Transcript of Speaker Pelosi’s Remarks at Weekly Press Conference

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi held her weekly press conference today in the Capitol Visitor Center. Below are the Speaker's remarks:

Speaker Pelosi. Black, because today we had the great honor in the U.S. Capitol to honor Woody – Hershel ‘Woody' Williams, the last surviving Medal of Honor winner from World War II – our link to the Greatest Generation. Many, many Medal of Honor winners were present as were members of our military. It was very exciting. This is a man who was 5'6", 135 pounds, and yet, he fought and fought and fought and took out like six enemy installations. And, again, won the Medal of Honor. And when he did, he single‑handedly destroyed enemy positions. But Admiral Nimitz praised his extraordinary heroism by saying, ‘Uncommon valor was a common virtue' at Iwo Jima. That's when he did this. He was a Marine at Iwo Jima. So if you have a moment, you may want to go pay your respects to him. He's lying in state under the Dome of the Capitol, under the flag of our country, which he defended so valiantly. His family is here and, and among his family members, they included with his family, these Medal of Honor winners of multi‑generations.

So this has been a very good week for our veterans. Not only are we honoring our veterans and honoring Woody, we're honoring all of our veterans. He wanted it that way. But also, we passed the PACT Act. We are so excited about passing that legislation. It's a solemn promise to protect our veterans when they come home – which, as you probably know, an initiation of hostilities frequently are these burn pits. They're terrible. I don't even want to tell you what goes into a burn pit, but they're huge, and they are carcinogenic. And many of our veterans – this bipartisan legislation, it was a big vote. We were very pleased with the vote. It ensures that we care for our heroes in uniform who risk their lives and then, not only in combat, but deadly threat of toxins from the burn pits. It provides access to VA health care to 3.5 million potentially exposed veterans. It grants presumptions of exposure to veterans.

Up until now, they've had to have these complicated cases to prove, were they there? And if so, how come – does it necessarily relate to their condition? Well, this is a presumption of exposure for veterans. And it includes something very important you've probably heard about – what went on at Camp Lejeune. This was in terms of the water supply, and it's not just harmful to our men and women in uniform and our veterans, but their families. Again, carcinogenic and dangerous.

So this is a very important – this is special to me, because long before I came to Congress, I'd done sit‑ins and all the rest on Agent Orange in the early '80s with some of the veterans of the Vietnam War. Agent Orange. One of them was attended by Dick Gregory, who helped instruct the protesters as to how to deal with hunger strikes – to keep hydrating and the rest. It's quite remarkable. I loved Dick Gregory. He and my brother served in the military together years ago in Texas, and he wrote about it in his book. So we had a friendship. But in any event, it took a very long time for the Agent Orange issue to be dealt with – with the blue water legislation of just a few years ago. But in our bill, we have some – in our HASC bill, which I'll talk about next, we had some further improvements on that.

So again, these, shall we say, other consequences of war have to be recognized, not just war – wounds from combat, but wounds from exposures.

Again, today, we are caring for our veterans as we defend our security with the HASC bill that is on the Floor, as we speak, with many amendments being voted on. It's going to be a strong bill, hopefully with strong bipartisan support for our Servicemembers. It supports our Servicemembers with a strong pay raise. It strengthens our security, including investments in the next generation of our defense technology. This has been a high priority, both of them, for the Chairman, Adam Smith, who's done a remarkable job. And it supports our democratic partners in values, including an additional $1 billion in security assistance for the Ukrainians. And that, of course, is always on our minds next to our hearts and the rest.

As you know, we are – dealing with the protecting freedom and Democracy in our country when it comes to a woman's right to choose, and as Republicans in Congress are plotting a nationwide ban to nation – to criminalize abortion in all 50 states, Democrats are taking action to defend the right to reproductive freedom, freedom. Tomorrow, we'll pass the Women's Health Protection Act, voting for a second time on this legislation to make the protections of Roe v. Wade the law of the land.

And another bill we'll have tomorrow is Ensuring Women's Right to Reproductive Freedom Act. It's stopping Republicans from criminalizing women who exercise their Constitutional right to travel across state lines to terminate a pregnancy.

Women's health decisions are her own. They don't belong to politicians in Washington, D.C. or in state capitols or in the Supreme Court of the United States. They belong to a woman, her family, her God, her doctor, her loved ones.

At the same time as we are protecting freedom, we want to make our country safe. And House Democrats have continued to work to defend freedom and save lives. Yesterday, we passed the Active Shooter Alert bill. The Active Shooter Alert bill is like an AMBER Alert. It can tell you when there's – in your community, nearby – an active shooting going on. It has broad support from the law enforcement community. Mr. Cicilline has worked for a long time with the law enforcement community on legislation of this kind. If there's an active shooter threat in a school or any public place, a similar system to AMBER Alert will go off. 168 Republicans voted no. If your child were in a school where there was an assault, wouldn't you want to know? How can these Republicans vote no to people knowing that there's an assault in their school or their community centers or wherever? 168 Republicans voted no.

