Today. Since we finished our legislation yesterday, getting ready for the next round of legislation to come to the floor. But it changed the nature of today. Here we are, tomorrows a national holiday. Getting ready for the fourth of july. I wear this flag pin quite frequently. I have a couple different flag pins, but this one particularly fraught with meaning. It says on it, one country, one destiny. The american flag. One country, one destiny. These were the words that were woven into abraham lincolns coat. It was an imperative then, one country, one destiny. It is an imperative now. Especially now, when we have such challenges to the wellbeing of our country. We have a pandemic that is wreaking havoc in households and across the country. Hurting our economy. In that regard, we must put aside bias and embrace science. Science, science, science. Testing, testing, testing. An answer that helps us address the virus, the pandemic, and enables us to open up our economy in a way that is safe. Thats whats in the heroes act. Testing, tracing, treatment. Separation. Hand washing. Masks. Science, science, science. Also in the heroes act, so named for the heroes that it honors, by keeping them employed, state and local health care workers, sanitation workers, transportation workers, teachers, teachers, teachers, food suppliers, you name them. Employees of state and local government. Many of them, especially in the health care sections, risking their lives to save other peoples lives. And now they may lose their jobs. And in the heroes act are the resources to keep state and local governments running. So they dont have to fire people. So that they can continue services. Because thats what theyll have to do. Raise taxes or Lower Services or some combination thereof. Also, in the heroes act, is that we have to come together around, recognize our one country, one destiny, is putting money in the pockets of the american people. Direct payments, yes. But also unemployment insurance. I also have in there funding for voting at home, supporting the post office, food. Many people are going to food banks now who never thought they would. Its for every reason. Personal, economically, patriotically, budgetwise and the rest. Its very important for us to pass the heroes act. When we ran in 2018, our agenda was a simple one. For the people, for the people we would Lower Health Care costs by lowering the cost of prescription drugs, and preserving the preexisting condition benefit, among others. Thats exactly what we did. Thats exactly what we did on monday. When we passed the Affordable Care act enhancement legislation. And a part of it was to lower the cost of prescription drugs by enabling the secretary to negotiate. At the same time as we were passing that enhancement, the white house is in the Supreme Court trying to overturn the Affordable Care act. Because they dont believe in science and they dont believe in governance. So if you put the two together, lets just overturn it. And that may be what they believe. But if thats what they believe, then they should tell the truth about it. Instead of saying, oh, we support the benefit of preexisting condition no. You fought to overturn it. Youve been trying to overturn it for the full time of the trump administration. And now youve taken it to the Supreme Court. And we will fight, we will fight that fight there. But im very proud of the work of our chairman to bring our agenda for the people and the work of the committee members. Second part of our agenda was to Lower Health Care costs, bigger paychecks, by building the infrastructure of america. And to do so in a green way for the future. It was a very lengthy bill, 25 hours of in the rules committee. Not in the rules committee, but in the amendment process, and then a long time on the floor. I want to salute the maestro of it all, peter defazio, but many other chairmen played a role in that and ive acknowledged them. But this is a broad bill. Its transformational. Its the biggest and greenest infrastructure bill in the history of our country. And its about roads and bridges and surface transportation, for sure. Its also about clean water. Some of our Water Systems are over 100 years old. Made of brick and wood and now this will be resources there to change that. Its about infrastructure for broadband so that all children, all families in our country can have Distance Learning and telemedicine and all that that takes. Whether they live in rural areas, which is a focus on rural, or urban deserts in that regard. Interestingly, senator mcconnell complains, this socalled infrastructure bill would siphon billions in funding from actual infrastructure to funnel into Climate Change policies. Exactly. Were not siphoning off money. Were Building Infrastructure for the future. Not for the 1950s. And were doing it in a way that cleans the air a health issue, clean air, clean water. Its an economic issue. Transportation, transfer of product from farm to market and the rest. Its a fabulous bill. It would take too long to go further into it. But be sure its the safest and greenest infrastructure bill. Were proud of this legislation because, you know what, it advances Environmental Justice. In our Health Care Bill it was about justice in health care, addressing the concerns of previously underserved communities who are now more drastically affected by the coronavirus. Part of it was again, in that regard, many of you there, when we were on the steps of the capitol, rolling out the solving the Climate Crisis action plan led by congresswoman, madam chair, kathy castor of florida, the most detailed sweeping climate plan in over a decade, reflecting over 100 hearings across nearly every committee in the congress. Lower health care costs, bigger paychecks, cleaner government. And the cleaner government piece in the last few days, the centerpiece was the George Floyd Justice in policing act, which will fundamentally transform the culture of the policing of ending Police Brutality and bring accountability to our police departments. It will save lives. It recognizes that overwhelmingly our men and women in uniform take great pride in the integrity that they bring to their job. But some dont. And this bill addresses that. And were so proud that George Floyds family allowed us to name the bill for him. They said it met their standards. That was last thursday. And last friday we proudly, for the first time, the house voted to grant statehood to the district of columbia. Our members of congress, again, our priority, and even all elected officials safety is our top priority. If the people arent safe, what is the rest the rest of it doesnt matter as much. And the matter of intelligence. To