House Speaker Pelosi Minority Leader Schumer Hold Briefing CSPAN July 23, 2020 4:16pm-4:46pm EDT
at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures in history we hear about the roots and developments of the modern conservative movement. then sunday, at 4:00 p.m. eastern on "real america" four police training films from the 1960s. at 6:00 p.m. eastern on "american artifacts" a tour of the ellis island immigration museum and 7:00 p.m., david blight and annette gordon reed talk about recent debates over removing historical monday ults. exploring the american story. watch american history tv this weekend on c-span3. >> earlier today, house speaker nancy pelosi and senate minority leader chuck schumer held a news conference to discuss negotiations between congress and president trump on additional economic aid in response to the coronavirus pandemic. here's that news conference now.
>> good morning, everyone. in anticipation of seeing a proposal finally from the other side of the aisle and other side of pennsylvania avenue, i invited the distinguished leader in the democratic leader in the senate to join us today to have some observation we thought we would have in hand we'll see. we come together on a day that marks for the 18th straight week
that acceleration is an assault on the lives and livelihood of the american people. if we want to open our schools, if we have to open our economy we must defeat this virus. we put ford the h.e.o.r.a.e.s. act they said they needed a pause. still are not prepared, they didn't use the pause to prepare and what we have seen so far falls very short of the challenge that we face, in order to defeat the virus and to open our schools and open to our economy. science, science, science and science seems to be ignored, the delay, the denial have caused deaths. we can do something about it but
>> thank you, speaker pelosi and thank you for the great work you have done on so many things and now most notably the heroes bill which are senate democratic caucus is in full support of. faced with the greatest economic xhalening in 75 years the greatest public health challenge in a century democrated waited for months for our senate colleagues to get our colleagues to get serious about helping the american people who suffered so much during this pandemic. now that senate republicans have finally woken up to the calamity in our country, they have so divided, so disorganized, so unprepared they have struggled to even draft a partisan proposal within their own conferen conference, they can't come together. even after all this time it appears the republican legislative response to covid is
ununified, unserious, unsatisfactory. the republican disarray and dithering has serious potentially deadly consequences for tens of millions of americans. 1.4 million americans applied for unemployment last week, the first time the number rose since march. tomorrow the moratorium on evictions expires, exposing millions of americans to the risk of being kicked out of their homes through no fault of their own and over the weekend states will send out their final enhanced unemployment checks but here we are, still waiting for the republicans to put together a partisan bill that will never become law just so they can muster up the courage to negotiate. now we're hearing the republicans may only be able to produce a disjointed small proposal that don't add up to a coherent plan to fight covid. from what it we read in public reports their proposals or
series of proposals won't include food assistance for hungry kids. it won't include rental assistance or keep tens of millions of americans with a roof over their heads. it won't provide hazard pay to essential worker whofbs risking their lives and their families' lives since the crisis began. it won't make the assessments in the communities of color ravaged by this virus, it won't provide funding for state and local governments and the need to keep teachers and bus drivers and sanitation workers on the job and from what we know it won't even include funding to ensure our elections are safe this fall. remarkably the likely centerpiece of the republican legislative response to covid is not help for the 20 million to 30 million unemployed americans or resources for testing and tracing. the centerpiece of the republican proposal is a
liability shield to protect big corporations from lawsuits if they put their workers at risk. seriously, leader mcconnell has made corporate immunity the centerpiece of the republican response? once again, the republican senate is far more comfortable providing relief to big corporations than relief to workers and families. how about instead of shielding corporations from liability we shield renters from eviction? how about instead of shielding corporations from liability we shield the unemployed from poverty? according to reports the white house and senate republicans want to cut the enhance the unemployment benefits that democrats secured in the c.a.r.e.s. act to a percentage of a worker's former wage. that's right, america. if you lost your job through no fault of your own and can't go back to work, because this administration is mismanaged the
