{"id":155197,"date":"2023-02-01T23:28:39","date_gmt":"2023-02-02T07:28:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/?p=155197"},"modified":"2023-02-01T23:28:39","modified_gmt":"2023-02-02T07:28:39","slug":"briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/?p=155197","title":{"rendered":"Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Washington, DC&#8230;Good afternoon, everybody.  Q Good afternoon.  MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Today, the Vice President is in Memphis, Tennessee, to attend the celebration of life service for Tyre Nichols. White House officials, including Senior Advisor for Public Engagement Keisha Lance Bottoms and Senior Advisor and Infrastructure Coordinator Mitch Landrieu, are also in attendance on behalf of the administration.<\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" width=\"640\" height=\"360\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/FTL8_Rm0RhY\" title=\"02\/01\/23: Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>As you know, the President and the Vice President spoke to Mr. Nichols\u2019s mother and stepfather on the phone earlier to express their condolences and support.<\/p>\n<p>The President told Mr. Nichols\u2019s family that he would continue pushing Congress to send the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act to his desk.<\/p>\n<p>Last year, when \u2014 when Senate Republicans blocked that legislation from coming to his desk, President Biden took executive action. But as the President has said, there is no substitute to federal legislation.<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s why, tomorrow, the President is hosting Representative Hors- \u2014 Horsford and a small group of CBC members here at the White House for a conversation about the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act and other shared policies. And it\u2019s why he\u2019s continuing to call on Republicans in Congress to join with Democrats and ensure our justice system lives up to its name.<\/p>\n<p>I know you all just came back from the President\u2019s Competition Council meeting, so I wanted to highlight a few \u2014 a few items that \u2014 that has showed some progress we\u2019ve made on the President\u2019s competition agenda.<\/p>\n<p>Today\u2019s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau \u2014 CFPB \u2014 rule would save consumers as much as $9 billion a year in excessive credit card late fees.<\/p>\n<p>The NTIA report today provides recommendations to give consumers more control over their devices.<\/p>\n<p>And the President is calling on Congress to pass a Junk Fee Prevention Act, which would crack down on excessive concert and entertainment ticket fees; ban airline fees for families to sit with young children; eliminate exorbitant early termination fees for TV, phone, and Internet service; ban surprise resort and destination fees at hotels.<\/p>\n<p>And also, more broadly, we are making progress limiting junk fees, which can cost hundreds of dollars a month.<\/p>\n<p>CFPB is targeting overdraft and bounce-back fees, reducing those fees by more than $1 billion a year.<\/p>\n<p>And the Transportation Department led more airlines to guarantee coverage of hotels and meals when flights are delayed or canceled for issues under their control.<\/p>\n<p>Competition is a core tenet of the President\u2019s economic agenda to lower prices and promote capitalism.<\/p>\n<p>Now turning to another piece of news: During the North American Leaders\u2019 Summit earlier this month, President Biden emphasized his commitment to working with Mexico to prosecute dangerous drug traffickers and increase information sharing on chemicals used in \u2014 in the illicit manufacturing of fentanyl and other synthetic drugs.<\/p>\n<p>Yesterday, the Treasury Department sanctioned leader of a Mexico-based network and two associates for procuring pre- \u2014 precursor chemicals from China to manufacture and traffic illicit fentanyl and other synthetic drugs to the United States.<\/p>\n<p>This action was coordinated closely with the government of Mexico and will play a role in disrupting the importation of chemicals to the United States. And we will continue to closely coordinate with Mexico and our regional partners to disrupt the transnational criminal organizations that are trafficking illicit fentanyl into the United States.<\/p>\n<p>And I wanted to end our topper here by mar- \u2014 by marking the start of Black History Month, which we are celebrating today.<\/p>\n<p>Each February, National Black History Month serves as both a celebration and a powerful reminder that Black history is American history, Black history is American culture, Black stories are essential to the ongoing story of America.<\/p>\n<p>Yesterday, the President issued a proclamation in celebration of Black History Month. This month, the Biden-Harris administration is shining a light on Black history by taking time to celebrate the immeasurable contributions of Black Americans, honoring the legacies and achievements of generations past, reckoning with centuries of injustices, and con- \u2014 confronting those injustices that are still so vividly in front of us today.<\/p>\n<p>\u2003President Biden and Vice President Harris are deeply committed to advancing equity, racial \u2014 racial justice, and opportunity for Black Americans as this administration continues striving to realize America\u2019s founding promise.<\/p>\n<p>This administration\u2019s commitment began with building a federal government that looks like America. It continued with building a federal bench that reflects our nation.<\/p>\n<p>Nearly one third of his judicial nom- \u2014 appointments are Black Americans, and President Biden has nominated more Black women to federal courts than ev- \u2014 than every other President in history combined.<\/p>\n<p>And, of course, President Biden appointed Ju- \u2014 Ketanji \u2014 Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first Black woman to serve on our nation\u2019s highest court in the land.<\/p>\n<p>And in just two years, the Biden-Harris administration has delivered real and lasting change and continues to work each day to deliver equitable outcomes and opportunity for Black Americans, whether it\u2019s rebuilding the economy, where the unemployment rate for Black Americans is a near-record historic low at 5.7 percent, or providing nearly $6 billion in historic resources and support for Historically Black Colleges and Universities.<br \/>\n\u2003<br \/>\nBut of course, even as we make meaningful progress, not a day goes by \u2014 and especially not this day, today \u2014 without real reminders of how far we have left to go.<\/p>\n<p>The Biden administration will honor and continue the work of Black Americans who have created a more fair and inclusive democracy, helping our nation move closer to the realization of its full promise of opportunity and justice for all.<\/p>\n<p>With that, Seung Min, go ahead.<\/p>\n<p>Q One \u2014 one question on police reform. Can you talk about the President\u2019s message to the CBC members when he meets with them tomorrow and what new, sort of, strategy the White House has for getting police reform through Congress? And I ask that because one of the CBC members told one of my colleagues today that the President is, quote, \u201cmissing the opportunity\u201d to be a historic President when it comes to these issues, and that he\u2019s been a champion of the status quo in many ways. We need to be \u2014 \u201cWe need him to be a champion of a new vision for America.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, the President is very much looking forward to meeting with congressional \u2014 the members of the Congressional Black Caucus and to have a conversation \u2014 a real conversation about how to move forward on police reform and other shared policies, as I mentioned moments ago.<\/p>\n<p>Look, these are members that the President has had a longstanding relationship with, as you all know. And it\u2019s \u2014 it is a collaboration that we see this \u2014 this conversation becoming \u2014 a collaboration, again, on dealing with an issue that is truly affecting the Black community and also the brown community as well.<\/p>\n<p>And, you know, to your \u2014 to the statement that you just laid out from a Congressional Black Caucus member, I would say this \u2014 you know, and I said this at the top: When \u2014 when the Senate Republicans blocked and would not move forward with the George Floyd Policing Act, the President acted. He acted by moving forward with an \u2014 taking executive action.<\/p>\n<p>And that shows, we believe and the President believes, how important this issue is. And by bringing the Congressional Black Caucus tomorrow to the White House, it also shows the President\u2019s commitment to working with Congress on trying to figure out how do we move forward.<\/p>\n<p>Again, it does not take away from the fact the \u2014 the way that we\u2019re going to deal with this issue is to have federal legislation. That\u2019s how we\u2019re going to move forward.<\/p>\n<p>Again, the President took executive action \u2014 he was very proud that he was able to do that \u2014 when the Senate \u2014 Senate Republicans, in particular \u2014 blocked \u2014 blocked what the \u2014 what Democrats were trying to do. And he took action. And I think that shows his commitment.