LEADER JEFFRIES ON CNBC: "WE MUST AVOID A CATASTROPHIC DEFAULT ON OUR NATION'S DEBT"
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries appeared on CNBC's Squawk Box where he reiterated that while extreme MAGA Republicans attempt to hold our economy hostage, House Democrats remain committed to avoiding a catastrophic default on our debt and ensuring that America pays its bills.
QUICK: Joining us right now is House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. And Leader Jeffries, thank you for being with us this morning. We are trying to get a feel for where things stand. It means a lot to not just investors and consumers, but obviously the future of our nation, what happens here. I think the one thing that is now clear is that there is a negotiation that's taking place. This is not going to be a clean bill that is passed, a clean debt ceiling limit bill that's passed. And I guess we're still trying to figure out where-where things stand in those negotiations. What can you tell us at this point?
JEFFRIES: Well, good morning. There's certainly ongoing discussions. And in our view, those discussions are proceeding on two parallel tracks. One, we must avoid a catastrophic default on our nation's debt. It would be the first time we intentionally default in our 247-year history. It will result in triggering, in all likelihood, a job-killing recession, cost the American people millions of good paying jobs, hurt the economy, hurt businesses, tank the stock market, hurt the retirement security of millions of Americans, and of course, dramatically increase costs all at the same time. And so we have to make sure that America pays our bills in a manner that is done without gamesmanship, partisanship or brinksmanship. At the same time, Democrats, under the leadership of President Biden, have always maintained that we are, of course, willing to discuss the budget and the appropriations and the types of spending decisions, investment decisions and revenue decisions that should be made to protect the health, the safety and the well-being of the American people. It was a very positive meeting yesterday. It was calm. It was candid in terms of the discussion. And I'm optimistic that common ground will be found in the next week or so.
QUICK: Coming out of this, just trying to figure out what's on the table, what isn't. We're going to be speaking with Speaker-with Leader-I'm sorry with Speaker McCarthy next. And he has said to the press that when it comes down to it, they're going to be insisting on tougher work requirements and said that this is a red line that was drawn for what he expects to see. You've called this a nonstarter.
JEFFRIES: Yeah, work requirements, so-called work requirements are a nonstarter. First and foremost, it's important to understand that in 2018, the last time we discussed the farm bill, 145 Republicans explicitly voted against an amendment that would impose so-called work requirements on SNAP recipients, including then-House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy. Voted against it. And so it's entirely unreasonable to think that at this particular point in time, in the context of a debt ceiling showdown that has been manufactured as part of an effort to avoid a default, that these type of so-called work requirements can be imposed on the American people when there are already significant work requirements that exist under law. And Republicans previously and explicitly voted against them. We can have a discussion about those issues, but that should be done in the context of the farm bill, not with a gun being held to the head of the American people in a hostage taking situation.
KERNEN: Leader, it's good to have you on, obviously, today. Two years, caps? Ten years, I don't know what that looks like in terms of spending caps. I don't know-how do you, do you split the difference? Do you not do anything? And what are the chances for something that goes longer than just, for lack of a better term, kicking the can down the road? Is that still an option to get this done and revisit it in less than a year, or will it go out past the next election? What do you think finally happens?
JEFFRIES: Well, we can't continue to find ourselves in this situation where it's a flirtation with a default. It creates uncertainty that's bad for the American people, that's bad for the economy, that's bad for business. And so our view has consistently been that any resolution of this matter has to be at least two years in nature. And that was a position that was once again made clear in the meeting yesterday. At the same time, we should have a very aggressive discussion about deficit reduction into the future. President Biden, under his administration, in addition to all of the significant legislative accomplishments that occurred in the last Congress, including around infrastructure, or the CHIPS and Science Act or the Inflation Reduction Act, reduced the deficit by $1.7 trillion and then presented a budget that would not only protect and strengthen Social Security, build an economy that works for everyday Americans, it would also reduce the deficit by an additional $3 trillion. That's a total of $4.7 trillion in deficit reduction. That matches what the Republicans are proposing. And so let's have a conversation about the best way to get there. It can't only be draconian spending cuts that would hurt the safety, the well-being and the health of the American people. We also have to make sure that revenue is put on the table, that we revisit sort of wasteful subsidies for Big Oil and Big Pharma. That's a conversation that we can have. But that should be done in the context of the budget discussion and the appropriations discussion.