crisis, republicans want to you take a pay cut of 30% or even more. the number of unemployment claims unfortunately increase this week for the first time in 15 weeks, and republicans are fighting with themselves over how much to cut unemployment benefits. republicans fight over themselves over how low to go and hard-working americans continue to suffer. democrats are ready to work. republicans need to pull their head out of the sand, get their act together, sit down with speaker pelosi and me, and start negotiating a real package. >> thank you, you spelled it out perfectly. when listening to you i'm thinking, what is it that the trump administration and the republicans in congress have against working families in our country? as they sit around their table and join their corporate friends
at the corporate board table, we have to be thinking about what's going on at the kitchen table of america's families. many more people than ever, many people who never thought they would are going to food banks and yet this legislation that they're proffering has nothing to address food insecurity in our country, it's about our children, millions and millions of children are food insecure yet nothing there for that and as a leader said in terms of rent, people will be in the streets, the evictions will continue yet in our bill and proposal does that modeled after some past initiatives for emergency security. health care workers, transit workers, our first responders,
food suppliers, sanitation workers and the rest, nix, they say no to that. in terms of what we have to do to address the virus, they are scientifical scientifically in absentia. they just don't get it. they don't believe in science. they don't believe in governance, so why should they pay attention to science and do something in governance about it? so they make a token thing and now they're saying well we're going to use some of the money we did before which they didn't spend before. this is a crisis for our country. i hoped as we do in legislating when they offered their bills before, they offered their first version of the c.a.r.e.s. act we countered. they offered the next version of the ppp, we countered. we offered this legislation, we thought they would counter with something that was at least
reconcile ab reconcilable but this doesn't reconcile with the needs of the american people. it is another example of their dereliction in duty for not facing the reality of what this virus is doing to our, the lives, the livelihood and actually the life of our democracy. with that, we're pleased to take any questions you may have. yes, ma'am? >> it seems these negotiations are as you've outlined hitting some speed bumps, and millions of americans are facing unemployment benefits running out at the end of next week. if you can't get a bigger deal, are you open to temporarily extending those benefits for people? >> no. this is a package. we cannot piecemeal this. this is as you see, it has an integrity. it has a oneness about meeting the needs of the american people, defeating the virus as we honor our heroes and put money into the pockets of the
american people. >> the only thing i say in answer to your question, we're not going to take care of one portion of suffering people and leave everyone else hanging. that's what they may want to do, take care of this and then go home. no way, this is a comprehensive proposal that addresses the many problems of covid, and we have to address it as a totality. >> leader mcconnell had to make it up in a speech this morning. in any case, i hope so but they're so divided, they're so divided and there's no lead leadership from the president. at the same time that they know the president has no leadership they're afraid to buck him on anything and he doesn't know how to solve this problem, as we have seen. so much of what has happened, so much of the illness and so much of the deaths and so much of the
economic hardship and health hardship is because this administration has a no direction, no plan, no straight line of attack. >> and what we have in the h.e.r.o.e.s. act as a strategic plan for testing, treating, isolation, of course mask wearing, sanitation. so the other day when the president embraced masks, what he was doing was admitting, admitting how wrong he was for months and in that period of time, many more people died, and even since we did the h.e.r.o.e.s. act two months and one week ago, 2.5 million more americans have become infected, and 55 million more people have died, while they were pausing, some of them saying we don't need anything more.