<\/p>\n<p>Q And on documents, Ian addressed a version of this at the sticks a little bit ago. But I\u2019m wondering how the White House can claim that they are being transparent when the FBI search of the Penn Center \u2014 Penn Biden Center that happened months ago was not proactively disclosed to the public. And what should the public take away from the fact that you are keeping information like this from the public?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Look, I\u2019m going to be very prudent from here. I\u2019m going to be very consistent from here. I\u2019m just not going to comment anything that is related to what is currently happening. This is a legal process.<\/p>\n<p>As you just mentioned, my colleague was right outside these doors, answering many of your questions. He has done that these past couple of weeks \u2014 I believe four weeks now \u2014 and he\u2019ll continue to do that.<\/p>\n<p>Anything that is specific to this \u2014 to this partic- \u2014 particular process, I would refer you to the Department of Justice and also, again, my colleagues at the White House Counsel\u2019s Office.<\/p>\n<p>Q Following up on that \u2014 I understand you\u2019re not going to discuss the details or anything, but just: Is there a reason that two of the searches were disclosed and not the search of the Penn Biden Center?<\/p>\n<p>You mentioned this is a legal process. Is there a legal reason why you\u2019re disclosing only two and not what we know is a third search?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I\u2019m \u2014 again, I\u2019m going to refer you to the White House Counsel\u2019s Office.<\/p>\n<p>Q Okay. Then another question on the meeting today with Speaker McCarthy. You know, given that the President has made it pretty clear he\u2019s not going to negotiate on the debt ceiling, what does he hope to get out of this meeting then?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Look, the \u2014 we have said before: The President is looking forward to working \u2014 working closely and trying to figure out how we can deliver with \u2014 with Republicans who are willing to work in a \u2014 you know, in a good-faith, bipartisan way. He said that right after the midterm elections, and he\u2019s \u2014 he will continue to make that effort.<\/p>\n<p>And, you know, the President has been very clear about this. He wants to \u2014 they\u2019re going to talk about a range of issues, as you\u2019ve heard me say, as you\u2019ve heard us really report out from how we see this \u2014 this meeting moving forward.<\/p>\n<p>And, look, he wants to hear from the Speaker what\u2019s his plan. What is his plan on the budget? What is his plan to really deal with \u2014 to deal with \u2014 to deal with what is at the top of the minds of the American people? How are we going to lower costs for them? How are we going to deal with the national deficit, which is something that the President has taken very seriously by \u2014 in record \u2014 in record fashion, lowering the deficit by $1.7 billion? He wants to talk about that. He\u2019s always willing to have those conversations in good faith.<\/p>\n<p>And also, he wants to see what their budget is. What is their plan? We\u2019ve heard them over and over again talk about cutting Medicare, cutting Social Security. This is what we\u2019ve heard from Republicans leading up to the midterms and then after the midterms.<\/p>\n<p>So, okay, what \u2014 what is \u2014 what else are they going to be doing? What does that look like for them?<\/p>\n<p>Q And the President did have some choice words for the Speaker last night ahead of this meeting. He says he\u2019s made off-the-wall commitments to the far right. Was there any strategy in saying that ahead of this meeting? Is he trying to throw him off a little bit? Or, on the flip side, you know, is that really helpful to be talking like that \u2014<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, I will say this: Like, we understand what the Speaker is going through. He has a caucus that \u2014 you know, that has put forward some pretty extreme ideas, some extreme options in front of the American people: cutting Medicare, cutting Social Security. That is what he\u2019s dealing with.<\/p>\n<p>And so, what we\u2019re saying is that, \u201cOkay, well, this is what your caucus is saying. This is what your conference is saying. What\u2019s your plan?\u201d And I think that\u2019s what he is acknowledging, really, what the Speaker is currently dealing with.<\/p>\n<p>But, look, you know, as we \u2014 as we talk about \u2014 as we talk about the meeting that\u2019s about to come up very shortly and what they\u2019re going to discuss \u2014 again, a range of issues \u2014 the President had meetings, as you know, with the Democratic leadership just last week. He\u2019s looking forward to having this conversation.<\/p>\n<p>You saw a memo yesterday asking \u2014 asking the Speaker and, really, Congress \u2014 Republicans in Congress \u2014 are they going to live up to their constitutional obligation; are they going to lift the debt ceiling, as many of them did, including Speaker McCarthy, three times under the last President?<\/p>\n<p>So, that\u2019s number one: their obligation, are they going to live up to that. And number two: what\u2019s their plan as it relates to the budget and dealing with issues that truly matter for the American people.<\/p>\n<p>Q Karine, what is the current number of documents bearing classified markings that have been found in the President\u2019s residences and offices?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I would refer you to the White House Counsel\u2019s Office.<\/p>\n<p>Q Okay. And Ian just declined to comment on that as well.<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay. Well, there you go. You got your answer.<\/p>\n<p>Q On debt, would the President veto a bipartisan bill that included both spending cuts and a debt limit hike, similar to the 2011 compromise?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, I\u2019m not going to get \u2014 I\u2019m certainly not going to \u2014 well, I\u2019m glad you mentioned 2011, because I know I \u2014 there\u2019s been a lot of reporting on that. And I just want to be very clear: In 2011, the Obama-Biden administration negotiated in good faith, but congressional Republicans\u2019 recklessnessless [sic] \u2014 recklessness caused a historic blow to our economy. That\u2019s what we saw in 2011.<\/p>\n<p>And that\u2019s why when you look at how the administration \u2014 the Obama-Biden administration moved forward in 20- \u2014 2013, in 2014, and 2015, they moved forward in a way to avoid unnecessary danger. They didn\u2019t do that in those three \u2014 in those three consecutive years because of the bad faith that they saw in 2011.<\/p>\n<p>And so, look, let\u2019s not forget: That\u2019s why congressional Democrats and Republican in Congress voted three times in the Trump administration to lift the debt ceiling. And let\u2019s not forget this has happened 78 times since 1960, 49 times under Republican presidents and 29 times under Democratic presidents.<\/p>\n<p>So, this has been done before. It\u2019s their constitutional obligation to do this. And we are talking about programs \u2014 when they talk about Medicare and Social Security, we\u2019re talking about programs that they want to take hostage that\u2019s going to affect taxpayers, that\u2019s going to affect seniors, that\u2019s going to affect veterans.<\/p>\n<p>And, again, it is their constitutional duty. They should be able to do this without conditions.<\/p>\n<p>Go ahead.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thanks, Karine. I\u2019m trying to address some market-related chatter as well as some of the beliefs of some members on Capitol Hill. Jay Powell was just asked about the debt ceiling. He said there\u2019s only one option here; it\u2019s for Congress to pass the increase. Is that the view of the White House \u2014 there was only one option; there are no prioritization off-ramps, comically-large coins to consider, anything like that? Congress is the only option here, in the view of the White House?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, on any of the coins \u2014 and mint coins \u2014 I know that\u2019s come up before. You know, that\u2019s something that the Treasury deals with and answers on, so I\u2019m not going to comment there. I think we\u2019ve been very clear.<\/p>\n<p>I think we\u2019ve been very clear from here that this should be done without conditions. And it is \u2014 it is their basic job \u2014 Congress \u2014 right? \u2014 it is their basic duty to lift the debt ceiling. It is something that has been consistently done over the years.<\/p>\n<p>And that\u2019s how we see it. We see it as \u2014 as something that should not be done without condi- \u2014 with conditions. It should be done without conditions, to be even clearer. And again, it is their constitutional obligation to get this done for \u2014 on behalf of the American people.<\/p>\n<p>Q I understand that. And you guys have made that abundantly clear repeatedly. I\u2019m saying: Are you closing \u2014 can you close the door on any other alternatives than Congress fulfilling their constitutional obligation?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Look, what I\u2019m saying is we\u2019ve been very clear about, when we\u2019ve been asked, if there is going to be negotia- \u2014 if there\u2019s room for negotiations. We have said this should be done without any conditions. We should \u2014 there shouldn\u2019t be a way to go around this to get this done. This is something that Congress should act on.