I don't know. These people think their political survival is more important than the survival of our children. We have to do much more. More action is needed to save lives. The Judiciary Committee is moving forward with a markup on the assault weapons ban. They'll have their own announcement on that, but there is great support in our Caucus for an assault weapons ban. It's about our children. More children die from gun violence in each year than cancer, car accidents or anything. How could that be? 168 Republicans voted no – ‘We don't want an AMBER Alert if somebody is shooting up a school nearby.'

Again, we have talked many times here with charts and all the rest about our Democratic efforts to lower costs. Later today, the House is receiving a classified briefing from the Administration on the national security imperative of the COMPETES Act. The COMPETES Act is transformative, lowering costs for families and energizing American competitiveness, bolstering America's national security – that's part of that briefing – and securing America's economic preeminence and much more.

We have also, as I talked about before, worked to get – as we try to get that legislation to the President's desk, we also are continuing to pass bills to lower costs for families. Lowering gas prices – passing our Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act to crack down on price gouging on Big Oil. For lowering food costs – by taking further action to lower gas costs, which have an impact on food costs, because farmers need gas, but also, lowering fertilizer costs for farmers. Increasing competition in terms of meat processing and poultry processing for families. And lowers costs at the pump, as we've discussed: cleaner, American, Unleaded 88. And lowering the costs of everyday goods. Our Ocean Shipping Reform Act – now law, this is now law – is cracking down on exorbitant fees that ocean shipping companies charge, which raise the price at home.

So we want – we recognize the challenge inflation is to kitchen table budgeting for America's working families. We want to lower costs for food, lower costs for fuel, lower costs for many of their expenses – and many of it sprang from price gouging by oil and gas companies. But exorbitant prices by shipping companies, which has an impact on the supply chain. Supply chain is diminished, costs go up – costs go up for families. While Republicans vote against these – and these are mostly bipartisan bills – Democrats will continue to fight inflation and lowering costs for families.

So there's so much going on now. It's – the overturning of Roe v. Wade has initiated legislation that – we will be persistent. We have other bills in the works. The war in Ukraine has increased cost at the pump, and food costs in terms of the – hopefully won't continue for too much longer, but the blocking of food being exported from Ukraine to the rest of the world. So hopefully those – if that war could come to some closure, it would be a good thing for Democracy. It would be a great thing for the people of Ukraine. It would be essential to protecting women and children who are the victims of war in Ukraine, but it also has an impact on the economy.

I'd just close by saying this: I was talking to somebody with knowledge about the motivation for the Russian invasion of Ukraine. And I said, you know, I was there. What just shook me so was – and also here when parliamentarians and grassroots people come to visit us from Ukraine – is the assault that the Russian soldiers are making on little girls, raping 11‑year‑olds girls repeatedly, their mothers in front of them, in front of their grandmothers and all the rest, taking them off to Russia and kidnapping them and the rest.

And I said: ‘You know, war brutalizes people.' It's so sad to see what's happening to these soldiers. And what I was told was: ‘These soldiers are not doing anything they are not instructed to do.' Does that break your heart?

Any questions?

Q. Madam Speaker, about this alleged attempt to undermine the House, this January 6th Committee says Donald Trump tried to call one of their witnesses and maybe interfere. I was wondering what do you think of that?

Speaker Pelosi. I don't really go into the January 6th. I'm very proud of the work that they are doing to seek the truth, but anybody who's been to our meetings knows that I don't go into their work. I keep my distance from it. I'm proud that we have [a] strong bipartisan initiative to seek the truth, find the truth and most – and, as you see, the evidence that they have is from Republicans.

Q. Madam Speaker, on COMPETES – the Secretary of Commerce yesterday suggested a narrower bill centered on the CHIPS part of it. Is that something you could be open to or accept it in face of this impasse from McConnell?

Speaker Pelosi. Well, she said a couple things, I think. She said CHIPS, and then she said CHIPS plus. That's what we're more interested in. But we are – we had been working constantly on the CHIPS bill, and we need to have the transformative nature of research and education and the rest to make us continue to be preeminent in the world. How it shapes up in the next short period of time, we'll see, but we are determined that we will pass a bill.

Q. Madam Speaker. Good afternoon. Is there any reason to think that we won't see a COVID bill here? I mean, you tried to get this into the big spending bill back in March. You thought you might be able to do something in April or May. That's never come to pass. COVID cases are up here. Is Congress ignoring this right now, or is there a way to do this unilaterally or put this into some sort of a spending bill in the Senate?

Speaker Pelosi. Well, as you know, we are a bicameral legislature, and you should probably go ask those questions to the United States Senate, because we have stood ready to have the resources available. Now we have the monkeypox, and that is another call for resources and action. So I think those who may be thinking, ‘Well, let's wait until things get really serious,' on the Senate side, they are getting serious.

Yes, ma'am?

Q. Madam Speaker, I know the House is going to be taking up these abortion measure – measures, rather. Some Democrats have called on President Biden to declare a national public health emergency. Would you support that? Others have also said that his Administration was too slow to respond with those executive actions. Were you satisfied by the Administration's response in the fallout of Roe?

