House Minority Leader Mc Carthy Conference Call with Reporters CSPAN April 30, 2020 11:11pm-12:07am EDT
rupted into a deadly confrontation. yea, everyone having to give are admonished their attention. >> here the u.s. supreme court life. -- live. all-conference conference. liven will provide coverage. first up, 10:00 a.m. eastern, the justices here the case of the patent and trademark office versus booking.com. be a part of history and listen to the supreme court oral arguments as they are heard by the justices. live at 10:00 on c-span. or listen on the free c-span
radio app. >> house minority kevin minard a conferenceeld reporters other topics included proxy voting, holding remote hearings, and discussing national security issues over technology. afternoon. before we begin, i want to continue to pray for everyone who has lost loved ones on this virus. i also want to thank all those
from the medical community, to the truck drivers to the farmers to the grocery clerks two people who take out food, everyone making sure the country is still working through this. we cannot thank them enough, especially on the front lines, all those in the medical community as well. i have put together a group of slide decks since we cannot be in person with one another, i thought i thought that could work better. the first slide decks i go to is some of the data we have from johns hopkins. we are still suffering from the virus, but we are making progress. scott gottlieb said today on a plateau, there are a couple things i take from this johns hopkins numbers from a positive sense of where i look at it, we have a downward trend, an uptick, at the same time, we increase the number of testing, the other day, we were at 5 million, now we are 6 million, we are doing almost a million a week. we are broadening the tests and we don't have that slope of
going upward, i view that as a positive flattening as tests continue to grow. it is important that we get to that point to go back to working as well. if you look at the second slide, or the third one, very sad news, we've got today the jobs, the historic job loss. we are at 30 million. this trend shows one of the worst economic damages coming out of -- where millions of americans are suffering. we look at the first quarter gdp, contracted by 4.8% in the first quarter, the second quarter is predicted to be one of the worst in our history. it is important to reflect what has congress done so far, working with this administration, over 3 trillion
in direct relief, you combine that with what the federal reserve is doing, that is about $7 trillion into the economy. a lot of it is implemented, or has to be implemented. that's why i refer to it as our marshall plan for main street. if you look at the fifth slide, i'm talking about ppp, that first group, we did 1.6 million loans. we calculate that, about 30 million jobs saved. nearly 5000 lenders. when we started this, there was only about 1800 lenders approved. the time we are approving lenders, expanding who can lend, we want to make sure community banks, fintech is even in the process, looking back at that, we have never approved almost one million more loans, the volume of loans are made are 5300 lenders now from that
process of 1800, we have done about another $90 billion. if you look at where the money is going from all those who are able to lend the money, about 587,000 of those loans come from 10 billion or less lenders. the smallers are producing more at the positive side, the smaller banks are dealing with the smaller businesses. that is very important in what we are trying to see happen here. it is historic and the ability to save 30 million jobs and we got 30 million out there. that are unemployed. we will have to do much more. i sent to all our members, there
was this article, he is a smart individual, created a lot of companies, runs a lot of companies now, he said it is a time to build, every step of the way, to everyone around us, we should be asking the question, what are you building? what are you building directly or helping other people to build or teaching other people to build, taking care of people who are building? if the work you are doing is not leading to something being built or taking care of people directly, we need to get you in a position, an occupation, a career where you can contribute to building, from all aspects. one thing i had done that i believe i sent out to all of you as well is an essay i put out there, how do we start rebuilding this country? some of the great lessons we
need to learn right now. the biggest lesson we need to learn is the dependency the world has on china when it comes to ppe and medicine. we did a conference call this week with our members, i had experts on there about what china has been doing to control different supply chains. if the medical supply chain, they have a monopoly on. this essay, how do we go about breaking it? now that we have $7 trillion going into the economy, we talk about more legislation, this is part of the recovery that we need to do. we need to consider this legislation, i want the republican and democrats to be serious about addressing this issue.
that's why i'm spending -- having conferences over the phone, advising members, educating members on how big china has become in many of these supply chains and we have to break them. looking at areas that we can improve cost and improvement. the strategic national stockpile, two goals must be achieved. we modernize the stockpile and bring pharmaceutical manufacturing back to the u.s. you look at our strategic national stockpile, it is unable to transfer itself to other federal agencies. when we build the stockpile, it tends to remain on the shelf until after things expire. when i talked about with my members and we've been flushing it out, allow the private sector to keep stockpiles. then each year, they can sell it back in so we have a modernized stockpile every year.