protect our men and women in uniform. Before the initiation of hostilities, or in response to them, when they are in danger, their protection is of the highest priority. And so when there are allocations of a threat to our men and women in uniform, we expect the president of the United States to give them that same force protection, that same priority. And we are disappointed that that has not happened. In the last i called for russian sanctions to be expanded. In our last russian sanctions legislation, you may recall, we had a strong bipartisan bill that was to be sent to the president. But the white house said they wanted us to take out the sanctions on russia that pertained to the intelligence and the defense sectors. The very sector that is accused of possible threats on our men and women in uniform. We have to restore those, whatever else happens of this, we must restore those sanctions. And we must act upon them. While were in the international arena, as many of you know, i saw some of you there this week, beijing passed its socalled National Security law which signals the death of the one countrytwo systems principle. When i say i saw some of you there, i meant the Foreign AffairsCommittee Hearing yesterday. As one who has worked on human rights in china in a bipartisan way, with our colleagues across the aisle and across the capitol, it was so encouraging to see the room was in overflow crowd of members. From both sides of the aisle. Of course we had to keep our distance. And therefore the members had to sit in the, shall we say audience, and others had to come in virtually. But it was the fullest participation for us to review what is happening there. It was a proud and broad bipartisan participation to shine a light and condemn this law. Congress again on a bipartisan basis is united in our mission to hold beijing accountable. Last year the house passed the hong kong human rights and democracy act and yesterday we passed hong kong autonomy act, which had already passed the senate. And that is to help end chinas campaign of cruelty against hong kong. Youve heard me say it again and again. If we dont speak out against violations of human rights in china because of commercial interests, we lose all moral authority to speak out against Human Rights Violations anyplace in the world. Getting back to the flag and the fourth of july. We take that pledge every day in civic arena. Pledge to the flag. Ends with liberty and justice for all. And everything that i talked about here, whether it was health care or job security or Environmental Justice or justice in policing or statehood for the district of columbia, were talking about liberty and justice for all. That has to be central to all of the legislation that we have put forth. And im proud to say that it has been in this array of bills that came forth between last thursday and yesterday evening and now will come back continue our work in committee to bring forth legislation when we come back. Central to them all will be liberty and justice for all. Especially poignant for us as we observe the fourth of july. Any questions . Reporter thank you, madam speaker. My question is about hong kong. Theres a proposal that grants Refugee Status to hong kong residents. Do you support that bill . Theres a bipartisan bill on that. And also, what is your overall reaction to mass arrests in hong kong during the july 3 protest against the security \[indiscernible] ms. Pelosi at the hearing yesterday i had the privilege by unanimous consent to participate in the hearing. And listen to the testimony of the witnesses. One of the my concerns about the law is, is it starting now that you cannot you can practically do nothing. You have no expression of anything that would you not be susceptible to prosecution probably in beijing. So my question was, does this retro does this apply is this retroactive . Does this apply to all of the protests for democratic freedoms that have happened in hong kong . I dont know the answer to that. The Chinese Government does. And unfortunately theyre not sharing that with us right now. But i fear for it. But if you saw the socalled National Security, what it is is suppression of any expression in hong kong, really sad. So im disappointed, obviously, in the arrest of anyone who is speaking out peacefully for democratic freedoms, wherever it is. In terms of refugee im not familiar with that. But those people would qualify because they have, by this law, a wellfounded fear of persecution in the place of origin from which they would come. So they would qualify on that score. I would rather we could make it right in hong kong so that that place of such entrepreneurship and dinism and spirit of democracy i told you before, when two Million People were in the street like a year and a half ago, i said to the president , could you Say Something about the young people in the street . He said, did you see the size of that crowd . A few Million People. I said, yeah. Even more significant when you know that that is 25 of the population of hong kong. This is a real tragedy. Its so sad. But in the congress, in the house, and in the senate, in a very unified way, we have all worked together. It has been, for me, a joy to be bonding with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, both sides of the capitol on this very important issue. The republicans have been there every step of the way. I hope the president will be. Yes, maam. Reporter \[indiscernible] do you think that the president should have been verbally briefed on the information related to russian bounties . Ms. Pelosi having nothing to do with the briefing we had today, i think the president should have been verbally briefed on it. But i thought that before the hearing and it has nothing to do with anything that we were presented at the hearing. Of course the president should have been briefed. This is of the highest priority. Force protection. A threat to our men and women in uniform. The president , it was in his president ial daily brief but he wasnt verbally that doesnt mean that he shouldnt have read that. But again, having nothing to do with what we saw today. Reporter i know youre limited in what you can say about the briefings here. But it says that this information should have been things that the gang of eight or others would have known about. That said, can you comment if you did know about this . Ms. Pelosi i didnt know about it but i will say this. It was of a consequential level that the Intelligence Community should have brought it to us in that way. But what is important is the president s relationship with russia. This is at the same time as the white house was aware of this threat to the