Weekly Press Conference with Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
Interview
Weekly Press Conference with Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
Copyright ©2007 by Federal News Service, Inc., Ste. 500, 1000 Vermont Ave, Washington, DC 20005 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service at www.fednews.com, please email Jack Graeme at jack@fednews.com or call 1-800-211-4020.
Q Good morning.
SPEAKER PELOSI: Good morning. (Laughs, laughter.) Thank you. Welcome. Here we are, the last time we'll meet before our Thanksgiving recess. We begin by wishing you all a happy and safe Thanksgiving with your families and your loved ones. We go home very proud of our record of accomplishment in this -- not quite the end of the first session, but let's just talk about yesterday.
Yesterday, I'm very proud the House passed legislation that really takes us in a new direction in Iraq. It's a new direction certainly from what President Bush has been advocating -- a 10-year war without end, causing trillions of dollars with no end in sight and tens of thousands of troops to remain in Iraq.
Excuse me, sir, is there something I can help you with? (No audible response.) Okay. You seemed to have been waving.
Q No. (Light laughter.)
SPEAKER PELOSI: I don't know if that was in approval of our new direction in Iraq.
In any event, our new direction for the first time it's a new direction on the floor of the House as well because this new direction calls for tying funding to a strategy for redeployment of our troops out of Iraq to be completed within a year, by December of 2008, and to be begun 30 days after -- within 30 days of enactment.
We're very proud of this work. As I say, it represents a new direction, and it is predicated on the idea that's fact, that the Iraqi government has not stepped up to the plate to meet the sacrifice of our troops.
Our troops performed magnificently in all that they have done, provided a secure environment for the Iraqi government to make the change necessary to end the civil strife there. But don't take it from me.
Here's the comments of our generals who now serve in Iraq. Their comments validate our point that the Iraqi government has been intransigent in doing what it should do. They have said that that obstructionism on the part of the Iraqi government is a bigger threat to resolving the conflict there than the al Qaeda terrorists, than the Sunni insurgents or the Iranian militia.
That's from our own generals. So clearly they're saying if something doesn't happen by next summer that you have to reevaluate their strategy. We're saying, let's do that now; what further evidence do we need?
Yesterday, we also passed Head Start on the floor. This is almost a decade since the bill was passed. It's a great, huge, overwhelming majority in fact in the House and in the Senate, both with veto-proof majorities.
Today, we'll take up FISA. We all understand the responsibility we have to balance meeting our security needs, giving our president and our policymakers the best possible intelligence to protect the American people and, at the same time, protecting our Constitution. This legislation on the floor today does just that. I'm very proud of the work of our two chairmen, Mr. Reyes of Intelligence, Mr. Conyers of the Judiciary Committee.
Today, we'll also take up the Labor, HHS override of the president's veto, harkening back to the beginning of my conversation with you today about Iraq. For just a day in Iraq, less than a day in Iraq, we could be covering LIHEAP funding in the bill, the increase over the president's numbers. The president says we can't afford to provide help with home heating oil as winter approaches. This would be a million-and-a-half families across our country, for a day-and-a- half or so in Iraq. At the same time, Mr. President is saying we can't afford this bill. For a couple of days in Iraq, we can provide over 1,000 grants from the NIH to find the cures that our country so desperately needs for cancer, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and the rest.
This is really a debate about values, how we allocate our resources, what our priorities are.
And clearly, if the president believes in his war in Iraq, as I am certain that he does, and thinks it's worth the trillions of dollars he's spending there, it should not come at the expense of the health, education and well-being of America's families. But indeed, it is.
With that, I'd be pleased to take any questions you might have.
Q Madame Speaker, in light of the recent success of the surge -- I mean, civilian deaths, troops deaths have been down significantly -- does that mean we've turned the tide and are winning the war in Iraq?
SPEAKER PELOSI: No. Remember what the purpose of the surge was. The purpose of the surge was to create a secure environment in which the Iraqi government would have the opportunity to make the political change to end the civil violence there. They have not taken advantage of that opportunity, and as the general said in the article this morning, that window may be closing for them to do so. This is a problem.