>> and one more point in reference to your question. one of the reasons we're up against this cliff is because the republicans have dithered. the h.e.r.o.e.s. act passed two months and a week ago, nancy and i sent a letter to mcconnell three weeks ago saying let's sit down and negotiate. nothing. now we're up against the cliff. we have to solve the whole thing because there are a lot of different cliffs. >> two parts to this. have you been actually given a piece of paper or a phone call from the white house saying this is what our plan is? >> no. we learned some of it earlier this morning is what we learned from k street where they kind of -- >> and the second part is then you said 3 trillion talked about the covid here, they talk about [ inaudible ] but where is the give there? if you give anything short of 3 trillion, 1.5 trillion, 2 trillion? >> you think we'll negotiate the amount of money in this room
here? no. let's see what -- >> [ inaudible ] >> what was really important was to see their proposal what the leader kept something for. put it on paper. >> we need a specific proposal, a bill. we put in a bill, legislative language that passed the house. you can't just say five lines and let's sit down and negotiate. the devil is all in the details, and we don't know what's in and what's out. we don't know if the president's on board. is this going to be mcconnell's proposal? is this going to be the senate republicans' proposal, mcconnell and trump's proposal? you can't negotiate that way. >> actually what leader mcconnell had been saying is, the impression he gave was that he was going to be negotiating with the senate democrats and then they would come up with something as congress works its will one side makes a proffer, the other body comes back with what they have. to your point, they have nothing for state and local, and our
bill that's $915 billion, state local i trib local, tribal, governments and territories. $915 billion. go to speaker.gov/heroesact and see what it means to you in your community, and then understand it's half of what they were willing to add to their national tax, 83% of the benefits going to the top 1%. so when you see what they have on paper you see what they don't have on paper. they say $1 trillion and nothing for state and local, nothing for food stamps, feeding the hungry, nothing for helping with rent and the rest of that, nothing, so many things they don't have, then you realize how they're at $1 trillion how unacceptable it is. yes? >> madam speaker you were clear last week on the unemployment
benefit that $600 is the number you were going to be sticking with. has that changed at all in the week now that you've seen at least some numbers floated from the other side? >> you want to speak to that? i'm all for the $600, because people really need it, but again, as i said to you then, we have issues that relate to direct payments for people and the size of what that is, and the rest, but i go to the table with the commitment to the $600. mr. leader? >> our unemployment provision has kept millions out of poverty, millions. >> it really has. they like to talk about the $600. i like to talk about the 83% of $2 trillion that they gave to the richest people, the top 1% in our country. why are they worried about whether it's 600 or 400 or 500? people really need that, and as we try to bolster -- look, we
all know that there's a floor for the stock market, that the fed, everything being done to keep the stock market from going down past a point. why can't we have a floor for america's works families, and while they bolster the stock market, which is not a bad thing. i'm not criticizing it, i'm just saying it's a fact. why do they have to make a fuss over $600, which means a lot to many working families in our country? single moms in certain parts of the country where the unemployment benefit is very low. again, we can try to help businesses as we try with ppp and the rest of that, and we can help them pay the rent and pay their employees and help them pay the utility bill but if they ain't got in customers, they still have a problem and this money is really important for people to spend, inject demand into the economy, create jobs. yes, ma'am? >> madam speaker, the republican
proposal is about 70% of approximately 70% of the wage replacement. >> we don't know that. we can't negotiate with a chymera. we hear different things all the time from different people. >> would you agree it doesn't exceed prior wages? >> he withic loo the proposal we've had. kept millions of people out of poverty, it's in the h.e.r.o.e.s. bill to be extended until january 31st. >> there's a great deal said by the republicans that is not true. i always, you've heard me say many times they'll have an anecdote somebody who didn't go to work because they had 600. the plural of anecdote is not data. that's our fundamental principle in the appropriations committee. we need data. okay, so we do know that millions of families in our country depend on that $600.
they're not going to go to work. here's what they'll say. we want them to go to work. they're essential workers. we are not going to give them osha protections and if they don't go to work and take the risks to their lives and that of their families if they don't go to work, they can't get unemployment insurance. so they're there to sabotage working families. that's why i say what did working families ever do to the republicans and the president that they're out to get them, a. b, we're not giving money to state and local because some of their governments are mismanaged. we're not talking about that. we're talking about the receipts that they have for paying for coronavirus, a, and the revenue lost because of the coronavirus, all over the country, democratic and republican, nonpartisan, whatever you want to call t red, blue, purple, whatever. so they're using an excuse that
has nothing to do with the coronavirus. so they're engaged in distortions. delay, denial, distortions. very damaging to our economy, very deadly to our people. let me take another person though, because that's how we do it here, yes. >> thank you, madam speaker. on another subject, would you care to comment on federal agents adam streit's importment and possibly chicago? >> jeff merkley is on the floor now legislation i support and others that fundamentally says the police officers, any federal officers have to have i.d. where they're from and what their name is and more importantly if they go off federal property itself and patrol streets or anything else, they have to get the permission of the executive in charge, the mayor or governor. that's how this should be done.