Speaker Pelosi. I have no question about this Administration's support for a woman's right to choose and to take the necessary actions to ensure that. This is something that is core to who we are. It's about freedom. It's about health care. It's about respect for women. And that is something that the President is wedded to.

In terms of a – that's more of a scientific decision and I certainly – we would all be open to that. But the fact is, between now and if that can happen, we can pass the – we will pass the Judy Chu legislation tomorrow, which takes Roe v. Wade into the law of the land and protects it from some of the assaults that have occurred since it became upheld by the Supreme Court.

But I, I wouldn't waste my time on figuring out how enthusiastic this White House is about a woman's right to choose. They're there. And for the first time – 2019, was the first time that we got – had a pro-choice Congress, we had pro – we had a Democratic Majority, but weren't always pro-choice. So we feel pretty confident about what we can do. But most of the – much of it was – sprang from the community itself, from women themselves. And that's what is so – I don't want to say beautiful to behold, because it's so tragic. But so encouraging to see is that women understand this is an assault on their dignity, assault on respect for women to be able to make their own decisions about the size, timing of their family.

And by the way, women's right to choose is a kitchen table issue. Contraception, birth control – they're kitchen table issues. They have an impact on the financial well-being of a family, in terms of the timing, or if a family is going to expand. So this has been – this is something that this President – I have no complaint about it. But we're always impatient. Welcome to our world. There's never been a time when outside groups are not impatient for more. I can say that with some authority, being the recipient of it, but also being the contributor to it. Before I came to Congress, I was Chair of the California Democratic Party. We were never satisfied with what the officials did, timing-wise, intensity and the rest. That's the beautiful part of a democratic system.

Q. I'd like to follow up on that question. Congresswoman Chu's bill has passed the House before, but it continues to fail in the Senate. Are there any discussions between House leadership and Senate leadership for some sort of negotiations?

Speaker Pelosi. What do you mean negotiation? What do you want to negotiate?

Q. Some senators have said that this bill – Senators Murkowski and Collins, for instance, have said that Congresswoman Chu's bill goes too far –

Speaker Pelosi. We're not going to negotiate a woman's right to choose. Senator Murkowski and Senator Collins may have their view, but it is not a view that is one about a woman having the right to decide. So we're not, we're not negotiating that. No.

Q. Are you in discussions with the White House on any further executive actions that can be taken if this bill can't pass the Senate again?

Speaker Pelosi. Well, we are – we're not – people don't like it when we say vote. Vote – in 100 days, people will be voting – less – fewer than 100 days, people will be voting. And we have to elect a couple more Senate – Democratic senators so that we can get around the filibuster, so that we can pass legislation that truly, that truly impacts a woman's right to choose. But there's not a halfway measure. Can't be a little bit pregnant in this. There has to be a real measure that protects a woman's right to choose. And so no, it's not for negotiation. We know. What are you going to negotiate? What are you going to negotiate? Whether a woman can have contraception? Is that a cause for negotiation? Whether people can have birth control? Yes or no? A little bit here, a little bit there. No – this – look, you're in my wheelhouse now, because I had five children in six years and one week. God blessed us with that. And Republicans have sometimes have said on the Floor, ‘Nancy Pelosi thinks she knows more about having babies than the Pope.' Yes, I do. And I think any Pope would agree. And what was a blessing to me is not what should be – something that other people should choose for themselves. That's what we're talking about – is respect freedom of reproductive health for women, and it's not about politicians negotiating that away.

Yes, ma'am?

Staff. Last question.

Q. Trump has indicated that he plans to announce a 2024 run in the next month or so. What impact would that have on the midterms, and would it benefit Democrats, in your opinion?

Speaker Pelosi. Do I ever even mention his name? Would I even waste my time talking about him? What I will say is – and I'll say this, and I've said it again and again: Democrats have absolutely no intention of losing the House in November, and the Senate, too. We are mobilized, we are fortified, we have great candidates and we have a great – our country is at risk. Our Democracy is at risk. But what we are campaigning on are the kitchen table issues that affect America's working families. So they know the difference between a Democratic and Republican Administration on top of Congress, on top of which – on top of which our Democracy is at stake. I don't speculate on who's running in 2024, even if it's a former occasional occupant of the White House.

That's up to the Republicans to figure out what impact it may have on them. But we do know that if people vote, if women vote, women win, and so do their issues. So that's what we're about.

I hope you get a chance to go see Woody Williams, the great American hero. And it gives us a chance, because he would like it that way, to celebrate not only him, but all of our veterans. He dedicated his life. That's why today, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Milley was there, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs McDonough was there, and the Secretary of Defense Austin was there to pay their respects. And that's why – because he devoted his life to helping Gold Star families who had lost loved ones in battle, helped build centers for health care for veterans.

This is a glorious day for us, because this individual was such a manifestation, a personification of our respect for our veterans and our recognition of the debt that we have to them.

Thank you all.