Certainly any time our military is engaged in military action, we want the best possible outcome for them, and they have produced that. But their sacrifice and their courage has not been met by any action on the part of the Iraqi government. As I said, the generals have said that the obstructionism and intransigence of the Iraqi government is a bigger threat to ending the war there than the al Qaeda terrorists, the Iranian militia -- the Iranian militias and the Sunni insurgents. So sadly, it has not produced that desired results.
Some of the violence is down also because of the displacement of people. Two -- two million Iraqis have left the country. Two million have been displaced from where they live. There's been ethnic cleansing of neighborhoods so now that people no longer live in mixed neighborhood and there are walls built between these neighborhoods. And there are now 175,000 American troops in Iraq.
So again, with all of that power and with all of that opportunity, even the generals in office now -- we've been hearing this from the retired generals -- even the officers in theater are now saying that the Iraqi government has not met the expectation to make the change necessary. So this isn't about improvement in Iraq. The generals are saying the improvements are not taking place.
Q Madame Speaker?
Q Madame Speaker?
SPEAKER PELOSI: Yes, Mike.
Q Will there be a government shutdown this year?
SPEAKER PELOSI: No. Absolutely not.
Q What's the way out of the impasse?
SPEAKER PELOSI: Well, the hope that the president will -- I think there are some on the Republican side who would like to see the president split the difference with us on some of these spending bills. But if he does not, there will not be a government shutdown.
Q Madame Speaker, there's widespread acknowledgement that what you passed yesterday on Iraq will not be enacted into law. There are some moderates in the Senate putting together a proposal that changes the mission but without any withdrawal timetables. What would you think of that as a possible compromise?
SPEAKER PELOSI: I have no idea what it is, so I can't speak to it. But what I will say is that we took a great -- a giant step yesterday in taking our country in a new direction in Iraq, a direction that is completely necessary, because as we were debating the issue on the floor, the president's spokespersons and employees were saying that by next year, by next July, we will be down to the pre-surge -- (off mike) -- Iraq. That means by next July, of 2008, we will be where we were in November of 2006, when the American people said we need a new direction.
We have put forth our new policy, we will press for that, and that is the approach that we will take. And it's not a question of whether it will become law. Everybody knows that the president is stuck in his place, a place where he wants a 10-year war costing trillions of dollars to the taxpayer, tens -- hundreds of thousands of troops there for a long period of time, at the expense of our young people, at the expense to the taxpayer, at the expense of our reputation in the world, at an expense to the military readiness of our troops.
That was one of the other reasons we were -- went forth with our legislation yesterday: certainly because the Iraqi government has not stepped up to the plate to do what it should do, but also because this war in Iraq is having a very damaging impact on the readiness of our troops. That's why you see Chairman Ike Skelton of the Armed Services Committee, that's why you see Chairman Jack Murtha of the House -- the Appropriations Defense Subcommittee speaking out so vociferously against this war, because it is undermining our ability to protect the American people, because of the undermining of our capability to protect our interests wherever they are threatened, and our ability to focus on the real war on terror.
(Cross talk.)
Q Madame Speaker, on SCHIP --
SPEAKER PELOSI: Yeah.
Q -- characterize where we are now. And have we sort of reached an endgame with this --
SPEAKER PELOSI: Well, we're in a constructive debate. We're -- constructive debate, Democrats and Republicans, House and Senate. We're hopeful that something will come of it, and that's where we are.
Q But it's more than just hope at this point. We've heard hope for weeks.
SPEAKER PELOSI: Well, they've been exchanging paper and ideas, and I hope that we're close to some resolution of it. But I've given it a lot of time. It's like three weeks since we passed our legislation. But as long as they're making progress and there's any prospect for a bipartisan success there, then I think they should be able to have that time.
Q The bill today creating new regulations, so what about the people who are facing foreclosure? Should Congress have acted sooner so that this wouldn't be at such a crisis level?