KERNEN: Nobody's talking about raising taxes in the debt ceiling negotiations at this point. This would be-this would be later, Leader?
JEFFRIES: Our view is that if we're going to have a thoughtful conversation about deficit reduction, that that conversation can't simply be one-sided based on the right wing ideological perspective of a handful of extreme MAGA Republicans, it can't. That can't-that's not how you make public policy in divided government.
SORKIN: Leader, I guess the question is, is there a conversation happening in the room that revolves around taxes in a meaningful way, either extending the tax cuts under President Trump, which, by the way, would continue to add to the deficit or shifting or changing those programs down the line. Is that– is that on the table right now, is what you're saying?
JEFFRIES: What I'm saying is that if we're going to have a meaningful conversation about deficit reduction, which my Republican colleagues have said they would like to have, that that conversation has to involve an evaluation of spending and evaluation of revenue. And that point was made very clear yesterday in the White House meeting.
QUICK: Can I just ask, do you think that there is going to be a deal that is done two weeks from now? Because it sounds like you all are very far apart and this is before we even hear from Speaker McCarthy?
JEFFRIES: No, as I indicated, I thought it was a very positive forward-looking meeting and I think that everyone articulated their positions. But three things were made clear. One, we cannot allow a default to happen. Two, this is going to occur in a bipartisan way. And three, we all need to get to work with the fierce urgency right now to make sure that America pays our bills.
SORKIN: And I don't think anyone disagrees with that. I think that– I think that once you start talking about taxes, tax hikes, tax cuts, tax, whatever, that's longer, that's a conversation that takes longer than two weeks to resolve. And so the question is sort of how does that get resolved? Does this get kicked down the can in terms of is there a three-month reprieve and you're going to continue these conversations? So we're back having this conversation all over again come September. What–how–what does that look like?
JEFFRIES: Well what it should look like in the view of many of us, is that we should make sure we avoid default in the same way that has been done under Democratic presidents and Republican presidents, including three times under the presidency of Donald Trump. Not in the context of gamesmanship or partisanship or brinksmanship. Now–
SORKIN: I'm just saying the practicality of how you there in the next two weeks. [Crosstalk]
JEFFRIES: Right, and the practicality is that we're not going to solve the fiscal health of the American people over the next ten years in two weeks, that's what Republicans are suggesting they'd like to do. And what we're saying is that we should have a serious discussion about that, but every available tool to engage in deficit reduction, to build an economy, to continue economic growth should be part of that discussion. And if we can't do that in two weeks, then, of course, that's a conversation that should occur along the usual budget and appropriations track, while avoiding a default.
KERNEN: But Leader Jeffries, making– taking a stand and making the point that you don't negotiate with terrorists, which I keep hearing, and that there's hostage-taking and you're not going to do that. Would taking a stand right now and insisting on a clean debt bill, is that worth– is that the hill you should die on if it causes a default? Or do you acknowledge there's going to be negotiations to get it done? It's not going to be a clean– is that worth dying for as a, you know, just a terminology? Is that worth it?
JEFFRIES: First of all, I've not heard anyone suggest that we don't negotiate with terrorists. I don't view my GOP colleagues– I certainly don't view the Speaker as a terrorist.
KERNEN: We hear the old MAGA trope rolled out the ultra MAGA trope. So I've heard other Democrats say we won't negotiate with terrorists.
JEFFRIES: First of all, first of all, extreme MAGA Republicans is not a trope. Donald Trump has made clear–
KERNEN: It's not a good way to negotiate.
JEFFRIES: That's not– Joe, let's not take us off track. What we're trying to do is to arrive at an agreement that avoids a default and sets us on a course to address the fiscal health of the United States of America in a responsible way, in the context of divided government, where Joe Biden is the president and Democrats are in the majority in the Senate, and there is a closely divided House of Representatives.
SORKIN: We have 30 seconds. 14th Amendment, you think that could ever work? Maybe not in this context, and given the risks, but longer term down the line, would you ever use the 14th Amendment and actually challenge it in courts if this is something you think that needs to get undone?
JEFFRIES: I think we have to find a bipartisan resolution, and I'm confident that we will, that can move the country forward.
SORKIN: But not in court. Okay.
QUICK: Leader Jeffries, thank you for your time today.
Full interview can be watched here.