LIVE: House Democratic Leader Jeffries Holds Weekly Press Conference 2024-04-19 16:23

Good afternoon, for months, the American people have had their national security interests placed on hold, recklessly, because of pro-Putin mega extremists like Marjorie Taylor Greene. It's long past time that we support our democratic allies in Israel, Ukraine, and the Indo-Pacific, and provide humanitarian assistance, civilian harm's way, in theaters of conflict like Gaza, Haiti, and the Sudan. House Democrats have once again cleared the way for legislation that is important to the American people to be processed and considered on the House floor for an up or down vote. From the very beginning of this Congress, we have made clear that we will put people over politics. It's not a slogan. It's a way of life, and we have demonstrated it repeatedly. We will continue to do just that, because we believe in achieving real results for the American people. Questions? What's important at the moment is making sure that we finish the job, and that robust majorities of Democrats and Republicans in order to meet the national security needs of the American people. Democrats will provide a majority of our majority as it relates to funding Israel, humanitarian assistance, Ukraine, and our allies in the Indo-Pacific. It remains to be seen what Republicans will do in terms of meeting the national security needs of the American people, but it was important for House Democrats to make sure that the national security bills are going to be considered. I speak with Mike Johnson frequently. We have an open, honest, and communicative relationship. I did not talk to him this morning. We made a decision last evening that we would do what is necessary to provide the votes on the Rules Committee to ensure that the legislation could be heard on the House floor today. Once we made that decision, it was clear that we would do what was necessary to make sure that the national security legislation was considered by the entire House of Representatives. That's a declaration, not an observation, but that statement still stands. That's a declaration, not an observation. We'll have to have the conversation before the House caucus. First things first, we still have to get the national security bills over the finish line. In that statement, that's what we made clear, that we have to do the business of the American people. We've been waiting for months, unnecessarily, because of gamesmanship, and partisanship, and brinksmanship on the other side of the aisle. First, the extreme-magnet Republicans said, we can't meet the national security needs of the American people until we make changes to border policy. Then the extreme-magnet Republicans killed a border policy bipartisan piece of legislation. Then we were told that the extreme-magnet Republicans could not address the national security needs of the American people until a spending bill was completed. Democrats provided the support necessary to make sure that we funded the government in a manner that was compassionate and comprehensive, and met the needs of the American people. Then we went on to another excuse from the extreme-magnet Republicans. Third, we were told that the national security needs of the American people could not be met until we reauthorized the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, even though we were promised, after finishing the spending bill, that the first order of priority upon our return to Washington in April would be national security legislation. But we had to deal with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which Democrats once again helped get over the finish line. Extreme-magnet Republicans, as we have observed, are out of excuses, and the American people and our allies in Ukraine and throughout the world are out of time in terms of our national security needs being met. Hopefully, we're on track for that to happen tomorrow. We've been very honest in our assessment of the situation from the very beginning, including in the declaration that I made in late February. At the appropriate time, as House Democrats, we will have a conversation about how to deal with any hypothetical motion to vacate, which at this point hasn't been noticed. Moscow, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Massey, and Gosar are quite a group, and I'm sure that will play some role in our conversation. But central to the conversation, the prerequisite to the conversation is to make sure that the national security legislation, in totality, is passed by the House of Representatives. We can assess how we got to where we are once the national security legislation is voted on and completed in terms of the process in the House of Representatives. Our teams and the whip teams on both sides of the aisle are in constant communication about the whip counts as it relates to both procedural votes and substantive votes. That was no different as it relates to the national security legislation. I did not speak directly to Mike Johnson about the numbers necessary because it was pretty obvious to us, given the growing number of pro-Putin Republicans in the GOP, particularly in the House of Representatives, that this was going to require substantial Democratic participation. We had a choice. Were we going to put people over politics? Because the political thing to do is always to let the extreme MAGA Republicans crash and burn because they have so many out of control members they cannot govern on their own. We could let them simply crash and burn. But when we say we're going to continue to put people over politics, we actually mean it, particularly when it comes to meeting the needs of the American people, both domestically and in terms of our national security. We're going to continue to do just that. As much as I would like to think that the American people care about what I may have to say about