we can go to our allies, we can tell our allies we would be willing to store their stockpile in america because we are finding what china done had some that had done to so many people, withholding medical equipment, trying to get huawei in, all these things china is trying to do that america would not, it would help us keep the supply chain back in america, it would be efficient, but it would also never expire, it would be modern in the process, and we would have the capability for the public-private partnership to be up-to-date. finally, we need to really look at it deregulatory agenda to bring manufacturing back to united states. this includes extending incentives, because we have to look at it from a different
perspective. we can't just say you want the supply chain back. in america, we don't make aspirin, we don't make penicillin, the basic things that china has control of. how do you bring it back? china, by having a communist country, they will dump in a market to break the private sector to be able to do it as well. if you compound that on top of it with the regulatory system that takes five to seven years to build a manufacturing plant and china comes in a market you want to build, it breaks you from the ability to do it. we have to say collectively together, we need to cut that down. we can't say it will take five to seven years and think we will break their supply chain, because where will they be 10 years from now? we need to get down to 18 months to a year. these are not just a concept of republican ideas, these are american ideas. these are something we have to
look at collectively if we are serious about future legislation, about recovery, we've got to make sure we never repeat the challenges we have now. break the supply chain from china, never allow them to have that great of influence or looking at different supply chains, maybe not deal with the virus, if you are looking at south dakota, china owns a manufacturing of our food. how much of the food chain do they control? are they buying into our energy sector as well? we should look at every element of industry within america and analyze what percentage do china have control over that critical minerals to be able to produce and secure america for safety? those are fundamentals that i think we can have happen. thinking of what some of your
questions may be, i have spoken to the speaker twice. we are doing this press conference, i will call later. working on how do we make congress get back to running? one thing i know is doctors go to work every day, congress is not. delivery drivers continue to work every day, congress is not. you've got store clerks, every element going to keep this country working, i believe congress is essential. i sent a letter to the speaker two weeks ago now, i understand you are looking at states getting opened up, but no state opens up completely. at a conference call yesterday with the california delegation, senator feinstein, speaker pelosi, gavin newsom, california is a diverse state. we are large. we are 40 million people. we are 12% of the nation.
america is not exactly -- i look at the data, it was probably a week old. unfortunately, the deaths that occurred, 55% last week was from new york and new jersey. how can we do this on a safe manner to make sure we have the tracing, when we begin to open up, we've got to crawl before we walk and walk before we run? in the meantime, we have to be prepared if a hotspot comes back up. we have to be prepared to tackle that, count top of it, and make sure that does not spread. how can we make sure congress can work from any central point of view and move forward? one of the proposals i've laid out to the democrats and from that letter, the speaker put together a committee of six members, three republicans and three democrats, and we met when we were in d.c. and had a
conference call back in the district this week. i propose, don't bring all of congress back at one. we want to keep social distance. we've got armed services. we need to deal with the defense authorization act. this is not stopped iran, not stopped china from trying to say they are pushing us out of the south china sea, it is not stopped russia from buzzing our aircraft carriers, we cannot give a false impression that america is not prepared and we should not slow our time for preparedness. this is a critical bill that we do every year. armed services can meet in the chambers or in the auditorium, more than enough space for social distancing.
let's work and get that bill done. we don't have to work late into the night. the public can't be there, so let's make sure the press is there. testing continues to improve. i think people can be tested to be in there, get that work done, then you've got a product before you call somebody back. transportation, same type of thing. pick a big room. small business had a hearing. i would bring back sub committees on appropriations to give them bigger rooms. have them do the work. what will happen is you will have product that can be voted on by congress, from national defense to others, and they don't have everybody back at once. as bills get done, you can pinpoint when they need to be voted on and remembers back. members back.
