him letters asking if he really wrote the book, and they were responding to that interview. "you would not have accepted the prize if you had not written the book, would you? that's not the right thing to do." >> watch sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> earlier today, house speaker nancy pelosi held a news conference with reporters at the capital. she talked about the coronavirus and the government's response to it. >> if he is different to come into this room without all of our members, but here we are today -- it feels different. last night, i held another town hall meeting, as our colleagues are doing, at home, listening -- electronically, of course -- to their constituents, and again, bringing us the intelligence of how things are on the ground across the country, and of dire situation, so our hearts are broken for

those who have lost their loved ones. so very, very sad, and so many who are diagnosed and have that uncertainty. the key to our opening up our country and economy is really science, evidence, data, which can only be obtained by testing, testing, testing. again,o forward here, listening to scientists, listening to public health officials and the rest from around the country as well as to the intelligence from the areas that our colleagues bring, we cares two.ed for it will honor our heroes, those who have on a day-to-day basis -- our health care providers, first responders, police, fire, emergency service people,

transit, food providers, teachers, teachers, teachers -- we honor them, and that takes the form of state and local funding. , we kind ofs bill .ollowed the cares model we have to do very much more than that and democrats and republicans across the country -- governors, mayors, county officials, etc. -- have been calling out for this funding. if -- we are going from just doing state and local as one chunk to state, local, county, etc., it nearly doubles what we need to do in this bill, which is much bigger than what was in the original cares bill. that is a discussion that we are having next. next, we talk about saving the lives and the livelihood of the american people and, of course, the life of our democracy.

in terms of saving lives, the going to ridre ourselves of this as well as evidence,r economy is science-based testing, testing, testing. just think of the t's -- testing, tracing, treatment. an isolation, when necessary, of course, with social distancing. but in terms of what we can legislate and fund, testing will be a very major part of this. we need a national strategy. to do so, i think, is long overdue. our first bill march 4 was testing, testing, testing, but it did not come through in terms of policy. our not last but most recent bill, the interim bill signed a week or so ago by the president is about $25 billion for

testing. that's not enough, but it's what we could get, and we need to do much more. if we are talking about testing, tracing, treatment, etc., we have to do it in the most ethical way that everybody -- when we hear the disproportionate number of people dying among people of color, we want to get to them sooner to test, to trace, so we and recognize there is a path that is better than the one we are on in this regard. that will be a major part of this. with the testing on the tracing and the treatment that we will have to have a core of people going out there, culturally appropriate, linguistically appropriate, into communities to trace. more on that in a moment. then the third part -- honor our

heroes, state and local. open up government. testing, testing, testing, science. that is the key. the heart ache that is out there. one mom reported that one in -- this has been something that is my motivation for being in politics, to help children. from brookings reported that one in five mothers say their children are not getting enough food. three times the rate during the great depression, so in addition to putting money in people's pockets, direct payments someloyment insurance, other tax credits, etc., we really also need to put food on the table. billd snapped in the first

. in the next three bills, they would not accept snapped. we have to have snap. when i was hungry, you fed me -- i mean, why is that a mystery? the american people know it. the food banks are overwhelmed, and we have to have a significant increase in snap. again, we've tried to do this as much as possible in a bipartisan way. republican and democratic governors and mayors across the country support what we are doing with the state and local honoring our heroes. tose people risk their lives save other people's lives, and they may now lose their jobs. it's just not right. i will not go through the whole bill here because i have to get the agreement of my caucus, but those are the broad categories. within them, our appropriations piece will address the postal

service and things like that. that is kind of a taste of what our discussions are, but very important for you to know the priorities. in all the bills, we have some element of this, so this is no departure from where we went for. there are so many other things going on in all of this, and ,hat is, as you have seen imagined and this time the coronavirus and all the apprehension that comes with it in terms of the access to health the president has said he is all out to make the case in court. the executive branch's role is to protect and defend the law of the land, except they are going against the law of the land, ok? let's let people know what that means in their lives. when there was a chance they of thenly do pieces

repeal of the affordable care act, their top priority was to the sure that repeal of benefitting condition -- it means everything. you have seen the little , the littlee lobbyist born with some challenge or other, pre-existing condition for anyone. wasn -- being a woman considered being a pre-existing condition. the list of benefits that are in there, but i just want to focus on the fact that when they thought they had just a few, they would go after a few provisions, their focus was on ending the benefit of pre-existing conditions not being a barrier to access to health care.