president trump always likes diversions. he's miserably failing at testing. he's miserably failing at contact tracing. he's miserably failing at getting the economy going. he's miserably failing on the greatest crisis america has and the american people know it. so he tries the diversion. there's a real answer, the answer is merkley's bill. >> and that's the bill that is supported by the house democrats as well. i hope the republicans would join us. it's very, very important. the use of storm troopers under the guise of law and order is a tactic that is not appropriate to our country in any way. >> it is so un-american what has happened. it is so in keeping with third world countries and dictators, you haul somebody off the streets, don't tell them who you are, why you're doing t et cetera. it's also unconstitutional. >> thank you. >> yes, ma'am? >> al andrea owe casio cortez put in the congressional record
who congressman yoho said to her and said having a wife, having a daughter doesn't make a decent man. what is your response to what she did and do you think congressman yoho's apology was enough? >> to tell you the honest truth, we're focused on trying to save lives with our bill to prevent, to kill this virus, just to destroy this virus. we're there to open up our economy and our schools. the fact the democratic women's caucus has gone to the floor at a time when our floor time is precious tells you how important this is. it's a manifest indication of our attitudes in our society. i can tell you firsthand they've called me names for 18 years of
leadership. i don't know, so funny is you'd say to them, do you not have a daughter, do you not have a mother, a sister, do you not have a wife? what makes you think that you can be so, and this is the word i use for them, condescending in addition to being disrespectful. one of my i don't want to say favorites but one we were discussing a woman's reproductive health a number of years ago on the floor of the house. they were so angry with me because i had five children and six years to the day, so i had standing on the issue, and they got up there and said on the floor of the house, "nancy pelosi thinks she knows more about having babies than the pope." yes. so there's no limit to the disrespect or the lack of acknowledgment of the strength
of women. nothing rings more, nothing is more wholesome for our government, for our politics, for out country than increased participation of women, and women will be treated with respect. thank you all. >> thank you. >> hmm? >> opening day? >> opening day. >> go yankees. go yankees. >> what do you think about some of the giants kneeling? >> what? >> what do you think about some of the san francisco giants kneeling? >> what do i think of them kneeling? what do i think of the giants kneeling? i'm so proud of gabe kapler, our new manager, who knelt with them. god bless him. >> thank you.
>> coming up, president trump holds a news conference with reporters at the white house. watch the president's remarks live on c-span3. >> watch our live daily unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house. >> our countries are linked by trade and travel. >> on issues that matter to you. >> part of our ongoing effort to focus on a mission to save lives and meet the needs of our states, our health care workers. >> long with briefings on the coronavirus pandemic, supreme court oral arguments and decisions. >> thanks for coming out to say hello, everybody. >> and the latest from campaign 2020. >> your calls and comments welcome. >> be a part of the conversation every day with our live call-in program, "washington journal," and if you missed any of our live coverage, watch any time on demand at cspan.org or listen on the go with the free c-span radio app.
tonight our series "landmark cases." produced in cooperation with the national constitution center we explore the issues, people and places involved in some of the most significant supreme court cases in our nation's history. we begin at 8:00 eastern with gideon v. wainwright. a case that went on to establish a broader sixth amendment right to counsel for alleged criminals. and then at 9:35 eastern griswold v. connecticut that was a planned parenthood challenge to an 1879 connecticut law that banned the prescription and use of birth control. the supreme court ultimately ruled the statute to be unconstitutional. watch landmark cases tonight on c-span3 and anytime at c-span.org. live coverage of two key hearings next week. on monday, amazon's jeff bezos, facebook's mark zuckerberg, sundar pichai of google and
apple's tim cook appear before the subcommittee on anti-trust, commercial and administrative law, as they examine dominance of online platforms and market power. live coverage begins at monday noon eastern at seespan 2. tuesday at 10:00 a.m. eastern, william barr appears before the general oversight of the justice department hearing. watch live hearing coverage monday on c-span 2 and tuesday on c-span3. watch any time on c-span.org or listen on the c-span earlier app. >> kevin mccarthy earlier today held a news conference at the capitol and talked about the upcoming house agenda and future kr coronavirus relief legislation. this is 20 minutes.