maybe all the members are not back for an entire week, they have a few days to vote. we are all in three buildings. you know the size of all those rooms. we can limit the number of staff so you have social distancing. there are ways to do this safely. by working with the medical community and also making sure congress is doing the job it needs to happen. i hope you will be able to do that. it is something that can work. i know one of the subcommittees on appropriations will come back next week and start their work. they can allow witnesses into that as well, doing it in a safe manner. we can get this process going. unfortunately, i don't see the democrat leadership has agreed to this to make us move forward and it continues to linger out there and i think the american
public would like to see us do our job. with that, let me stop and see how the operator can tell us how to take questions. >> we will begin the question and answer session. if you would like to ask a question, press *1. please be sure to unmute your phone. if would like to ask a question, please press *1. one moment for your first question. the first question comes from the washington post. your line is open. >> thanks for the call. thanks for the update on the rules discussions. i don't know if you saw the speaker's press conference, she indicated she is prepared to move forward with proxy voting when the house comes back, whenever that is.
i want to ask you about that, your reaction to that, whether that is something you are willing to negotiate on. second, she has said that she consulted with a attending physician in making these decisions regarding the health -- house schedule. i want to know if you spoke to the attending physician. do you agree with the concerns the speaker put forth in the risks by house back with all the staff in full? thank you. rep. mccarthy: great question. we would not want to do anything without doing it safely. that's why in my letter, i don't say bring the entire congress back and staff back at once. you crawl before you walked and walk before you run. let's be prepared and see what we can do, just as states are doing out there. if you brought committees back and operating all the committees at once, an example of three committees, of work that needs to be done right now.
if you have these committees come back, you don't have to meet in their regular committee rooms. i think they are probably too small for social distancing. that's why you only bring a few back so they can use the chambers, the auditorium. wide, vast areas. if you look at how we were able to vote last time, we did it in a manner that worked well. alphabetical, you don't have to show up, you are able to get work done critical to the american public. staff is not there, only a select number of staff. we don't have all the members there, only the members in those committees would be working. if you brought everybody back today, which was unusual when i first heard the speaker and leader said, we are coming back on may 4, what were we going to vote on? where we just going to bring everyone back?
that's why i want to look at a thoughtful way of doing it. bring committees back, do work, have the bills done, then tell people to come back. once you start committees working, how you can do this safely, then you go to the next phase. you would bring more committees back that would have to get other work done. you can then maybe start a process if you needed to. you select which committees on thursday and friday is when you vote in the house. members are not there the entire week. you are limiting the number of staffers you can be in the building based on the size of your office. you have social distancing. that's the way you talk about with the medical community and others, the best way to go about doing it. then you continue to keep -- if you are social distancing, when you are walking the halls, you are wearing masks. i have spoken to the speaker, i know she wanted to do the proxy before my conversation, these
are the concerns i gave to the speaker and that's why she put the committee of six together to see if we can work through this. i'm a little concerned, if you go to proxies, i don't have a number in front of me, but if you look at the number of people who came back, it was a good number. the numbers were missing, not that much higher than on average missing time. on both sides. but we also found with proxies, one person could hold 200 proxies if they wanted to. the congressman, you hold them accountable. they don't lend their power to another member. i understand, there are members who can have certain challenges, can be in a group that they've had lung problems, they can't be there. they should not be in that process, maybe we can work
something out. the idea, somebody holding it all the time, now that many democrats want to do this remotely, committees and others, i don't see how you negotiate a national defense authorization over the technology that we have today. we were doing a meeting,, i consider myself pretty advanced in technology, we were doing it by microsoft teams, i had three computers and used it before going in, i put it onto my phone when the computers wouldn't work, then the house system blocked me from my phone being used because it was my private phone. so how would you do this and how would you debate the national security of america and you think somebody is not going to come in? we are not prepared for that.