<\/p>\n<p>Now \u2014 and I\u2019ve mentioned this a little bit, which is: As it relates to, you know, lowering the deficit and that being a top priority for this President and has been throughout the last two years, he is willing and happy to have a good-faith conversation with anybody who wants to talk to him about ways to do that.<\/p>\n<p>And that\u2019s why he\u2019s been able to, in the last two years \u2014 we\u2019ve talked about it; I just mentioned it \u2014 in record fashion, $1.7 trillion, which is the largest decline in American history. That\u2019s what the President has been able to do.<\/p>\n<p>Now, as it relates to the debt ceiling, that is a separate matter. That is a different, different matter. We see this as a constitutional obligation that they \u2014 that they have, that Congress has to act.<\/p>\n<p>Q And just one more. The Department of Interior advanced an $8 billion oil drilling project earlier today. Climate advocates had pretty sharp criticism of that. Does the President believe he is adequately balancing his climate goals with the need for increased oil production in the near term?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, let me just be clear: No decision has been made on this.<\/p>\n<p>So \u2014 now, if you\u2019re asking about the President\u2019s commitment to tackling the climate crisis, as I think you were just saying, the President has done more than any other President on this front. And he\u2019s taken bold executive actions to accelerate clean energy manufacturing. He secured historic legislation to make communities more resilient to the impacts of climate change and lower energy costs and so much more.<\/p>\n<p>And he continues to deliver on historic climate change action while carrying out the law and meeting our energy needs.<\/p>\n<p>Again, no decision has been made yet. This is something \u2014 as it relates to this particular project, the final decision is going to be made by the Secretary of the Interior.<\/p>\n<p>But this is a President that has been committed to climate change. And \u2014 and you see that, again, in his actions.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thanks, Karine.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thank you. You were mentioning police reform \u2014 how the President has said that he wants legislative action. It doesn\u2019t seem like there\u2019s more momentum at this point for the George Floyd bill. Is there anything being considered as far as executive action? I realize he signed the order last summer, but anything additional as far as executive action?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, let me \u2014 let me just say a couple of things here, because I think people forget what the executive action did and \u2014 that the President took. Again, he took these \u2014 he took this step when Senate Republicans blocked the George Floyd Policing Act and would not move forward with something that\u2019s incredibly important.<\/p>\n<p>So, it \u2014 if you look at the executive action, it resulted in immediate changes, like manda- \u2014 mandating stricter use-of-force standards and body-worn cameras and banning \u2014 it banned chokeholds and restricting no-knock warrants at the federal level. It set the new standard for effective, accountable policing at the federal \u2014 at the federal level, as well.<\/p>\n<p>It also incentifi- \u2014 incentivizes reform at the state and local level through grant making and accre- \u2014 accredation [accreditation] standards.<\/p>\n<p>But again, we understand there\u2019s a lot more work to do. And the way that we\u2019re seeing this, the way that the President sees this: In order to have long-lasting change, we have to have federal legislation. That is the way that we\u2019re going to be able to see real \u2014 a real difference in communities as it relates to police reform. And that\u2019s why he\u2019s having the caucus here. He\u2019s going to have those conversations and see how we can move forward.<\/p>\n<p>Q There were some things that were revised in that \u2014 in that order compared to earlier draft orders. There \u2014 on use of force, it originally said that officers would only be able to use deadly force as a last resort. That was changed to \u201cwhen necessary\u201d as well. So, it did revise, but there were additional things that some criminal justice advocates were calling for as well.<\/p>\n<p>So, is there anything additionally, noting what\u2019s in there, that\u2019s being considered in case we don\u2019t see Congress move?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, again, we \u2014 the President has taken this very seriously by putting forward an executive action. As you just laid out, we ta- \u2014 we went back and forth and talked about what was in the executive action.<\/p>\n<p>But he truly believes in order to make real reform here, we have to get Congress to act. And we \u2014 this is a President that has been told many times, \u201cYou cannot get this done. You cannot get that done.\u201d And we have, you know?<\/p>\n<p>And if you look at the last two years, you know, I think more than 250 pieces of legislation that came into law were bipartisan. Some of the most important, historical pieces of legislation that\u2019s going to really help Americans, as we talk about the economy, as we talk about not leaving anybody behind, was done in a bipartisan way.<\/p>\n<p>Think about the bipartisan infrastructure legislation. Right? For example, you think about the CHIPS and Science Act that\u2019s bringing back manufacturing \u2014 manufacturing back into the \u2014 into the U.S. Those are important steps that was led by this President.<\/p>\n<p>So, again, it\u2019s not going to stop him just because we\u2019re \u2014 we may be hearing naysayers or people are saying that we\u2019re not going to get this done. It doesn\u2019t mean that the President is not going to continue to work really, really hard to make this happen.<\/p>\n<p>Q Just one more. Does he support a pattern-or-practice investigation into the Memphis Police Department?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I\u2019m just not going to get into any specifics as to what\u2019s happening currently in Memphis. As you know, there\u2019s an ongoing investigation. There\u2019s \u2014<\/p>\n<p>Q That would be Justice Department, though?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: That would be \u2014 look, that\u2019s \u2014 I will \u2014 the Department of Justice is dealing with \u2014 they\u2019re doing their own investigation. As we know, authorities are doing their own investigation. We\u2019re just not going to comment on anything specific as that is going on.<\/p>\n<p>Q Would the White House be open to an appropriations deal that also takes care of the debt limit? Or would that, in your view, be negotiating on it in some way?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, we said, again, without conditions. This should be done and lifted without conditions. And that would be a way to get around of doing their constitutional duty. So, I\u2019ll just leave it there.<\/p>\n<p>Go ahead.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thank you, Karine. Just two quick \u201chow we all do our jobs around here\u201d questions, and then one or two on the President.<\/p>\n<p>Why not have Ian brief in here?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, Ian was outside and took your questions.<\/p>\n<p>Q But why not in here like other government officials?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Again, Ian was outside and took your question, and he\u2019s been doing that for the last four weeks.<\/p>\n<p>Q Would the White House have revealed today\u2019s search if pool cameras hadn\u2019t caught the investigators arriving on scene?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Again, this is a question for the White House Counsel\u2019s Office. I would refer you to them.<\/p>\n<p>Q Okay. Today is perhaps the best example yet of the new era of divided government. There were Republican Oversight hearings being held today on the administration\u2019s border security and pandemic policy. The President is meeting with the Speaker. Can you remind us: What is the level of cooperation or legitimate back-and-forth you\u2019re willing to have with a Republican-led House when they\u2019re holding these investigations?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Say that \u2014 say \u2014 say a little bit more so I understand.<\/p>\n<p>Q Well \u2014 okay, border security \u2014<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.<\/p>\n<p>Q \u2014 policy is one thing. Pandemic policy \u2014 how money was spent \u2014 is another. What \u2014 what does the White House consider to be the kind of oversight and inquiries from congressional committees that you\u2019re willing to engage in and what is not?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, as it relates to the Oversight Committee \u2014 and I\u2019ve said this many times before \u2014 look, we\u2019re willing to work with Republicans \u2014 House Republicans on important priorities that matter to the American people, like lowering \u2014 lowering costs for Americans, as they said was really important going into the midterm elections. That\u2019s what we want to focus on.<\/p>\n<p>We want to focus on the priorities that matter to the American people. We\u2019re not interested in engaging in political stunts. And we want to move past the constant political warfare as we continue to see from Republicans, sadly.