaker needs to recognize that the world has changed and there are other ways to get the message out in real time to a broader audience of people that would probably never be watching C?SPAN, a broader audience than anybody that would ever be watching C?SPAN. But getting it to C?SPAN enabled it to have additional visibility. But the large numbers of people watching it were watching it on their own technologies.
Q: So would you treat the rule as obsolete if you were to…
Leader Pelosi. What rule are you talking about?
Q: The rule about the Speaker has control over the cameras that govern the floor of the House.
Leader Pelosi. I never even think about that. It's just irrelevant. I think that that's something that…
Q: But you had to break the rules.
Leader Pelosi. Yeah, the Speaker has awesome power. The Speaker has control of the lights, the heat. It was freezing in there last night. It was freezing. People were starting with sweaters and then blankets, and then I think they were practically having rugs because it was freezing in there. That was one way, but we would not be deterred.
One more.
Q: The Supreme Court's deadlock this morning means that Obama's Executive actions on immigration will not go into effect. Is there anything else he can do, with that in mind, to energize Latino voters ahead of this election?
It was in 2012, during the summer, that he first launched DACA, so it's not too late to do something. Is there anything else, maybe a smaller?scale executive action that he could take?
Leader Pelosi. I'm certain the White House is probably investigating those possibilities. From what I know – again, I haven't paid all the – I haven't read the documents yet because I haven't even been to sleep – it was a disappointing setback for hardworking immigrant families. It delays the implementation of measures to help those immigrant families.
I think it's important to know that we believe that the Court was wrong. I'd remind you that President Reagan and President George Herbert Walker Bush did more by executive order – percentage?wise, affected more families by their executive actions than President Obama. It's hard to understand why this Court would say it was okay for President Reagan and President Bush, it's not okay for President Obama.
But I believe that a court will ultimately prevail because the law is on the side of the President, the legal authority. The precedent is there.
But this decision today does not set a precedent. It does not set a precedent. It applies only to DAPA and expanded DACA – ‘DAPA' meaning the parents and ‘expanded DACA' being since 2010 – not to existing DACA. So the President's executive order on existing DACA still can be enforced, and, generally, other pieces of the President's immigration agenda have not been affected.
But, anyway, we really need to pass comprehensive immigration reform. Again, I think we have the votes to do so. We just need the Speaker to give us the signal to take up the vote. Same thing with the guns. Just give us a vote. We believe that we can prevail, because the American people overwhelmingly support these positions.
But I'm not happy about the decision, but once it was 4?4, it was – 4?4 means, you know, it goes back to the lower court. But I do want to point out that it wasn't as pervasive of all of DACA, just the parents and since 2010. Not to minimize it, but just to define what it is.
And, again, and I've said to you before, the President acted because Congress did not act on immigration. Way back in the '80s, Congress did act, the Immigration Act of 1986. It was a very significant immigration bill. Congress acted.
And President Reagan, to his credit, said, "You didn't do enough, so I'm instituting a Family Fairness element of it." And he and President George Herbert Walker Bush did just that. Higher percentage of people affected than the Executive actions of President Obama.
I don't know what that tells you, but, nonetheless, I think the election will help with that because it has evoked such a high registration of people in the immigrant community. That would be Asian?Pacific American, Hispanic, African, Caribbean. All kinds of immigrants to our country are affected by it.
Q: So you don't think that these programs not going into effect will de?energize any of those communities?
Leader Pelosi. No, no. I think it's an energizer. I think it's an energizer. I think, to the contrary, I think it's an energizer. But I always see things a little differently.
No, I think it's an energizer. It says the President did what the President, by law and by precedent, had the right to do. To send it back, we need a full Court, and we need – we really do need comprehensive immigration reform.
And you're talking about it in this respect. We just had some meetings in the tech community. They want immigration. Every group that you meet with, one way or another, keeps talking about the need for comprehensive immigration reform.
The only people who don't seem to get it – and, again, widely popular in the public. The only people who don't seem to get it are the Republicans in the House.
But, hopefully, we can change that. I'd love to take both of those issues off the table, to have immigration reform done, have guns done, and not have them be political. Because I don't really think of them as a difference of opinion on the spectrum of what is the role of government, and Federal and local. This is just about policy that has been – again, a Republican President, under President Reagan, it was passed. So it isn't partisan in terms of the Democrats.
In any event, thank you all. Thank you for – I never saw the gallery so full. We really kept you up late and during the night and all the rest. I mean, except for a State of the Union or a visiting dignitary maybe. But thank you for your interest.
And we have six pages – they gave me six pages today, six small?print full?pages listing of newspapers around the country where the sit?in was on the front page. I thank you for that.
Thank you all. Bye-bye.
Q: Did you go to game 7?
Leader Pelosi. I congratulated Cleveland. I know it's a real boost of morale for them. We've had a great season. I'm proud of our team. And that's it.
Q: Were you there?
Leader Pelosi. Yes, I was. I was there.
Q: That must have been fun.
Leader Pelosi. With 53 seconds, 89?89.
But you can't help but be happy for a city that wins. I mean, I would like it to be our city, but I felt some joy for Cleveland. Although I'm sad about our not winning, because I think we're the better team. But we can take it up next year. Onward to the Giants.
Q: Even year.
Leader Pelosi. Thank you.