CNN "Newsroom" - Transcript: Interview with Pramila Jayapal

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

CAMEROTA: And let's talk more about the Biden agenda with the chair of the Progressive Caucus, Democratic Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal.

Congresswoman, great to have you.

REP. PRAMILA JAYAPAL (D-WA): Great to see you, Alisyn, yet again.

CAMEROTA: You as well.

So let's get some answers to that.

First of all, I just heard you say on a different news network that you had had conversations with Senator Kyrsten Sinema. And can you just tell us about what those conversations were and if you got Senator Sinema to detail any of what her demands are?

JAYAPAL: I don't want to overplay it at all. I had one conversation with her. And it was a little while ago, just maybe a week-and-a-half or two ago.

And I'm not going to reveal what we said in that conversation. But I think she's very clear. She's negotiating with the White House. And I think that's important, because, obviously, this is the president's agenda, and we are going to make sure that we enact it.

But he's an important person in this to really bring along those two people that are still holdouts.

CAMEROTA: Well, the reason that I asked you about this is because I had heard you say that you hadn't gotten counterproposals from the two moderates, the moderate Democrats Senators Sinema and Manchin.

And why haven't you gotten those yet?

JAYAPAL: Well, Alisyn, they don't -- from what I have heard, they don't agree with each other on everything either; 98 percent of us do agree. And so we're waiting for the two of them to agree with each other and then to submit a counterproposal.

And I'm not sure why it's taking so long. But, obviously, this is a moment where we're all in agreement. So, if somebody else has a different proposal, they should put it on the table.

But it doesn't make sense for us to continue to negotiate against ourselves. All of that said, we have gone back through. And we have prioritized, as the Progressive Caucus, five months ago. We said these are the five things that we want in this bill. So we didn't have a list of 100 things. There are a lot more than these five that are in the bill.

We are prioritizing these five. And we have said this is what we need to see. And we will take a shorter number of years for exactly the reason that probably 70 percent of Democrats feel that way as well, because how do you pick child care against paid leave? How do you pit pre-K against housing? How do you pit climate change against any of those things?

So that's why we think it makes sense. If you look at our five priorities, we would be willing to cut down the years a little bit. But we do need to have all of those priorities in the bill.

CAMEROTA: OK, so, in other words, you do not agree with Speaker Pelosi, who had said her conclusion was that you will have to do fewer things well. You don't want to do fewer things well. You want to do the same amount of things for a shorter amount of time?

JAYAPAL: Well, it was a little confusing what the speaker said, but she did clarify the next day and walked that back and said, actually, there are some things that we will cut out, but when you look at these five priorities, and because she was asked specifically about most of the things that are in our priority list, she said we would likely do those for a shorter period of time.

So what she might be saying is, there are some things that are in here that we would love to do, but they will probably be cut out. However, the things that the Progressive Caucus prioritized, the filters we used for that, Alisyn, were will it be transformative, can benefits accrue immediately to people across this country, and will they be universal in terms of how they affect people?

And I think that's how we came to our five. And that's why I don't think that those five will be cut out of this package. I think they will be in there, but perhaps for a shorter period of time. And that's what we have been saying.

CAMEROTA: And do you -- is it your impression that the speaker walked that back after talking to you, that it was because of a conversation that you both had where that was clarified?

JAYAPAL: I did not have a conversation with her, but a lot of our members texted me that night and said that they were texting her. And so I think she clarified what she meant by that.

We do have -- we will be sending a letter on behalf of the Progressive Caucus that kind of details exactly where we are on this. And, hopefully, that will be helpful to make sure that everybody is very clear on where the majority of our caucus is.

[14:10:06]

CAMEROTA: Do you worry that the protracted back-and-forth between the progressives and the moderates about these spending bills for the past two months is hurting other Democrats in their state races? And I mean Terry McAuliffe, who, as you know, is running for governor in Virginia and Governor Phil Murphy in New Jersey, because it sounded like Terry McAuliffe thinks it is.

So let me just play for you what he said this weekend.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FMR. GOV. TERRY MCAULIFFE (D-VA): We have got frustration with Washington. Why haven't we passed this Infrastructure bill? It passed the U.S. Senate with 69 votes two months ago. I have been very straight on television. We're tired of the chitty chat up in Washington. Get in a room and get this figured out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Congresswoman, do you worry that it's hurting other Democrats?

JAYAPAL: Look, I think that Democrats who are running right now should be running on the fact that Democrats in Congress cut child poverty in half with the American Rescue Plan. Democrats got shots in arms and got more Americans vaccinated than we

have seen -- than we could have imagined when President Biden first came in. Democrats got money to small businesses and states like Virginia so that they could continue through COVID. Democrats held up state and local government.

That's what these candidates should be talking about. It does take time to negotiate. Certainly, Terry McAuliffe, as a consummate politician, understands that. And the reality is, I think everybody should be supporting the fact that we need to get the entirety of the president's Build Back Better agenda to his desk.

And this is the way we do it, by linking the two bills together.

CAMEROTA: Well, it sounds like there is actually a messaging problem. And I basing this on this new CNN poll that was just released that asked Americans -- when asked, if Congress were to pass both these bills, the ones that you and I are talking about, infrastructure and social safety net, only a quarter of Americans say that it would help them.

Basically, 25 percent say that the impact of the infrastructure and economic bill would make them better off; 32 percent say worse off, and 43 percent say about the same. So what's that about?