<\/p>\n<p>And, again, let\u2019s not forget, when Americans went out to vote in the midterms, they said they wanted to see less of that. They actually wanted to see bipartisanship.<\/p>\n<p>As it relates to any specifics to the Oversight Committee, I would refer you to my colleagues at the White House Counsel\u2019s Office.<\/p>\n<p>Q There was a local news report that various versions of the so-called Beast that the President is driven around in don\u2019t include the \u201cTaxation Without Representation\u201d license plates that Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama used and Presidents Bush and Trump did not. Is there any reason for that? Or does the President plan to par- \u2014 start using them on the Beast?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, I saw \u2014 I saw some of those \u2014 some of that reporting.<\/p>\n<p>Q This is big news in this town, okay? (Laughter.)<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I know, you have a look \u2014 (laughter) \u2014 you just looked over at Mary. Mary looked over to you.<\/p>\n<p>Q I saw Mary\u2019s (inaudible).<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: \u2014 and I don\u2019t know what\u2019s happening. (Laughter.)<\/p>\n<p>But, look, I have to run dow- \u2014 that down, as to the Beast and \u2014 and why it may not have those plates.<\/p>\n<p>But what I can tell you \u2014 and the President has been very consistent since the campaign \u2014 that we strong- \u2014 strongly support the D.C. statehood. And \u2014 and that has not changed. But I\u2019ll run that down to see about this \u2014 the plates on the Beast.<\/p>\n<p>Q And January came and went and there was no physical for the President. Is there a plan for that?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: That is a very good question. I\u2019m glad you asked it. So, just to answer that question for you, the President will \u2014 physical will be completed February 16th and released publicly in the same manner as it was back in 2021.<\/p>\n<p>So, we have a date for you. We wanted to make sure we had a date for you.<\/p>\n<p>Q Clear your schedules, folks. (Laughter.)<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yes. And just to \u2014 just to give you a little bit more of information, I know folks were wondering why it hasn\u2019t happened yet. This was literally a matter of scheduling around what has been an incredibly busy \u2014 busy schedule for the President the past several months, evolving schedule \u2014 travel schedule in recent weeks, as you all have seen for yourself.<\/p>\n<p>But we have a date in the books, and so wanted to share that with all of you.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thank you, Karine.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thank you. I wanted to ask you about the India-U.S. initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies that you launched yesterday. NSA Sullivan said that it is the next big step in the relationship. And he also said that this is an initiative led by the President himself.<\/p>\n<p>Can you let us know what this President thinks about it, why he\u2019s launching the initiative, and why this is called the big \u2014 next big thing in this relationship?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, as you know, the President and \u2014 and the Prime Minister \u2014 Prime Minister Modi \u2014 announced this initiative back when they met in a meeting in May of just last year, 2022 \u2014 and that was in Tokyo, as you all know \u2014 and directed their national security advisors to spearhead our partnership and critical emerging technologies.<\/p>\n<p>And the President believes this initiative that you just laid out is key for the U.S. and India to create a democratic technology ecosystem and reinforces our democratic values and our democratic institutions.<\/p>\n<p>So, we see this as an incredibly important initiative and a partnership that we have with India. We made our announcements yesterday in \u2014 in defensive innovation, semiconductors, space, 5G, and STEM talent. And we look forward to building on this momentum in the upcoming months and years.<\/p>\n<p>So, again, an important partnership and initiative between the two \u2014 the two friends, the two countries.<\/p>\n<p>Q Is it also aimed towards China?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I mean, you can\u2019t ignore the geopolitical context that we live in, as you asked me about China. But this initiative is not about one \u2014 any country or one country. It truly is about something bigger than that: a relationship between two friends, two countries who have been partners for some time.<\/p>\n<p>So, look, as two \u2014 two of the world\u2019s leading economies and democracies, it is in our interest to strengthen this partnership and deliver for our people, when you think about the economies and the people around the world.<\/p>\n<p>So we think this is an important step forward. And we\u2019ll continue to grow on this innovation \u2014 initiative.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thank you. One more on the deficit reduction talks as it relates to the debt limit. So is the position of the White House that \u2014 you don\u2019t want to negotiate, obviously, on the debt limit; that needs to happen \u2014 you say Congress needs to do that without conditions. So would that mean that any bipartisan proposal that the President agreed to as it relates to deficit reduction or debt reduction would have to happen after Congress raised the debt limit?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, I mean \u2014<\/p>\n<p>Q I guess I\u2019m just trying to figure out, sort of, the \u2014<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.<\/p>\n<p>Q \u2014 the process here. Like, what\u2019s step one and what\u2019s step two?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I don\u2019t think there\u2019s just one step. And the step is they need to live up to their congressional obligation. That\u2019s their constitutional obligation, to be even more specific, which is lifting the debt ceiling, something that was done three times under the last President. And I\u2019ve mentioned the number 78 many times, because it\u2019s happened 78 times since 1960s \u2014 49 times under a Republican president and 29 times under a Democratic president.<\/p>\n<p>This is something that the Speaker himself voted on three times in the last administration. So, there\u2019s only one step here, and the one step is to do this without conditions.<\/p>\n<p>Q But the President has said, and you have said from this podium, that he is open to these negotiations and potential legislation \u2014 right? \u2014 on deficit and debt. Right?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: When we\u2019re talking about the national deficit, when we\u2019re talking about lowering that, the President is willing to have good-faith conversation, which is something that he\u2019s prioritized, right? We mentioned the $1.7 billion that he was able to lower the deficit and because of the economic policies that he\u2019s moved for- \u2014 moved forward with. So he takes that very, very seriously.<\/p>\n<p>Now, if they want to have a good-faith conversation about that, he\u2019s willing to listen. But right now, all we have heard from the Republicans \u2014 the Republicans in the House, to be very specific \u2014 the extreme Republicans in the House, to be even more specific \u2014 is that they want to cut Medicare, they want to cut Social Security, hold that hostage, which is something that should not be done. It would lead us into chaos.<\/p>\n<p>So it\u2019s not \u2014 it\u2019s \u2014 it\u2019s \u2014 it is a direction that we think is wrong, a direction that is not \u2014 should not be taken. We think that, when it comes to the \u2014 lifting the debt ceiling, it should be done without conditions.<\/p>\n<p>All right. I\u2019ll come back down. Go ahead.<\/p>\n<p>Q Can I ask you about police reform really quickly again to follow up on some questions you received, Karine? Thanks.<\/p>\n<p>Senator Graham is floating a comp- \u2014 a compromise idea that would keep qualified immunity for officers but would get rid of those protections for police departments. Would the President support a compromise of that kind?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So I haven\u2019t seen that \u2014 that piece of legislation. We certainly would have to go \u2014 get \u2014 go back to our policy team to talk through that legislation from Senator Graham.<\/p>\n<p>What I will say, though, is the President wants to see action in a bipartisan way in Congress to deal with an issue that\u2019s clearly critical, as we\u2019re watching what\u2019s happening today and we\u2019re watching a family bury a loved one. And we believe, he believes the way that we\u2019re going to make transformational change on this issue is to have legislation.<\/p>\n<p>I don\u2019t want to speak to something that I have not spoken to the team yet.<\/p>\n<p>Q But suffice to say, it\u2019s possible the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, it doesn\u2019t have to come in the version that it preexisted in. Right? You guys are open to some changes to that? Is that a yes?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, look, if it\u2019s in a bipartisan way, if it\u2019s Republicans joining Democrats in a real way to cha- \u2014 to bring forth transformational change, we are willing to have that conversation.