the democrats thought they could do this by an app and they were wrong. if you are going back with committees, you can get this done. you now have 30 million americans who are out of work. i don't think congress should sit back. congress is essential and we can do this in a safe manner. i want to emphasize safe. when i looked at the first quarter's gdp. nearly half of the first quarter decline in gdp was attributive to health care because there are certain things we did to prepare for the virus coming. we eliminated all these elective surgeries and others, which prepared -- now we are past that, we have an opportunity, that would be some pent-up need in the economy as well. how can we open that up a safe manner? that would change at the same time. you can look at these different items and congress can do the
same. those who sit back and say, i can't bring everybody back at once, they are not being thoughtful about how everyone else are doing it. there is a way to do this and the answer should not just be no. next question, operator. >> our next question comes from bruskie. just a moment. now your line is open. sorry about that. >> yesterday, speaker pelosi named her choices for the select committee on coronavirus. i was wondering if you plan to select anyone to be on there? rep. mccarthy: i told her from the beginning, i don't know why
she would need this committee. as many of you know, we already have an oversight committee. in the cares act, we produce three new entities for accountability. one happened to be one within inspectors general, one from a congressional one. every single one of those are not political. inspector generals, the president appoints, senate confirms, in the congressional one, all four leaders appoint somebody. not one side or the other is weighted. we made those picks before. they are to report to congress every 30 days. when the speaker told me she wanted to do this, she was concerned about price gouging when it came to ppe, masks, and others.
because of that timeframe, how are you going to do this? why don't we work with the attorney general to go after anyone with price gouging and she got upset with me. then she came back, she had already selected who could become chair of it without telling me what the mission of it is. jim clyburn is a smart, political person. he is credited with getting joe biden the nomination when joe biden -- he is also the individual who told everybody -- he elected the third-highest person as majority whip, they lost a majority, he kept the job. you have to be politically smart to keep a job as majority whip losing the majority.
he went on to come back as the whip, who had joe biden the nominee, he told all his members that the coronavirus is an opportunity to restructure government into their liberal view. politically, he is smart, he wants to use things politically, she is trying to tell me this is a policy one. i viewed it and told her clearly that i view this as another impeachment committee, it is the only one that is looking at from a standpoint of that we created from cares, is what is not created after cares, that is weighted. there are more democrats than republicans. there's nobody from the administration endo senators. -- and no senators. it is a politically appointed group. then she says, let me see who you are point. she appoint maxine waters. maxine waters advocated for impeaching the president before he was even sworn in. maxine waters advocates that people go and confront in almost a violent form people that she fundamentally disagrees with philosophically, encouraged
people to do that. they select raskin. let's see what he has done. he is the person who represented the democrats in the rules committee to bring forth the impeachment proceedings inside the house, two days before the president was inaugurated, he at a rally said, let's impeach the president. it is no different than what they have done every other time they created something to try to impeach the president. i was clear with the speaker, i'm not convinced -- we are going to participate in everything that is fair in the process and has the house, it has an equal weighting, i will make the decision whether we will participate probably next week. this is not viewed as something that is working for the accountability of the american public, it is viewed as a political operation that they chose at a time, they chose to
who the chair was before they even could've laid out with the mission is, they voted on it without giving the public what the mission of this to be, they weighted it to be one-sided, they did not allow the senate in. she could argue anything she wants, but it is political, even from the people she appointed. i will let you all know what my decision is next week. >> thank you. >> next, we will go to politico. >> thank you for doing this call today. i was wondering, when lawmakers come back, do you think lawmakers should be wearing masks in the capital? i noticed you and some other gop leaders did not wear masks last week. why is that? rep. mccarthy: if you notice where we did not wear masks, it's where we had social
distancing. a mask is to protect you from social distancing. i had been tested the day before. we were speaking from the microphone where people were sitting on the floor, there was more than six feet distance from any individual. if i go someplace in a store or others, you will see me wearing a mask. we made sure that on the floor, you had social distancing. it was not mandated that you had to come up on the medical community, you had to wear it on the floor. the speaker did not wear it. people have the ability -- they don't have to, based on social distancing. >> what you think the protocol should be for lawmakers? do you think they should not be required to wear it in certain circumstances? rep. mccarthy: right now, i'm not a doctor, the medical community put out that if social distancing is there, they are not mandating that you have to
wear a mask. you have the option that you can or don't have to. as long as you have that distance. that is what the medical community recommended to us. i want to do every thing as safe as we can, that's why we continue to consult with them. >> got it, thank you. >> next, we will go to kget news. your line is open. rep. mccarthy: which is a fabulous tv station inside my district. >> thank you for the kind words. i had a great interview with the valley baptist church, you had and your office were
helpful in setting that up, so thank you for that. good news there, 200 jobs have been saved over the next eight weeks for their payroll. you mentioned earlier in the presentation, how many loans have been approved total across america and how many applications are pending? what is your message for those -- like the owner of a steakhouse, the application is still pending, what is your message for them? rep. mccarthy: what we are talking about is ppp, the paycheck protection, which goes to small businesses that have 500 employees or fewer. for historical purposes, the reason that number has always been was small businesses is. in creating a program that has never been done before -- if we made everybody go to the sba, it would take forever. in the 14 days at the beginning of this program, we put through as many loans as the fda had done in 14 years. 14 days, 14 years.