we have briefings. we have press conference, maybe some of you were on the call with having a. i salute him for taking the lead against this texas initiative and now trump initiative to end the access for 20 million people million, -- 150 million families whose benefits were greatly increased, essential benefits, but the president says no. that is a bigger fight on health care, you would think, at the time of the coronavirus there would be some sensitivity, some that they for people who have some sympathy about their own health care and their predisposition to something like this and their ability at this time of economic uncertainty to be able to afford health care. there are so many other things, but with that, i will yield to you for questions.

have a new system here. this is new to me because i only heard about it last night. times," of "los angeles oh, there you are. here we are. ok. whoever invented this, the sound is not working. i've learned to be very good at reading lips on the floor of the house, but i don't know if everybody else can, so we will wait for the sound. in the meantime, i'm sure you have seen that once again, the trump administration is title ix protections for students and survivors, once again doing something to

undermine protections that are there. yesterday we studied that. there's also -- are we ready? ok, where are the people from the gallery? someone in the room, ok? [indiscernible] arehat something you actively negotiating with the administration right now? >> no, it is a reflection of the needs of the american people, and it is consistent with the precedent and the other bills. >> [indiscernible] >> we'll see. we'll see. i'm not going to negotiate it here. i would hope that they would see the need. as i say, everything that i just mentioned has bipartisan support in the country. i hope it does in the congress, but we have to start someplace, and rather than starting in a way that does not meet the needs they seterican people,

a standard. at some port -- we have to get a presidential signature, but at some point we have to come to an agreement, but we want people to know -- they are heartbroken, of course, about loss-of-life and , their health, but also economic security as well as their health security, that we are setting a standard that helps meet their needs. this is about them. it is about our heroes. it's about testing. it's about the american people. >> [indiscernible]

>> let me just say, i think everything should be based on science and not state or local or whatever it is. if you are going to have a standard, you have to have a federal standard because, as we know, viruses know no borders nationally, but they certainly do not know any state borders. i think the way this has been handled is most unfortunate. first of all, they had guidelines, which were weak, but nonetheless guidelines, and then the president said you don't even have to honor them. then we find out now that there much cdc report that had more comprehensive guidelines, and they buried it in the white house. again, our goal is a healthy .merica or healthy economy the rotor that is to have again,ds, testing, and not barry with the cdc is recommending -- the road to that.

did he pay attention to the scientists? i don't know. to point is that we want open up, but not in a way that causes more deaths. again, i think it is wrong for us not to -- if states want to open up -- we are starting in california with standards and the rest, that is a decision that they make, but there should be a federal standard because if , sameve in california thing in new york, new jersey, connecticut, and the rest. i do think there should be federal standards, and i think they should set an example instead of people going to the legislature of michigan in direct contact with each other, and i feel sad for them, these demonstrators because they could take something home to their children, which would be irresponsible.