<\/p>\n<p>Look, tomorrow\u2019s caucus is going to be very important as well. And we\u2019re going to talk to the CBC members and talk through what their \u2014 what their ideas are and what they\u2019re thinking.<\/p>\n<p>But again, we think that legislation \u2014 federal legislation is the way to move forward here.<\/p>\n<p>Q Quick separate question. I asked this of Ian Sams outside when he took our questions earlier. I want to ask of you, though, because I think it is for the wider White House, not just the Special Counsel\u2019s office, which is: Did anyone at the White House tell the National Archives at any point not to issue a press release about the discovery of classified documents?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I would \u2014 I would really refer you to the White House Counsel\u2019s Office, who has been running this process and refer you to them.<\/p>\n<p>Q Even if it \u2014 even if it\u2019s something that\u2019s not just in their purview, it would be wider within the entire White House?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I think because this is \u2014 when it \u2014 when it relates to the DOJ \u2014<\/p>\n<p>Q Understood.<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: \u2014 when it relates to the Special Counsel, this is something that\u2019s been under their purview, so I would refer you to them.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thanks, Karine. On the SHOW UP to work telework bill, I wanted to see if you could tell us what the White House\u2019s position is on that piece of legislation \u2014 it seeks to end telework for federal workers so they\u2019ll go back to work in downtowns \u2014 and whether or not President Biden would veto it should it pass.<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, a couple of things. I just want to take a little bit of a step back and \u2014 and kind of take us back to when the President first walked into this administration. And what he had to do and was able to do is really do a whole-of-government process in dealing with COVID and what we saw at the time.<\/p>\n<p>And he put forth a comprehensive \u2014 a comprehensive way to deal with making sure that people got their shots in arms \u2014 right? \u2014 making sure that what we saw with schools being closed, small businesses being closed. He was able to move forward with the American Rescue Plan, which was only voted out of \u2014 out of Congress by Democrats. And what we were able to do is open the country \u2014 reopen the country.<\/p>\n<p>Small businesses are booming, as we saw record \u2014 a record number of small business applications that we \u2014 which we announced about two weeks ago.<\/p>\n<p>And now, COVID-19 does not determine how federal agencies work and serve the public because of the work that this President did on day one.<\/p>\n<p>And so, our view is that the agency decisions should be guided by a focus on delivering results for the American people. That\u2019s how they should move forward, like other major employers and federal agencies are making those decisions based on their performance goals, not only to increase efficiency and effectiveness but also to remain competitive in the labor market.<\/p>\n<p>So, we\u2019re committed to working with anyone in Congress to continue strengthening federal agencies \u2014 we think that\u2019s incredibly important \u2014 and the federal workforce in order to deliver on their missions and serve the American public.<\/p>\n<p>That \u2014 that\u2019s what we think the criteria should be.<\/p>\n<p>Look, you know, we\u2019ve explained our thinking, how the President sees this, and don\u2019t have anything to share specifically on the SHOW UP Act. But we believe that, you know, there are ways that federal agencies should be able to track their performance and continue to \u2014 continue to deliver for the American people. And that\u2019s how we think this is the most important way to move forward here.<\/p>\n<p>Q (Inaudible) particularly given that the administration announced it\u2019s going to be ending the state of emergency on COVID, that there would be a desire to get federal workers back in the office?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I just don\u2019t have anything specific, it\u2019s on \u2014 on that particular question. We, again, think it\u2019s \u2014 it should be \u2014 that decision should be guided by agency, that that\u2019s their decision to make.<\/p>\n<p>Q Then, quickly, on one other topic, on Russia. Does the Biden administration believe that Russian and Belarusian athletes should be able to compete in the Olympic Games in Paris in 2024?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So I haven\u2019t talked to the \u2014 to my \u2014 to my colleagues at NSC. Would like to get a sense of where they are. Have not heard any real, like, impor- \u2014 reporting or have any incoming, so let me just talk to them and see where we are on that.<\/p>\n<p>Q Okay. We can circle back.<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay, great.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thanks, Karine. A couple of weeks ago, when the mayors were in town, the President said he looked forward to an honest debate with Republicans on entitlements. The House Speaker, on Sunday, on \u201cFace the Nation,\u201d was asked if he was going to propose cuts to Medicare and Social Security, and he said no. He said he would take that off the table. He was asked, \u201cCompletely?\u201d And he said, \u201cYeah.\u201d<br \/>\nSo is it your sense \u2014 is it the sense here that the House Speaker is not being honest when he says that?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I think it\u2019s more of, like, there are some facts out there \u2014 right? \u2014 that we can easily point to, this administration can point to. And I think I did a little bit of that last time.<\/p>\n<p>And so, if you look at McCarthy\u2019s Republican conference, especially the extreme part of that conference \u2014 and McCarthy himself voted to raise the retirement age and end Medicare as we know it. That has been historic. Like, that \u2014 those are the facts.<\/p>\n<p>And just last year, the Republican Study Committee, which includes most House Republicans, reiterated those costs to cut Social Security and Medicare. When Republicans call for these cuts, they do so under the guise of strengthening the programs.<\/p>\n<p>So, you know, when \u2014 when the Speaker \u2014 Speaker McCarthy says he wants to strengthen Social Security or Medicare but rules out making the wealthy and the big corporations pay their fair share, so that leaves just one option, which is cuts.<\/p>\n<p>And again, many \u2014 many outlets in here reported what \u2014 what House Republicans were thinking about when it came to this new Congress, the new 118th Congress. Fox News says, \u201cRepublicans eye using debt limit hike to overhaul entitlement programs if entrusted with majority.\u201d That\u2019s something that was reported on.<\/p>\n<p>CBS: \u201cRepublicans want to push Social Security, Medicare eligibility age to 70.\u201d As I just mentioned, voting to increase the age limit.<\/p>\n<p>Reuters: \u201cGOP House members are threatening to\u2026force cuts to Medicare and Social Security spending.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>I mean, these are the facts. This is from the reporting that we all saw from you, but not \u2014 you guys got that reporting because of what you saw the actions were being taken by House Republicans.<\/p>\n<p>Washington Post: \u201cHouse GOP eyes Social Security, Medicare amid spending battle.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>So this is something that they have said over and over again for the past several months. And there is also voting that can be looked at on how they have treated this issue of Medicare and Social Security.<\/p>\n<p>So they\u2019ve been very vocal, and they\u2019ve been very clear. And so, what we\u2019re going to do is we\u2019re going to stand up for the American people, fight for the American people, and protect Medicare and Social Security, which the President has said himself and been very clear about.<\/p>\n<p>Q Setting entitlements aside for a moment, one of the other things Republicans are saying is that there ought to be a reduction in discretionary spending. Is that something the President is in any way open to, or will he put forward a budget on March 9th that increases discretionary spending?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So I\u2019m not going to get into \u2014 get ahead of the President. Right? As you saw from our memo yesterday, the President is going to have his budget on March 9th. He is calling and asking \u2014 right? \u2014 the Speaker to put forward his budget as well so the American people can see what it is that they\u2019re thinking about, what it is that they\u2019re thinking about when it comes to the American people and the budget. Right? What are the cuts that they want to make? What is it that they\u2019re proposing?<\/p>\n<p>So, certainly not going to get ahead of what the President is going to put out on March 9th.<\/p>\n<p>Q If I just could, just because I know it\u2019s important to everyone here and important to the public as well: Can you explain the decision not to offer the public visibility on this meeting? It\u2019s \u2014 it\u2019s tradition for the press to be brought in when the President speaks to the Speaker of the House.