in the same time we are doing that, the way we found to do it was, let the businesses -- they have a list -- they have relationships with local banks, let the local banks be the ones, sba gaze into use it -- sba guarantees it. there are only 1800 banks who already qualified for the program. let's say that we said, let's expand it. we said, let's expand it. they already have the relationship there. we did more than 1.6 million in the first segment before the money ran out and the democrats held it up. i think he had over one million loans sitting there. i don't have the exact number today, but they are moving them rapidly in the process.
we expanded beyond just business because we know how important nonprofits and churches are too dealing with the community. we wanted to open up for them as long as they have less than 500. we expand from credit unions. we focused on the smaller banks, community banks, they have done the majority of the loan. we even came into finn tack. this was a whole new operation. a lot of this hinges on who you bank with. some are more productive than others. i had a lot of local businesses who came to me that you would know who have a long history, from cleaners to drycleaners two o mattresses, locally owned, they have to shift and go to community banks. if there is a challenge like with the steakhouse, i don't know who they went to with their loan, i would walk through with their bank or maybe look at some other local bank to help and i can work with them personally. but this is one of the best
successes here. more than 30 million jobs were saved in the first segment. when the democrats held it up and we asked to add more money to it, we had another number of 4.4 million unemployed, which a lot of us would not have done, the church would have had to lay off 200 people. think about how much that church and so many others produce and educate in our community, it is important. this is critical in this time. it should be up-to-date numbers. i appreciate that. >> thank you so much. >> next question comes from cnn. your line is open. your line is open, you may want to check your mute button.
rep. mccarthy: do you want to try the and come back to it? >> sure, we will go to fox news. >> thank you so much for taking my question. i wanted to ask about, you are not convinced in something like the oversight committee, however, wouldn't you be concerned if you guys are delegating another $1 trillion, including funding for state and local governments, wouldn't you want oversight of that? rep. mccarthy: that is a fabulous question. let's go back and walk through your question. your question to me was, would i
be concerned about participating in oversight? yes, i would be concerned about oversight. i want oversight. that's when we passed cares one, we created three new entities of oversight. appropriations have an oversight committee. we have an oversight committee itself. this new, special committee is under the oversight committee itself. it is inside the oversight committee. we have a congressional oversight committee who i appointed someone to who used to be in treasury, who owned a bank. probably one of the best statesmen you have. they report to us every 30 days. we have the inspector general. get the ga $20 million. when you talk about oversight, we have a bond redundant and i want to participate and lead in every way possible when it comes to oversight.
your question, if it is about nancy pelosi's committee, let's look at who she put on the committee. she was concerned about oversight, when she announced the committee and chair without telling you what the mission of the committee was about. tell me the four things that committee is supposed to do? the only thing she announced was jim clyburn would be in charge. jim clyburn has only said that the coronavirus is a chance to restructure government. that's not oversight, at a a restructuring of government. it seems like he's concerned about something else than oversight. then she puts on maxine waters. she also puts on raskin, who in the last week, went toe to toe with jim jordan in a screaming match. if you want to take a reputation
of different members you put on this committee on what they care most about, i don't judge them on them fighting for things they believe in, but it seems they are very political individuals. i have not seen them ask about oversight, i've only seen them ask about impeachment. raskin has built a reputation on even before the president was one in, that's what he took to the rally to say he wanted to accomplish. before the president was sworn in. what is the real intent of the committee? if your question to me, if i care about oversight, i do and i will go above and beyond. that's why we participate in every committee. if it is a political committee, i will take a pause, i will look for the real intent, tell me what it is about, before i make a decision. when we go to conferences later, we probably won't refer to this
committee as an oversight committee. or anything when it comes to accountability. this will be no different than they had to be named the intel committee impeachment committee. this will be no different than what nadler started to do in his committee. we watched this pattern time and time again. every time, when we moved to the intel committee, how did that start? the speaker going and naming it without anybody voting on it, against the rules, the same way this committee started. there is a pattern of behavior that the democrats do when they want to play politics and impeach and they are following the same pattern when it comes to this committee as they did with the others. i think your question, just when it comes to oversight, i want as much oversight as possible. >> i have a follow-up, if you have a moment, our state and local funding. how to delegate state and local funding, how can that be ensured that that money is not just a bailout from an existing issue?