the job performance of any of my colleagues in Congress, I don't believe that that is the case. I think what the American people care about right now is meeting their needs in a very dangerous world in terms of standing by our Democratic allies in defense of freedom and liberty here at home and across the globe. That will be the ultimate test by which Speaker Johnson, myself, and all of our colleagues in the House on both sides of the aisle will be judged. That's how we should be judged. Did we deliver for the American people? The threshold, I think, in terms of the test that we've confronted as Democrats is that we are consistently delivering for the American people. Let me reiterate that in terms of Speaker Johnson, we have an open, honest, and highly communicative relationship. He has to manage the dynamics of a very unruly House Republican conference filled with pro-Putin extremists who have zero interest in funding Ukraine. Let's see what happens on the floor tomorrow when the funding bill for Ukraine is before the House of Representatives. It took bipartisan cooperation, led by Speaker Johnson on the other side of the aisle, to get us to a point, finally, where America's national security interests can be considered. I'm very confident that the overwhelming majority of House Democrats will stand by our Democratic allies in Israel, in Ukraine, in the Indo-Pacific, and make sure that humanitarian assistance is secured for innocent Palestinians in Gaza who are in harm's way through no fault of their own, as well as people in conflict zones throughout the world, including in Haiti and the Sudan, where there is massive suffering. That's what I'm confident about in terms of Democrats continuing to step up and meet the national security needs of the American people, solve problems, and deliver real results, always exercising common sense and pushing back against MAGA extremist chaos. It remains to be seen what a majority of House Republicans will do. We'll have that answer tomorrow. That was the easiest question of the press conference. They have not. That's correct. That was also the case in October of last year. That's unclear. I don't have a position on it one way or the other. I think we have to evaluate the totality of bills that are in that package. I expect that there will be a significant number of Democrats who will support the fourth legislative item and a modest number of Democrats who might oppose it. This is a persistent group right here. From the very beginning of this Congress, the Democrats have made clear that it was a mistake to hand over the keys to the House of Representatives to MAGA extremists who were simply intent on visiting chaos and dysfunction on the American people. Every single House Democrat voted against the change to the motion to vacate rule, every single one of us, in January of 2023, because we believe it was a mistake to take a loaded gun in the form of the motion to vacate and hand it over to any single individual in the House Republican conference. That was a mistake, and we voted against it because it is not consistent with common sense and good governance. But now we find ourselves in this situation. And so we'll have to evaluate what is the best path forward in terms of the motion to vacate as a rule. That's a conversation for another day after the national security legislation is over the finish line, through the Senate, and sent to Joe Biden's desk for his signature. And by the way, President Joe Biden, throughout this process, has done a tremendous job. I don't have a question or view on that one way or the other, one step at a time in terms of what is in front of us, because what is in front of us is not just a simple day-to-day, run-of-the-mill issue. This is a Churchill or Chamberlain moment. We can either confront aggression when it's directed at democracy and freedom here in America or throughout the world, or we can appease it. And there are several months that have gone by where pro-Putin MAGA extremists have indicated they want to appease Vladimir Putin's aggression. This is a serious moment. The fate of the free world is actually at stake. It's at issue. It's in front of us. In which direction are we going to go? And so when Democrats repeatedly say, let's deal with the substance first before we address the process questions, we actually mean it. And we'll see where we are once the national security legislation gets over the finish line. Yeah, I haven't taken a look at that endorsement, and I'm largely unaware that it has been formalized. So I'll cross that bridge when we get to it. But I think my track record has been clear in terms of standing by incumbent members of the House Democratic Caucus. We're back on this topic again. I wrote an entire op-ed on this issue that was published on Friday, October 6th. And any thoughts that I have as it relates to a bipartisan path forward are contained in that essay. I wrote an entire op-ed on this issue that was published on Friday, October 6th. And I commend to you for your reading that particular piece, or any thoughts that I may have as it relates to changes to the House rules. I appreciate the effort, though. We maintain from the very beginning that we will find bipartisan common ground with our Republican colleagues on any issue, whenever and wherever possible, as long as it meets the criteria of making life better for the American people and solving problems for hardworking American taxpayers. And so we look forward to continuing to try to do just that with respect to the Farm Bill, aviation safety, and in making sure that we fully fund the Affordable Connectivity Program so that we can maintain internet access to vulnerable communities all across the country, including in inner-city America, small-town America, rural America, and the heartland of America. Thanks. Last question? We know how to count on our side. Thank you.