<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Not \u2014 look, not all the time. The President has had many conversations \u2014 one-on-one conversations \u2014 with members of Congress.<\/p>\n<p>I totally understand \u2014 I get the question and understand why there is interest in this. But we have done it many times before where we\u2019ve had private one-on-one meetings with members of Congress, and not just in this administration. We\u2019ve seen it under President Trump. We\u2019ve seen it under President Obama.<\/p>\n<p>And I know the Big Four was \u2014 was \u2014 there was a pool spray for that one, but it was the Big Four. It was a different kind of \u2014 a different meeting. But it\u2019s not uncommon. It is not uncommon to have one-on-one \u2014 private one-on-one meetings.<\/p>\n<p>And I\u2019ll just add to this: You know, Speaker \u2014 Speaker McCarthy is welcome to go to the sticks after the meeting and take your questions. We \u2014 we welcome that if that is something that he wishes to do.<\/p>\n<p>Go ahead.<\/p>\n<p>Q Can you help us just clarify what his position then, a little more, is on deficit reduction? Like, you\u2019re saying, \u201cMcCarthy, hey, give us your plan.\u201d Is your plan \u2014 the President sort of let out dribs and drabs of his views here and there.<\/p>\n<p>So, just so I understand correctly: He is opposed to any cuts to Medicare and Social Security, including changes to eligibility? He\u2019s open to other spending reductions over the medium term, including potentially defense?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I want to be very careful here, because what the President has been very clear about is: What is their plan? He wants to see their plan as it relates to the budget, right? So, the President is going to put out his budget on March 9th. You guys will all get to see that. And so we want to see what their plan is.<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019m not going to \u2014 to get ahead of that particular piece when it comes to the budget. But, of course, the President is going to protect the Medicare \u2014 right? \u2014 for Americans. Of course, the President is going to do everything that he can to protect Social Security.<\/p>\n<p>And when it comes to holding those two programs hostage, the President is going to call that out and say that we should not be holding those two \u2014 those two programs hostage on something that is the basic duty of Congress, which is to lift the debt ceiling, something that they should be able to do because it is their constitutional duty.<\/p>\n<p>Q Right. You\u2019re trying to put the debt ceiling aside, and I hear you. Does he want a fiscal reform deal aside from the \u2014 like, does the President want a deal with Republicans on it?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, he wants to see what \u2014 what is their \u2014 what are they putting forth, what is their idea of dealing with fiscal \u2014 right? \u2014 fiscal priorities. What does that look like for them?<\/p>\n<p>So, that\u2019s what he\u2019s going to ask them for, which is what we did in our memo yesterday. He wants to see what is it that they\u2019re putting forward.<\/p>\n<p>Q Right. And I\u2019m trying to ask what it is you\u2019re putting forward. Is this, like, revenue is part of that mix as well? Will he talk to Kevin McCarthy about, \u201cHey, these are the taxes we want to cut. We can shrink the deficit that way, too\u201d?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: We \u2014 look, we want to see \u2014 we have been very clear: When it comes to Medicare, when it comes to Social Security \u2014 right? \u2014 that should be protected. We\u2019re going to continue to fight for that.<\/p>\n<p>And we\u2019ve been very clear: When it comes to the debt limit, it should be done without conditions. We\u2019ve been very clear. And we should not hold those two programs \u2014 and others, not just that \u2014 hostage. Right? Been very, very clear about that.<\/p>\n<p>On March 9th, the President is going to put forth his budget. You\u2019re going to see how he sees the budget moving forward in this \u2014 in this fiscal year. And \u2014 and so, I\u2019ll leave it there.<\/p>\n<p>And then, again, as I said, in the memo \u2014 you guys read it \u2014 from Brian Deese and others, that we want to see what their plan is.<\/p>\n<p>Q And with the public health emergency, just to be clear: Is it the administration\u2019s plan to lift Title 42 on May 11th, when the public health emergency underpinning it is lifted?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I just want to be very clear on this part, too, because I know this question has come up, and I do want to do a little bit of a step back here.<\/p>\n<p>The CDC said in April that the Title 42 should lift, but the courts have, as you all know, required us to keep it in place. And so, that\u2019s kind of where we are.<\/p>\n<p>So, we do not know when or what the courts will rule, but we \u2014 we must comply with that order. And so, we\u2019re going to comply with that.<\/p>\n<p>As it relates to what exactly is going to happen, because it is a court matter, a court order, that is something that DOJ is dealing with at this time.<\/p>\n<p>Q Even if you lift the emergency, if the court order hasn\u2019t been lifted, you\u2019re going to keep 42 in place?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, here\u2019s what we were trying to do. And I\u2019ll be \u2014 explain, like, our thinking here.<\/p>\n<p>So, what past Republicans were trying to do is they were trying to really barrel toward abruptly and immediately ending Title 42. And what we were trying to do was to make sure that there was an orderly process to manage this in a \u2014 in a really \u2014 manage the situation at the border in a way that was, again, orderly and effective.<\/p>\n<p>And what they wanted to do was to end something overnight, which would have created chaos. And so, that\u2019s why we \u2014 we are \u2014 have been very clear about doing this when it comes to Title 42, doing this in a safe and orderly way. And \u2014 and coming up \u2014 you know, we are putting up \u2014 putting forward alternative priorities, alternative ways to dealing with the border. And so, that\u2019s why we moved in that way. That\u2019s why we were very clear about \u2014 about what we\u2019re trying to do these next couple of months.<\/p>\n<p>Now, as you\u2019re asking me about the date, if it\u2019s going to happen or not on that particular date, again, there\u2019s a court order in place that \u2014 as you know, that was \u2014 that was very clear, that DOJ is taking on. And so, I would refer you to DOJ about what will happen because of that court order.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thank you so much. Two domestic questions today. First of all, when the President meets with Speaker McCarthy, what are the specific areas of bipartisan cooperation that he\u2019s going to focus on, aside from, you know, the debt ceiling?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, there\u2019s going to be a range of issues that they\u2019re going to discuss. You\u2019ll hear from the President afterwards. We\u2019ll have a \u2014 you know, a readout of the meeting. You\u2019ll probably hear from the Speaker. If he\u2019s \u2014 if he is going to go to the sticks, you guys can all ask him questions. Don\u2019t want to get ahead of a meeting that is probably underway, I believe, and just don\u2019t want to get ahead of it.<\/p>\n<p>But again, there\u2019ll be a range of issues that the President thinks is important to work with \u2014 with Congress on, with the Speaker on, but just don\u2019t want to get ahead of what is going to be discussed specifically.<\/p>\n<p>Q And then, just zooming out on the Tyre Nichols funeral today. People both inside the United States and outside are looking at this killing and asking, \u201cIs the United States a racist society?\u201d I\u2019d like to hear your thought on that and also what the administration is doing beyond just police reform, qualified immunity, those discussions \u2014 what the U.S. is doing holistically \u2014 what the administration is doing holistically to address that perception.<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, at the top of the briefing, you heard me lay out how important this month is because it\u2019s Black History Month, and how important it is to see Black Americans and lifting up the contribution of Black Americans, and also understanding that their culture, when you think about Black culture as an American, is also American culture; when you think about what they\u2019ve been able to \u2014 what the Black community has been able to contribute to the history of this country, what they\u2019ve been able to contribute in many different sectors of America.<\/p>\n<p>And so, that\u2019s something that\u2019s really important that we will continue to lift up. There was a memorandum that was put out by the President.<\/p>\n<p>And, look, you know, when the President walked into this administration, he said there were four crises that we needed to deal with. One of them was COVID. One of them was the economy, climate change. And he talked about racial justice.<\/p>\n<p>And he had given many \u2014 he has given many \u2014 many speeches on the work that we still need to do to deal with an issue that is affecting a community acro- \u2014 communities across the country \u2014 this particular community, the Black community.<\/p>\n<p>So, we understand \u2014 he understands there\u2019s a lot more work to be done. And we need to call out injustices and continue to do that.