on the other hand, to have the president sort of praise that, this tells you what the challenge is. need.is is what we we need the testing. to honor our heroes, and we need to put money in the pockets of the american people. how are we doing? is this thing working now? jennifer? -- jennifer?.org >> [indiscernible] can you hear me? speaker, can you hear me? could tell us you why you did not start with before the house formed this bill [indiscernible] >> we had and all the negotiations we have had a list

of things we wanted to see. expansion of family medical leave, high standards or osha and legislation so that when companies would open, there is a high standard particular to the coronavirus that they would have to meet. part of this is things that they never agreed to before and kept saying in the next bill, and the next bill, and the next bill. these are part of those negotiations. in the next bill, we are doing these things, and the others we have build on what has been in the other bill. ok, who is next? love elliott? , speaker pelosi, for doing this. last night we learned president trump is going to name a donor as head of the postal service. what does this tell you about what might be possible in terms of getting the nations post

office back on solid ground? >> i thank you for your question about the postal service. my understanding is that the postmaster general is appointed by the board, the board is appointed by the president, so there you have it. without going into that, i would rather say that the postal service is very popular in our country. 70% or higher say there should be funding for the postal service. this is a connection throughout america. this is how seniors even before now would get there -- i'm looking -- would get their medicines and the rest, but in much is beinge so done, and so much depends on it being materialized by the postal service in terms of delivery and the rest seems a really terrible

time -- when i say their goal has always been to privatize, to make a profit off the postal ,ervice for private purposes that's the fundamental difference that we have. people have been tweeting me saying we want to protect our post office. everybody knows -- not everybody knows, many people know their letter carriers. these are true patriots doing a great job at ordinary times, and then this extraordinary time is pretty exceptional, and of course, we will have ending for elections, both by mail, and of course, all the more reason we want to have a vibrant post office, but that is not the main purpose.

there are some people -- i think it's 10 million letters they want to have people send that they are going to vote on election day -- 10 million ,etters -- and it is a send out a big initiative. for these and other reasons so people can express themselves other than electronically because some communities just don't have that opportunity for going to bee fighting for the postal service. nancy, are you there? >> thank you so much. the national debt hit $25 trillion this week. how much does the increase in the debt way on you as you try to decide how much money should go to state and local

governments or if you should put -- how dong into ppe you weigh those decisions? >> i'm a pay-as-you-go person, much to the dismay of some in my party, but i think as a matter of course, when we are doing what we are doing, we should do the offset to find additional spending or get revenue to pay for it because debt is an important challenge. years ago, george miller, when he was a member of congress, when we were at the midterm convention in philadelphia, he proposed pay-as-you-go. it passed the convention and became the law when bill clinton was president. when president bush came in, the surplus was erased because they eliminated pay-as-you-go. president obama came in,

the deficit went from 1.4 trillion dollars to $500 billion during his presidency, reflecting the concern that we all have. but what we are talking about now is about a stimulus to our economy at a time when people aboutippled with concern their physical well-being as well as their economic well-being. when we talk about food stamps and direct payments and unemployment insurance, they stimulate the economy. their purpose is to meet the needs of people, but they are a stimulus to the economy. and it's far better to spend our .oney that way the republicans had no hesitation whatsoever in the dark of night passing a bill that takes almost $2 trillion in debt in order to give 83% of the benefits to the top 1%.

when we look at the needs that , the top 1%,ve bless them all, we do not begrudge anyone their achievement, but there is no upside for our economy unless there is consumer confidence, unless people understand that the well-being of working people and our family is what keeps the american people strong. yes, i'm concerned about the itional debt, but i think would be penny foolish to say, "i'm sorry, we cannot do snap to give you food because there's a national debt." we just game $2 trillion to the wealthiest people in our country, but we cannot feed one in four people in our country because of the national debt. fed,nk the chairman of the chairman powell, has said it again and again publicly, he said it to me, think big. the interest rates are very, very low. think big.

that is what we are doing. let's see. yes, ma'am. [indiscernible] perspective?ng i don't think it is related to that. when the sergeant at arms and the capital physician say that we can come. we have two examples that work, one for a voice vote and one for a recorded vote. on.ave a good model to go hopefully when we come back, and i'm hoping that next week we will have the voting initiative on the floor so we can vote here, and if people for some they willnot be here, be recorded. yes, ma'am. >> [indiscernible]