JAYAPAL: You know what that's about, Alisyn? I'm going to throw it back to you in the media.

Everybody wants to focus on the top-line number. But we have been trying over and over again to say what is in the bill, because it is overwhelmingly popular when people know what's in the bill. Can you imagine the impact for people if they had 12 weeks of paid family leave?

And I wish we could go through and talk about each element and spend 10 minutes on each element, so that people would actually understand what is in the bill. So, I agree there is a messaging problem. And we keep trying to move it right back to, what are the elements that we are talking about?

Child care, universal child care, so that no family has to pay more than 7 percent of their income. Family leave for 12 weeks, so that you can take care of your loved ones when you're sick. The housing, so that the unhoused can actually have housing across this country, making sure that we are getting dental, vision and hearing benefits to seniors who are on Medicare, expanding that, and negotiating prescription drug prices, so no American will have to pay more for prescription drugs than in any other country, and of course, lifting up our immigrants.

Those are the things that are in this. And the minute you tell somebody that that's what's in there, they go, oh, well, that would make a transformative difference for me. And so I -- we definitely need help from all of you to make sure we're not just talking about some random top number, but that we're actually talking about the details. And that's been probably, for me, one of the best parts of these TV

appearances, is I get to talk about some of those things.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

And that is helpful. And we're glad to give you a conduit to be able to talk about those things. But I think that part of the reason that we sometimes get hung up on the top-line number is because it seems like that's where Democrats are hung up. I mean, it seems like that that is where sometimes the battle is between Joe Manchin and the progressives.

And so just humor me with one top-line number here. If you want to shorten the timeline for when the benefits are available, does that affect the top-line number? And is that now about $2 trillion? Is that what it's come down to?

(LAUGHTER)

JAYAPAL: You're good, Alisyn. You're really good.

It definitely affects the top-line number. As I have always said, the number comes out of the programs and the way in which it's structured. And so does it get us to $2 trillion? I don't know. I'm not even sure that $2 trillion is the number that's on the table. What if the number was $2.5 trillion, and if we structure the programs the way we wanted, it came out to 2.6?

I mean, I just think that it makes no sense to talk about the number until we really identify the elements of it and how it's structured. I could see a situation, Alisyn, where you could say, OK, well, a $2.9 trillion package, but has none of our priorities or has them structured in a way that leaves out the majority of the country, and I would be less in favor of that than I would a program -- a package that's $2.7 trillion, but has all of our priorities structured in a way that we want.

[14:15:08]

That's the reason I think it doesn't make sense to look at the top- line number. But you're very good, very, very good trying to get to that.

(LAUGHTER)

CAMEROTA: I will take that.

Speaker Pelosi has said that the new deadline, I guess her deadline is October 31. Is that realistic?

JAYAPAL: Well, look, I think we're trying to work as fast as we can. But we're waiting on two people to tell us what they agree on and what they want.

So the Build Back Better act is written, by the way. It's already written. It's gone through committees in the House. We have agreement from 96 percent of us and the president and the American people. So, as soon as they tell us, we can start figuring out and negotiating the details of it.

Obviously, what they say may not be enough for us, and then that's going to be a negotiation. We have had 29 extensions, short-term extensions of the surface transportation reauthorization money. And we can certainly do that again.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

JAYAPAL: Would we like to get it done by October 31? Of course, but what we want more is to get it done, get it done right, pass both bills, and get them to the president's desk.

CAMEROTA: While I have you, and while you and I talk about the nuances of this level of spending, the January 6 committee is trying to figure out how to stop something like that from happening again.

And at the same time, there appears to be a whitewashing of what happened on January 6 from the Republican side. And, of course, we all remember the video and pictures of you having to hide that day, as did so many of your colleagues, and how frightened everyone was for their lives.

So, when you hear now -- well, first of all, I mean, all signs suggest that Donald Trump will be running again in 2024. And all signs suggest that Republicans are on board with that and even encourage it.

This congressman in Georgia says: "He didn't have anything to do with January 6." He means Trump. "I think that's a far-fetched idea." That's from Loudermilk in Georgia.

This Republican in Missouri, Jason Smith, says: "To see where our country is right now, I miss him, absolutely miss him. And I would support him."

And then there's senator Chuck Grassley, who had said that what Donald Trump had done that day was irresponsible and dangerous, and now he's standing smiling side by side with him.

What are we to make of what is about to happen if Donald Trump gets into the race?

JAYAPAL: Alisyn, it is so dangerous, what's happening.

And I think, out of all of those that you quoted, the fact that Chuck Grassley is there, after saying what he did post-January 6, the fact that Steve Scalise, the number two Republican in the House, could not even say on FOX News, when he was being questioned, that Joe Biden legitimately won the election, I just -- I can't tell you how deeply distressing and dangerous this is for our country to have Republicans make a very political choice that they are going to go along with the big lie, go along with Donald Trump, because they're afraid of telling the truth.

They're afraid that, by telling the truth, they might lose their seats. What good is it to have your seat if you don't have a democracy? I mean, I just feel so strongly about this. And I think that it is a sad day in our country where this is happening and where we have so few Republicans like Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger who have the courage to stand up and say, this is wrong.

It is extremely dangerous, and I worry for our democracy, and I worry for the message that it sends out to the rest of the world about democracy and whether it can work.

CAMEROTA: Congresswoman Jayapal, thank you for your time. We always appreciate talking to you.

JAYAPAL: Thank you, Alisyn. It's always great to be with you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source