<\/p>\n<p>And while we have a rich history and an important history in this country, there are things that he also believes is important that we talk about and we speak to, and that is the injustices that we have seen in the Black community and other communities as well, historically.<\/p>\n<p>So, that\u2019s why the President has made it a priority in his administration to make sure that it looks like America, to make sure that we see the diversity in this administration, throughout different communities. And you see that over and over again when you look at the different agencies, when you look in to the White House.<\/p>\n<p>And this is \u2014 this is historically the most diverse administration in history. And that matters. When we talk about policies, when we\u2019re talking about transformational change, when we talk about how do we move forward in a country that is dealing with many issues, that\u2019s important to see that and to have that at the federal government.<\/p>\n<p>So, again, lots more work to be done. The President understands that. He\u2019s spoken to that. And we\u2019re going to hopefully be able to work towards the healing for this country.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thank you, Karine. I have two questions on debt and deficit. First, the budget that the White House proposed last year represented 102 percent of the country\u2019s economic output. Is the administration aiming for something below that this year?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I\u2019m just not going to get ahead of the President\u2019s budget that\u2019s coming out on March 9th. You\u2019ll be able to view that once he\u2019s ready to speak to it.<\/p>\n<p>Q But directionally, where are discussions going?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No, I hear you. I hear you\u2019re asking me for direction. You\u2019re asking me what is it potentially going to look like, the ballpark number. I\u2019m just not going to get ahead of the President.<\/p>\n<p>Q And then, on the debt itself, you said earlier that the difference between 2011 and now is the number of times that Republicans have been able to pass the debt limit on a clean basis without anything attached to it.<\/p>\n<p>But the other difference is that the national debt has more than doubled in that time. It now is about $240,000 per household. Does the President believe that that is sustainable?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, let\u2019s \u2014 let\u2019s remember why we have seen that the last couple of years, right? I mean, we\u2019ve seen that the \u2014 it balloon in the way that you just spoke to.<\/p>\n<p>Let\u2019s not forget the Trump tax cut \u2014 the $2 trillion 2017 Trump tax cuts, if you think about that.<\/p>\n<p>If you think about the first piece of legislation that Republicans put forward, it was going to increase the debt limit by $100 billion.<\/p>\n<p>And so, there has been time after time that we have seen, you know, action that has been incredibly, you know, not \u2014 not prudent to what we need to be doing in moving the country forward.<\/p>\n<p>The deficit increased every single year under Trump. His four years in office are responsible for 25 percent of to- \u2014 of our total national debt from the last 230-plus years.<\/p>\n<p>And so, look, there\u2019s been action that\u2019s been taken by \u2014 by Republicans in Congress that has led to where we are today. Again, their first piece of legislation just weeks ago in this new Congress would have \u2014 would have increased the deficit by $100 billion. And let\u2019s not forget \u2014 and let\u2019s not forget why: to help tax cheats, wealthy tax cheats. That\u2019s what they wanted to do.<\/p>\n<p>This is a President \u2014 for the first two years has taken lowering the deficit very seriously and has done it in historic fashion.<br \/>\nQ So will this administration pledge to be deficit neutral this year?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Look, what I can say is the President is committed to dealing with lowering the deficit. He \u2014 he has a record to \u2014 to speak to \u2014 as I just mentioned, the $1.7 billion that he has been able to do in the first two years to lower the deficit.<\/p>\n<p>And he is willing \u2014 willing to have a good-faith conversation \u2014 right? \u2014 with \u2014 with anybody \u2014 Democrats, independents, Republicans \u2014 to talk about how do we continue to move forward to do that, to deliver a \u2014 for the American people, yes, on important programs and issues, but also how are we going to continue to lower the deficit, which he thinks is incredibly important.<\/p>\n<p>Go ahead, Karen.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thanks, Kar- \u2014 Karine. Tyre Nichols\u2019s parents are expected to come to the State of the Union next week as a guest of a member of Congress. Is \u2014 would the President meet with them when they\u2019re here in town next week, Monday or Tuesday?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, don\u2019t have a \u2014 don\u2019t have a meeting to preview at this time. As you know, just last week, last Friday, the President spoke with his \u2014 his mother and his stepfather, offering his condolences and saying that \u2014 telling \u2014 telling them that he is going to continue to fight for police reform, continue to fight for the George Floyd Policing Act. And so, that is a commitment that he\u2019s made to the family.<\/p>\n<p>Don\u2019t have a \u2014 don\u2019t have a meeting to \u2014 to read out or \u2014 or to announce at this time.<\/p>\n<p>Q And on the COVID pandemic emergency, the administration has been using that as the justification for the plan to cancel student loan debt. Does ending the COVID emergency undermine the student loan plan?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, we see that very, very differently. As \u2014 as we\u2019ve talked about before \u2014 I think I\u2019ve been asked this question before: So, we\u2019re not using any emergency power. We\u2019re using the HEROES Act, as I\u2019ve mentioned before, which gives the Secretary of Education the explicit authority to provide debt relief in this exact situation.<\/p>\n<p>So, as you know, millions of Americans are \u2014 are at risk to default on their student loans due to the economic effects of the national emergency. And so, this is why we took this action to make sure that tens of millions of Americans are able to \u2014 to deal with the time that was very difficult, especially in the last couple of years.<\/p>\n<p>So, the Secretary of Education is using the author- \u2014 authority Congress gave them to prevent the harm. And so, that\u2019s been the important priority of the President to make sure that the folks who \u2014 who felt the \u2014 who felt the pinch, if you will, who felt the hurt the most these past couple of years due to what CO- \u2014 COVID did to the economy got a little extra help.<\/p>\n<p>Go ahead.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thanks, Karine. With regards to the State of the Union, will that be paired with additional travel? And more broadly, can you tell us anything more about what the President wants to accomplish legislatively over the next year, given the intense congressional gridlock?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, on \u2014 on the first question, we\u2019ll have more to share on what \u2014 what that week will look like for the President. Again, don\u2019t want to get ahead of any announcement from here.<\/p>\n<p>As far as legislatively, look, the President has been very clear after \u2014 again, after the midterms. And this is a President who has talked about, throughout his career, working in a bipartisan way with Congress on delivering important \u2014 important programs and important initiatives for the American people.<\/p>\n<p>That is something that he\u2019s going to continue to do, and it won\u2019t stop him. He\u2019s done that the first two years. I talked about 250-plus pieces of legislation that has become law that the President signed.<\/p>\n<p>So, clearly, that\u2019s something that the President is committed to, you know. He\u2019s going to have this conversation with Speaker McCarthy, just like he\u2019s had a conversation last week with the Democratic leaders. And they\u2019re going to try to figure out how can we work together in a good-faith way.<\/p>\n<p>Again, not going to get ahead of the President\u2019s State of the Union speech. You\u2019ll hear from him \u2014 you know, you\u2019ll hear from him talk about optimism, talk about possibilities, which is something that you\u2019ve heard the President speak to, and how optimistic he is for the future of this country. He\u2019ll talk about, you know, the ec- \u2014 his economic policy and how it\u2019s delivered these last two years. And he\u2019ll lay out what his \u2014 what he believes his legislation plan is going to be for the American people. Certainly not going to get ahead of that at this time.<\/p>\n<p>Q And, last year, on January 19th, the President had a solo press conference. Does the White House anticipate that there will be a press conference where reporters might be able to ask him about those plans that you just mentioned anytime in the near future?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Don\u2019t have a press conference to \u2014 to read out to you at this time.<\/p>\n<p>Go ahead.