-- do io sorry, dear expect what? [indiscernible] of course, yeah. yes. are collectingwe that data. the fact is in this legislation since you asked it that way, we think there should be stabilizers in these bills, so if the unemployment rate, now at 7%, triggers 26 weeks of unemployment benefits, but that for the medicaid funding and the rest so that you don't always have to say let's debate if that is necessary. this recognition that when you have that assault on the economy, and so -- they say to 17% --ight be up 16% or 17% unemployment.

i would hope that we could see a time in the very near future when that would be drastically examine and we will other ways to help people. have a sovereign .und, have a paycheck guarantee there may be other things that can help people not go on unemployment insurance because their employers will be able to pay them by one provision or another, but it breaks my heart to say because of what it means in people's lives, but unemployment insurance will be extended, yes. >> [indiscernible] >> yeah. >> [indiscernible]

>> they are going over all of that. i will get their report, but let me remove all doubt. our members want remote voting by proxy. people keep saying we want government to open up. to,, we don't want people they have a fever or if someone , they ora fever someone else should be recorded. i was all set to bring that to the floor when we were here before, and the republican leaders said let's talk about it, and i said if there is a way to do it in a bipartisan way, that would be better. my members were not happy

because they wanted to be able to do it by proxy right away, that day.ould not until the rule change. hopefully we can do it in a bipartisan way. it is really proxy voting hearings this way, either in person, electronically or hybrid , and the next question is can you do more, and that is part of the discussion, and a lot of it happening ast is far as the capital position and sergeant at arms is concerned, but we have an emergency of such

magnitude no one has ever seen before. this is probably the worst that is only getting worse when it should be getting better. -- you are saying is want the economy to grow? put money in people's pockets. you want to be able to open up the economy? testing, testing, testing, tracing, tracing, tracing, treatment, treatment, treat, isolation, social distancing. are absolutely's essential. that is what scientists tell us. state and local is a term used by the -- but the actual people who benefit are those in health care delivery. transit issues, food issues, teaching, postal service, all of that is about our heroes.

they all in some ways interact in a way that is risking their lives so other people can thrive .nd survive we are seeing hospitals laying off people, teachers being laid off. we cannot have that. instead, we want to honor them. i think we are totally unworthy to say isn't it great what they are doing, blue angels flying over and all of that -- that's a beautiful thing, but those of us with a responsibility for this have no right to praise them and then ignore their needs because that just cancels itself out. .et's meet their needs with ppe we saw yesterday the nurse said we don't have enough ppe, and the president said, yes, you do.

let's go from the facts, the science, evidence, data, and go from that to what we need. let me just say my members, i'm so proud of them. they are so concerned, so empathetic to the needs of constituents, so candid and how they see things happening and how they think we have to come to consensus. again, we are very proud the bills were bipartisan, and we hope we can continue that. that's why what we are doing is following with the path was in many cases as to what was in the other bills. we are not drawing any redlines in the sand or anything like that. , but ourey will not members are just fabulous in terms of their attention to all of this constantly, and our chairs of the committee are dazzling. they have been the source of more new ideas, more fresh

thinking, more challenges to the conscience of our country as we go forward. i could not be prouder, and they are the ones making their suggestions about what is in this bill. i asked them, as i always do, reach across the aisle. don't take anybody by surprise. let them know what your committee is thinking. we have different views about the role of government. if you are antigovernment, which many people are here, and you are anti-science, which many people here are, you don't see the need to have scientifically decisions for the federal government to act upon, and the fact is we don't want any more government than we need, but we have to have the governance that we do, and hopefully, that can be bipartisan. but our first response ability is to meet the needs of the american people. thank you all. stay safe.