security of our men and women in uniform, the president was still flirting with the idea of having russia be part of the g8. In total opposition to the wishes of the other members of the g8. They werent there, russia wasnt, because of their annexation of crimea, their invasion of ukraine. You cant be in the g8 or g7. So why was the president why were they not raising this to a level of to say to the president , this is not a good time for you to be saying russia should be part of the g8 when in fact there is reason to suspect that russia was threatening the security of our men and women in uniform. Reporter to that end. What should happen now . You mentioned potentially restoring those sanctions. I know you just had this briefing but do you think there are other steps congress should take in light of everything were learning about this episode . Ms. Pelosi let me just say, and reference my statement about i said earlier, i think, that when congress in a bipartisan way passed sanctions on russia, the administration told us to take out the sanctions on the g. R. U. , the intelligence, as well as the defense sectors of russia. Those should definitely still be they were there in a bipartisan way. Its just the administration wanted them out. I dont know why. So we should have those in there in any event. As this proceeds, well see what other sanctions there should be. But we want to move all doubt in anyones mind that just because its russia and just because all roads for the president leads to putin doesnt mean that we shouldnt be taking careful guard of our elections. Because 24 7 they are trying to undermine the integrity of our elections again. And other concerns that we have about russian behavior in cybersecurity, in actual security issues. But we dont subject it to the same kind of scrutiny, this administration doesnt, because its russia. Yes, sir. Reporter on the domestic front, youre leaving now for a few weeks. You come back july 20. Is there enough time to negotiate a compromise on the next covid relief package . Ms. Pelosi of course. First of all, im not leaving for two weeks. So dont give my husband and my family any thought that i will be there for two weeks. No. We come back the beginning of next week with the Appropriations Committee starting actually on monday for some subcommittees. My understanding for sure tuesday so that they can put the subcommittees can do their work on appropriations and then the full committee the week after can do their each of those bills. So that when we do come back were ready to go to the floor. Many people will be here, some will be virtual. Some of it hybrid. Some of it actual. Some of the virtual, well see. But congress will be intensely working. Not just Appropriations Committee, but that is what must be done by september 30. That has a priority. And last night, they didnt go too late. It was a reasonable time. The defense bill was passed. The ndaa, the National Defense authorization act. 560. Completely bipartisan bill. We were very proud of that. But, yes. No, we know everything we have in the heroes act is something the republicans have voted for before. Except one thing, which is a stronger osha standard to protect our workers. But Everything Else in the bill they voted for before. So this is nothing new to them. Some of it bigger. Some of it fresher. But all of it something they voted on before. How this works is the committees do their work and then what is unresolved gets kicked up to the four leaders and obviously the president is going to sign the bill, would weigh in there. They know, theyve made their overtures, they also have said publicly that this or that should be in the next bill. So we anticipate we will have a bill. Yes, sir. Reporter madam speaker, back if i may to the intelligence aspect of this. The white house continues to say this is not yet verified. One of the reasons that the president it did not rise to his level. It sounds like youre speak being this maybe a little bit more conclusive than the white house does. Is that your view . Ms. Pelosi let me just say. This you got the con. The white house put on a con that if you dont have 100 consensus on intelligence, that we shouldnt be it shouldnt rise to a certain level. Well, we were practically we would practically be investigating nothing if you had to start off at 100 . So dont buy into that. And neither should the does the Intelligence Community. Its an investigation its gathering intelligence. And they have enough intelligence to know where we have to go next with it. So i dont i dont know what the point of your question is. Just because they didnt have 100 consensus, should this be not briefed to the president of the United States . When it involves the security and safety of our men and women in uniform . As we said in our statement, Chuck Schumer and i, he should spend more time reading the daily president ial brief, the president ial daily brief, whatever, than planning military parades and preserving the relics of the confederacy. Reporter madam speaker. On that topic. You obviously care a lot about symbols. And symbols of america. Ill make this clearer. Can you update us on where you think things stand with the confederate statues remaining in the capitol . And if you just assume that now thats left to the states because leader mcconnell is not engaging, and also, Vice President biden said this week he believes theres a distinction for jefferson, washington. Both of those men, theres a bust of washington and a statue of jefferson in the house side, which you control. Do you believe theres a distinction or should there be a conversation about those representations as well . Ms. Pelosi i do believe that the people have committed treason against the United States of america, their statues should not be in the capitol. And that is we took down the paintings of the speakers who were members of the confederacy. And there will be legislation coming forth to remove those same people who meet that low description. If youve committed treason against the United States of america. Its not about washington and jefferson. Its about alexander stevens, read what he said about people. Its about the president of the confederacy whose statue is up there, who committed treason against the United States. So thats the clarity that we should have. Some of it is the states have put them there. The states may want to review. But in the meantime, while they may be in the capitol, we can decide where they are in the capitol. Thank you all very much. Happy fourth of july. Take care. Keep a distance. Wash your hands. Happy fourth. Thank you. \[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] Kevin Mccarthy talked about the