rep. mccarthy: first and foremost, is how congress allocates. you can set frameworks around. money can be spent for, what money cannot be spent for. you can do it directly through grants. other times, you will have a problem. if you apply this to a state or governor itself and give them flexibility they do did you pay off other things and not help the cities and counties. i don't be open it up to the city and county where the governor is not taking to any 5% off the top? why don't you say he can't pay for pensions or any thing else? it can only be for covid. have people show the accountability of what they lost during the time period. we know when covid started, when individuals shutdown, and when they open back up. let's see your accounting from that purpose and go through. congress needs to think about how they would supply the money. we have already supplied $500
billion to states. in one month, we did that. put that in perspective. we spent a little over $600 billion for an entire year in medicare. the states are still going to continue -- for states, this is my concern, it's why i like your question of why i think it is the right question, on that sunday when speaker pelosi held up the first cares act, one of the things she brought up was not just changing election law, but was concerned about pension. these are actions that the states have refused the mismanagement of their own state and think they will make taxpayers pay for their mistakes, they are wrong. that's why there has to be a framework and requirements
for any money we will provide and we have to make sure if you are going to provide money, money goes to where it is supposed to go, it is not someone is taking some percentage off the top and that is a concern, if i send that money to sacramento, will bakersfield, or lancaster ever get that money? the need for their first responders or others? show me the challenge and account, the financial risk of what took place during covid and let's put it appropriately to what we are doing. >> thank you so much, sir. >> next, next star media. your line is open. >> hi, mr. leader. thank you for taking the call. today, we heard cumbersome and -- today we heard congressman clyburn talking about the importance of broadband when we are talking about a larger infrastructure
bill, something the president has been in support of. i'm wondering if you had any further talks with the president about what exactly infrastructure might look like if it is part of the next spending measure or if it is part of cares 2? rep. mccarthy: this president really wants to be able to build in the correct manner. one of the biggest concerns he has is building where it does not take a decade. broadband is a good discussion. we are finding a broadband problem when kids are out of school, there are segments of america that you say, learn from home, online and others, they are having a real challenge with it. i think broadband is an appropriate discussion for us to have regard as of whether we are doing an infrastructure bill or not, the need for broadband across america. especially in rural areas. next question.