SPEAKER PELOSI: Well, Congress has been acting -- I think we should have acted last year, yes. In fact, Barney Frank and Senator Baucus at that time were moving forward with legislation that was nixed by the Republican leadership. They are now working again in a bipartisan way to go forward and to -- I'm very proud of the legislation. It's bipartisan. It is tough legislation and it is one part of what is needed. There are so many aspects to this subprime crisis. We won't be able to address all of them in one piece of legislation. But we do understand the scope of the problem.
Q (Off mike) -- time to get an AMT passed and to the White House by mid-December. IRS and Treasury insist that that means that millions of taxpayers will get the wrong information when they get their tax forms and publications in January, that millions of taxpayers will have their refunds delayed. Are they bluffing? Are they wrong? If they're right, won't Democrats get blamed for it?
SPEAKER PELOSI: Well, we told the -- our chairmen have written to the IRS to say that this is on the way, that patch will happen, and so they should prepare in that -- (short audio break).
Q Treasury and IRS insist that that's not (an option ?), that they've got to publish something, and the deadline for doing so is today or tomorrow.
SPEAKER PELOSI: Well, I stand on what I said.
Q On the energy bill --
SPEAKER PELOSI: If you want me to repeat it, I'll repeat it.
Yes, ma'am?
Q I'm so sorry. On the energy bill. If it comes down to a choice between RES -- you know, the renewable portfolio standard -- or CAFE, do you think it will come down to that choice? And if so --
SPEAKER PELOSI: I hope not.
Q -- which one would you choose?
SPEAKER PELOSI: That's not a choice that I hope we have to make. We're pushing forward. My commitment is to our House bill, to make sure that as much as possible to have a bill survive what I had hoped would be a conference, but now will be more of conversation on this.
And there's no question that the American people want there to be CAFE standards. For all the reasons that relate to our environment and global warming, though that's one thing, now it's a pocketebook issue as well, and the numbers are in the 80s where people want fuel efficiency and they want to see Congress act upon it. So we're going forward trying to get the strongest possible bill in every respect.
Q (Off mike) -- Speaker Pelosi? What is the new target for an energy bill, timetable-wise?
SPEAKER PELOSI: I hope that it will be a wonderful Christmas present to the American people.
Q For a number of months now, there have been protesters in front of your house in San Francisco calling for the impeachment of President Bush. And you were quoted as saying if they were poor and they were sleeping on my sidewalk, they would be arrested for loitering, but --
SPEAKER PELOSI: That's right.
Q -- because they have "Impeach Bush" across their chest, it's a First Amendment --
SPEAKER PELOSI: That's right.
Q Two things. One, I wonder if you agree with this policy of arresting people --
SPEAKER PELOSI: No, I don't -- my point is, is that -- just as I made. You said it and I don't have to repeat it again.
Q What do you think should be done about the protestors in front of your house?
SPEAKER PELOSI: Well, frankly, I've spoken on that point, and I'm not happy when people come to my house. And if they think that the longer they stay there the better the chances they'll have a meeting with me, I think we've disabused them of that notion.
Q (Off mike) -- in the Labor-H override issue? (Off mike) -- lowest assistance -- (off mike) --
SPEAKER PELOSI: Yes. Six hundred and 20 million dollars.
Q (Off mike) -- moderate Republicans who voted for the bill, they're giving them the argument -- (off mike) -- cut back the increase that the House approved? Can --
SPEAKER PELOSI: But the -- I cannot --
Q (Off mike) --
SPEAKER PELOSI: In a million years I can't comment on what Republicans say to Republicans in order to get them to change their vote on the Labor-HHS bill.
Q Can you comment on that argument? I mean, they are literally arguing.
SPEAKER PELOSI: Whatever it is, we have more in our bill than the president's request. Whatever it is, it's a dollar more than the -- the president said if any bill is a dollar more than he asks, he will veto the bill. It's important for the American people to know that that means a million and a half poor families in America and seniors in our country will not be getting the LIHEAP assistance that our bill calls for.
Yes, sir. Next question.