>> house minority leader kevin mccarthy also held a briefing with reporters earlier today where he announced a republican-led task was to investigate china's role in the coronavirus pandemic. here is a portion of his remarks. >> we cannot wait any longer. the stakes are too high to sit idly by. which is why today i'm announcing the republican-led china task was, and i advise the democrats to join with me. time was one moment in they said yes. a few moments ago they said no. i would say there is no more important time than now to join with us together, to work as one nation as we face these challenges. this group will be led by house

foreign affairs ranking member michael mcauley and it will include liz cheney and anthony funny, andyleast a barr, john joyce, adam kissinger, jim banks, michael walsh and chris stewart. it will be a microcosm of our entire conference, taking more than 10 committees of jurisdiction and others. they will be looking at a wide range of china-related issues including influence operations targeting the u.s. including our universities, think tanks, and media outlets. economic threats to our government and allies, efforts to gain a technological advantage and role in the origin and spread of covid-19. the work will lead to a comprehensive report with lettuce of operations due by october. a new committee that was announced by the democrats last month was the coronavirus oversight committee led by one

of the most political members of their caucus. i have frequent gone over the existing oversight functions in the house. we all know we have the oversight committee. every single committee has a subcommittee on oversight. three additional new oversight committees were put in the cares act. it is important to have accountability, and in doing so, and these three new committees, you have the inspectors general to select someone, you have the president and another committee who will appoint an individual that will be confirmed by the senate, and then you have a bipartisan, bicameral committee as well. every single leader, all four appointed one, and then the speaker and leader mcconnell will decide who the fifth person will be. this will be the only partisan committee out there, waited to

an advantage to the democrats with no senators on as well, but what concerns me about this, not just the redundancy and weight of taxpayer money, is who was selected. jim clyburn, probably one of the most political people in the democratic side, described the pandemic as a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit their vision. not an opportunity for the health and well-being of americans, but a political opportunity to restructure any liberal view the government of america. maxine waters was also appointed to this committee by the speaker. she said in 2017, "i'm going to keep working until he is impeached." jamie raskin called for the president's impeachment just two

days before his inauguration. he was also the individual selected by the democrats to go before the rules committee to bring the articles of impeachment forward to the house. whenot sure what they have it comes to holding accountability on the cares act. i know what they do politically. that is what has always had me concerned about this committee. while democrats might use this to take another stab at impeachment 2.0, republicans will remain committed to truth and transparency. that's why i'm going to ask our whip, steve scalise, to leave this panel for us. in addition, the panel will include jim jordan, jack gorski, and mark green. not sure if you're familiar with him. he will be the only doctor who is on this committee. he is a west point graduate. he is an emergency room doctor. who think this

committee or this virus is designed to restructure government, the individuals we appointed have one goal in mind -- truth and transparency. c-span has unfiltered coverage of the federal response to the coronavirus pandemic with white house briefings, updates from governors in congress, and our daily call-in program, "washington journal," hearing your thoughts about the coronavirus crisis. if you missed any of our live coverage, watch on-demand at c-span.org/coronavirus. >> a number of cases coming before the supreme court next week. on monday, if states can prosecute native americans for crimes committed on tribal land, schools arehial exempt from federal discrimination laws. on tuesday, the deal with trumps

of fire's financial records and if the president's personal financial records can be subpoenaed. you can watch live coverage of next week's supreme court oral arguments by teleconference on the c-span networks at c-span.org and listen with the free c-span radio app. >> television has changed since c-span began 40 years ago, but our mission continues to provide an unfiltered view of government. already this year we brought you primary election coverage, the presidential impeachment process, and now the federal response to the coronavirus. you can watch all of c-span programming on television, online, or listen on our free radio app. be part of the conversation through the daily "washington

journal" program or through our social media. america's cable television company. as a public service. brought to you by your television provider. ♪ >> washington journal primetime. for the next hour, a special evening edition. your questions and comments about the coronavirus epidemic start now. host: another 3 million americans have filed for unemployment benefits, with the labor department tomorrow expected to release a jobless report that could potentially hover around 20%. 5 one economist put it, 1 in jobs lost in seven weeks. it is thursday, may 7. on the washington journal, the death toll from coronavirus in this country has now passed 75,000. more