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thanks, Karine. Boris Johnson is in town, talking about aid to the Ukraine. Is he going to meet with the President or anyone at the White House while he\u2019s here?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Don\u2019t have a meeting to read out at this time or on the President\u2019s schedule with the \u2014 with Boris Johnson.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thanks, Karine. I have one quick one on the documents and then one on student loans.<\/p>\n<p>Understanding that you can\u2019t tell us why the FBI search of the Biden Center wasn\u2019t disclosed previously and that Ian Sams has referred questions about the National Archives possibly being blocked from sending a press release to DOJ \u2014 understanding you can\u2019t talk about any of that \u2014 can you assure us that the White House has been and continues to be as transparent as possible \u2014 meaning that where there haven\u2019t been disclosures, something has prevented that?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: What I can say is what the President has said many times \u2014 and you\u2019ve seen it in our statements \u2014 is that we are cooperating fully. The President and his team is cooperating fully, and we will continue to do that. And I will just leave it there.<\/p>\n<p>Q On student loans, does the White House believe that the President or the administration can continue to use emergency powers after the emergency is over?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, providing debt \u2014 debt relief or pau- \u2014 pausing loan payments, as it relates to the student loans, does not require an ongoing na- \u2014 national emergency. And I just laid \u2014 laid out for Karen how we see this process and talking about the HEROES Act, which was \u2014 which was a authority that was given to the Secretary of Education through Congress. And that\u2019s how we\u2019re moving forward there.<\/p>\n<p>And, look, the emergency ending doesn\u2019t change the legal justification. And here\u2019s a couple of things here. There was a national \u2014 there was a national emergency, as we all know, as we\u2019ve all lived through it. Millions of borrowers were negatively impacted by the pandemic and faced risk of default on their loans.<\/p>\n<p>Due to that emergency \u2014 that national emergency, Congress gave, again, the Secretary of Education the authority to take steps to prevent that harm. And he is. And that\u2019s how we see the process moving forward.<\/p>\n<p>Q With the HEROES Act, it\u2019s the \u2014 the portion of the HEROES Act that the Secretary is using is the part that needs a national emergency to be able to cancel that debt. So, I understand what you\u2019re saying. And it was sort of explained in the background call a few weeks ago on this, where an official said that the increased authority under national emergency is necessary for the program to be created but doesn\u2019t have to be in effect through the duration of the program.<\/p>\n<p>And the reason I\u2019m asking is: That interpretation could potentially allow for, you know, policy effectuation beyond the emergency. So, at what point is someone not worse off after a pandemic? How are we determining \u2014<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, just getting back to, I guess, the \u2014 I guess, the crust of your question is that we don\u2019t need an emergency power to use the HEROES Act. It is a \u2014 it is an authority that was given to the Secretary of Education, and he\u2019s using that authority for a time, for a moment that we believe the American people really need it after these last three years, after dealing with what \u2014 what many dealt with \u2014 dealt with a \u2014 you know, a national emergency that was to them. Right? Something that was \u2014 caused them harm.<\/p>\n<p>And so, this is a way to help tens of millions of Americans who need a lex- \u2014 a little extra help. And so, that\u2019s what the Secretary of Education is doing.<\/p>\n<p>Q Doesn\u2019t the HEROES Act, though, require that \u2014 the national emergency for the Secretary to use it? I know we\u2019re splitting hairs here, but what I\u2019m getting at is: Yes, there was national emergency. Yes, the administration used the HEROES Act, because of the national emergency, to cancel student debt. And I understand that the position that the administration staked out in the DOJ brief is that it doesn\u2019t have to be in effect to do the program.<\/p>\n<p>But my \u2014 my question I\u2019m getting at is: When do you stop being harmed by the pandemic? How are we measuring it? And \u2014<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: That\u2019s a good question. Look, it\u2019s not any \u2014 and it\u2019s not any \u2014 any emergency power. It is, again, something that the Secretary of Education gets to \u2014 the HEROES Act is something that is in his purview that he\u2019s able to use, an authority that he\u2019s able to use. And that\u2019s a decision that the Secretary of Education is going to make.<\/p>\n<p>As you remember, the debt relief was \u2014 was being used at the same time that we were pau- \u2014 that we were going to lift up the pause \u2014 right? \u2014 for \u2014 for payments. And so, we believed, as that was going to happen, we needed to do something to help tens of millions of Americans out there.<\/p>\n<p>Again, this is an authority that the Secretary of Education has; it\u2019s not just any kind of emergency power. This is a power that was given to the Secretary of Education by Congress that he\u2019s using in a way to make sure that Americans out there who have been harmed get a little bit of extra relief.<\/p>\n<p>Q So, to put a final point on it \u2014<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I got \u2014 I got to move on. I got to move on. I just \u2014<\/p>\n<p>Q Just one final (inaudible) \u2014<\/p>\n<p>Q Karine, last one. Last one. Last one. Last question.<\/p>\n<p>Q Just really \u2014<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I really got to move on.<\/p>\n<p>Q Karine \u2014<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All the way in the back, yeah. Yeah.<\/p>\n<p>Q Thank you. Appreciate it. Does the President see the current rate of spending at the federal level as a problem? And if so, what spending cuts would he support?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, look, we \u2014 I just talked about what the President has done the last two years \u2014 right? \u2014 by lowering the deficit \u2014 right? \u2014 cutting the deficit by $1.7 trillion.<\/p>\n<p>So, yes, so that is something that he took very seriously and took action to make that happen. If you look at the Inflation Reduction Act, the Inflation Reduction Act is going to also lower the deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars. That is important as well.<\/p>\n<p>Every piece of policy, he has done it in a really responsible way. Every legislation that has been passed by Congress, that has been led by this President, he\u2019s done it in a responsible way. So, yes, he thinks it\u2019s important to \u2014 for him to do his job and the best that he can to really address the deficit.<\/p>\n<p>And \u2014 and I\u2019ll add this \u2014 I\u2019ll add this as well, and I\u2019ve said this multiple times at this podium today \u2014 which is that he is willing \u2014 he is willing to work in a bipartisan fashion, in a \u2014 in a good-faith fashion with anybody from \u2014 from Congress who is willing to continue that work that he has done, to build on that historic record that the President has made.<\/p>\n<p>So, I\u2019ll leave it there. Thanks, everybody. I\u2019ll see you tomorrow.<\/p>\n<p>Q Karine, will the White House let us know what time the McCarthy meeting began?<\/p>\n<p>MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah, we will. We will.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Washington, DC&#8230;Good afternoon, everybody. Q Good afternoon. MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Today, the Vice President is in Memphis, Tennessee, to attend the celebration of life service for Tyre Nichols. White House officials, including Senior Advisor for Public Engagement Keisha Lance Bottoms and Senior Advisor and Infrastructure Coordinator Mitch Landrieu, are also in attendance on behalf of the [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":155198,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_cbd_carousel_blocks":"[]","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[20,5,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-155197","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-featured","category-government","category-news","last_archivepost"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/9-020123-Press-Briefing-by-Press-Secretary-Karine-Jean-Pierre-YouTube-Google-Chrome-212023-112718-PM.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155197","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=155197"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155197\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":155199,"href":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155197\/revisions\/155199"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/155198"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=155197"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=155197"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.thepinetree.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=155197"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}