Q (Off mike) -- on some of you successes, like the first Iraq supp and the Peru bill, you had a majority of Republicans that have actually voted and passed those things. I'm just wondering, going forward, do you anticipate that you'll be able to pass some things like that, or would there be some things you'd put off the table like tax bills, where you would, dare I say, require a majority to majority.
SPEAKER PELOSI: Excuse me. I'm sorry. I didn't know what the first thing was you said. You said Peru and what?
Q On Peru and the first Iraq supp; I think the first FISA bill also -- those passed with a majority of Republicans. I'm just wondering, would you imagine that --
SPEAKER PELOSI: I don't think the first Iraq supplemental passed with a majority of Republicans.
Q Or a large number, I believe. I might be mistaken.
SPEAKER PELOSI: I don't think so, no.
Q The Peru bill --
SPEAKER PELOSI: No, I think the only bill -- well, they've had a majority of Republicans on a number of bills, certainly on WRDA, certainly on the student loans. We had it on our innovation agenda. There are a large number of bills that we had overwhelming bipartisan support on the floor of the House, nothing on Iraq -- maybe no permanent bases, that might have gotten that.
Or the Tanner-Abercrombie bill about asking the White House to give a report on how redeployment would go forward. Something like that, but not on any -- not on any funding bill. So -- and on Peru, yes -- was it a majority of Republicans? I didn't take note of that.
Q But when you're going forward, would you be willing to use that approach on other bills, or would there be things like taxes where you would desire not to use it?
SPEAKER PELOSI: Well, we always want to have the biggest possible vote that we can. We strive for bipartisanship. And almost everything in our new direction agenda -- our Six for '06 -- almost everything that we have passed this year has had strong bipartisan support. All of it has been paid for and conducted in the highest ethical standards. So we reach for -- we're not here to pick a fight. We're here to make a difference. And in order to do that, we try to have the strongest bipartisan support that we have.
Q Madame Speaker?
SPEAKER PELOSI: Yes, but that would be the last one. I have to go.
Q If the Senate cannot pass the Iraq bill, which looks very likely, do you strip the timetables from the bill and send Bush a clean --
SPEAKER PELOSI: No.
Q Or are you going to wait until January to consider the war spending?
SPEAKER PELOSI: We're not going to be taking it up anymore over here.
Q You won't be taking it up this year?
SPEAKER PELOSI: Yeah.
Q Madame Speaker, any thoughts on your predecessor, Mr. Hastert, announcing (his retirement ?) today?
SPEAKER PELOSI: Well, yes. Well, not to -- you -- we will all find out what his announcement will be today at the same time.
But I was very happy that he invited me. He said, would you please sit in the chair at -- I think it's 2:00 when he will come to the floor -- 2:30? -- when he will come to the floor. And at that time, I look -- after he speaks, commending him for his leadership and service to our country. I've said of him before when I received the gavel from him the first time that all of us are called honorable by dint of our -- the office we hold. Mr. Hastert is called honorable because of his character and his leadership for our country, and I will salute him for that service, whether as a teacher and coach, as a member of Congress or a speaker of the House.
I also will say that I thank him for his cooperation on helping us in our efforts to have a statue of the first African-American woman, Rosa Parks -- oh no, let me say it a different way. We passed a bill to do that, the first African-American woman to ever lay in state in the Capitol. And that would not have been possible without the cooperation of Speaker Hastert.
So it's a sad day. I don't know what it is. I mean, again -- (laughter) -- I don't know what to anticipate.
So without anticipating whatever it is, I know it will be monumental. And you know, I look forward to complimenting the speaker, in person as well as in public. This was just among friends here. (Laughter.)
Thank you.
Q What's the plan for December?
SPEAKER PELOSI: December: Well, we have full plans for December. We will follow up with our appropriations bills. We will attend to the energy bill. I'm not going to be exhaustive of that, because that's up to the majority leader to fill in the calendar there, and we work together to do that. But again the work that needs to be done before we end is our appropriations bills and the energy bill.
Thank you all very much. Happy Thanksgiving to all of you.
Source