>> our next question comes from l.a. times. your line is open. >> thanks for taking the call. my question was, where you stand when it comes to liability protections that leader mcconnell is hoping for in the next bill? rep. mccarthy: i agree 100%. we have to give individuals the protection. the last thing we need is coming back and slowing down our ability to do what we need to have happen. what i have found, if you put fear into people -- let me give you an example. 3m makes a number of masks. some are different, surgical masks are tighter, you have the n75, then you have other masks that you would not use inside the surgical room, but a medical unit could use them for testing
and everything else. but 3m would not be willing to sell it because they are going to get a lawsuit, trial lawyers wanted to sue them. we went to the democrats to ppe thatllions more month. democrats said no and the supplement. when we asked again in the second bill, at the end, we agreed to a weaker language, but enough where 3m was willing to have all the other masks that were sitting there that the medical units needed right then to finally be able to sell. there were trial attorneys that got the democrats to say no, especially in the first bill slowed it up. i would hate to see this coming back on individuals trying to do the best they can. i think that is critical. what will happen is it will harm what i feel are americans and
the economy. people hold back out of fear of a lawsuit instead of going out and treating something right now. >> thank you. rep. mccarthy: next question, operator. >> this question comes from townhall media. your line is open. >> thank you, mr. leader. i was wondering if you have a reaction from speaker pelosi's comments this morning regarding her defense of joe biden at the -- and the allegations made against him, she said she supports joe biden and she is satisfied with how he has responded to the allegations, which is a bit of a problem given that he has not addressed the allegations directly, despite a lot of media interviews since the allegations came up. i'm wondering if you had a reaction to that defense, given
how the democrats' whole how the democrats' whole reaction to this has been wildly different to, say, the allegations made against justice kavanaugh during his confirmation. rep. mccarthy: she is being a hypocrite. you cannot say joe biden -- if you are taking it as his nature -- has she talked to tara reid? joe biden has not responded to this. you cannot say one thing about every other time she has commented about any accusation and now say it is ok. -- she endorsed joe biden after knowing the situation. did anybody follow-up to the with a question speaker? when you went to endorsed joe biden, did you first look at her? if she thinks his response is a good enough response, to me, that is being a hypocrite based
upon the past comments she made on other situations she made similar to this. >> thank you. >> if you want to take another question? this next question comes from 23 abc. your line is open. rep. mccarthy: another great station inside my district. >> really appreciate that. thanks for your time. two of the biggest priorities in the 23rd districts are the agriculture and oil industries. during these times, it seems there is uncertainty coming from both large and small oil businesses locally and there has been safety concerns from agriculture workers working in the field during the pandemic. in what ways have you been pushing for the 23rd district
priorities in washington and otherwise? rep. mccarthy: thank you very much. for those who don't know my district, it is number one, it produces the second amount of of oil in the country. i want to thank everyone in that industry. the food supply, making sure it comes from the united states. making sure we work through pbe and others on how to be able to -- ppe and others on how to be able to do it. we did a number of calls early on, advising how we walk through an treatise. from the oil industry, we watched two things that became the perfect storm, one of the worst scenarios we have seen. from the virus, we watch the economic downturn. that numbered the price.
secondly, we watched what saudi arabia and russia did. the president engaged, getting saudi arabia and russia back to the table. that isin production 25% of the problems. the economy itself, supply and demand. we had too much supply. petroleum get more reserved. into theto put that cares act, democrats kicked it out, that's one of the things the speaker kicked out when she added more money to the kennedy center. that hurt asthma. back to the white house, the cabinet room.
oil leaders and energy leaders. we continue to work with them. i talked to one of the ceos today. this is going to be a vo challenge for us. a lot are being laid off, say you need to get in a more stable position, get the supply and demand. our ability to open up safely. the first quarter gdp numbers. numbers --et our that would be better if we had elective surgeries. hospital?esignate one i think there are a lot of things going on, but this is almost a daily discussion.
if congress could be working, those are items we could be dealing with. that's why it is important. it is not dealing with one party or another, but the entire country i appreciate you all being with me today. i will continue to hold these, i want to keep you apprised. i look forward to the day we can be back in our own press conferences in a safe manner. we have some promising items going, i have another conference call today, we are bringing a number of companies to get an update on where they are on antibodies and vaccines. we want to make sure there is no government slowdown. believe the ingenuity of america will solve the problem and solve it for the rest of the world. >> c-span's washington journal
news and policy issues that impact you. we will talk about the response to the coronavirus with dr. sarah fortune. at the harvard school of public health. a discussion of racial and nationalsparities with medical association president dr. oliver burke. c-span's washington journal, live friday morning. be sure to watch washington yearsl for a look back 50 to the antiwar student protest at kent state, which erupted into a deadly confrontation between students and the ohio national guard. >> all persons having business before the honorable supreme court of the last give their attention. the court is now sitting.
>> for the first time in history, here the u.s. supreme court, live. theay, due to the pandemic, court is hearing oral arguments by teleconference. c-span will provide live coverage of each of these sessions. on monday, the justices here the case of the trademark office versus booking.com. it concerns the travel company's fate -- attempt to market their company. live on monday at 10:00 a.m. eastern. on-demand at c-span.org or this and on the free c-span radio app. >> british prime minister boris johnson has returned to work after recovering from the coronavirus. he says he would outline the first phase of the reopening process in the comwe