Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki, November 12, | Eastern North Carolina Now

    And then, on the topic of Russia, there have been a number of reports over the last couple of days about concerns on the U.S. government over a potential Russian invasion of Ukraine with the troop buildup over there. Has the President reached out to President Putin? What's the level of engagement right now between the White House and Moscow?

    MS. PSAKI: Sure. Let me start with your first question. APEC hosting requires the consensus of all 21 economies. We thank the vast majority of members for their strong support so far. One economy - and I'm not going to - I'm not going to confirm which economy that is - but is still undergoing consultations and has not yet joined the consensus.

    And our hope is certainly that we move past this impasse, that it is resolved, and that we can continue the positive momentum on economic cooperation through APEC.

    And then, in terms of - your second question, say it one more time. I apologize.

    Q (Inaudible) that Russian troop buildup on Ukraine concerns the U.S. government about a potential invasion over there. And any White House-to-Moscow engagement in the last couple of days regarding that buildup?

    MS. PSAKI: Well, in recent week, and certainly days, we've extensive interactions with our European allies and partners, including with Ukraine - but about our concern about these reports. And during these meetings, we've, of course, been discussing our concerns about the Russian military activities and their harsh rhetoric toward Ukraine.

    We've also held discussions with Russian officials about Ukraine and U.S.-Russian relations generally. As we've made clear in the past and we've made clear directly to them as well: Escalatory or aggressive actions by Russia would be of great concern to the United States. We call for an immediate restoration of the July 2020 ceasefire. And we stand with our partner, Ukraine, and condemn Russian aggression against Ukraine in all forms.


    And, obviously, our European conversations are about shared concern about the reports of this buildup and rhetoric.

    Go ahead. Andrea.

    Q Hey. So, welcome back.

    MS. PSAKI: Thank you.

    Q Thank you so much, Jen. I wanted to ask you about the Xi meeting that's coming up on Monday.

    MS. PSAKI: Sure.

    Q So are you expecting anything sort of concrete to come out of it? Or is this really more about reestablishing a - kind of a better basis for dialogue? Can you just say a few words?

    MS. PSAKI: Sure. Well, let me - I think this is why you're asking me the question. So, let me just go back just briefly of, kind of, what our strategy has been to date. I mean, this meeting is coming after 10 months of President Biden taking action so we can outcompete China in the long term. And that means investing in ourselves at home to strengthen our own competitive hand. It means working with our partners and allies to make sure we have a united approach and a coordinated approach as it relates to engagement with China.

    We, of course, believe in intense competition. We believe and understand intense competition is part of that relationship. We also believe that that requires intense diplomacy. So, this is a reflection of that.

    And if you go back to the President's phone call on September 9th, where this was discussed - and, obviously, there was follow-up engagement - one of the disc- - part of the discussion was about the importance of that leader-to-leader engagement, not because we are seeking - and we're not - specific deliverables or outcomes, more because this is about setting the terms, in our view, of an effective competition where we're in a position to defend our values - which certainly will be part of the President's conversation - and those of our allies and partners, and also discuss areas where we can work together.

    So, I would see this, Andrea, as more of a continuation of that intensive diplomacy, given that we believe intense competition requires that. And I wouldn't see this as an - I wouldn't set the expectation, I should say, that this is intended to have, you know, deliv- - major deliverables or outcomes.

    Q Yeah, so there were reports that President Xi could ask the President to attend the Olympics in February. What kind of signal would it send if the President were to attend the Olympics, given the concerns that have been raised about China's actions toward Taiwan, its increased aggression and, kind of, flights there in that region? Is that - would that be a problematic situation for the President?

    MS. PSAKI: Well, I understand why, but we're getting a few steps ahead of where we are. I will also note for all of your planning purposes - and don't want to ruin your Sundays - but there will be a preview call of the summit on Sunday that all of you will be invited to. So, in terms of the Olympics or any invitation, I don't have anything for you on that at this point.

    Q Okay, just a quick one on the economy - on inflation. So, one in four Americans, according to a new survey, have experienced some kind of loss of income as a result of higher prices. The President has expressed concern about this. I know that you were working on different fronts -

    MS. PSAKI: On cue.

    Q - to address this, but, I mean, how urgent is it? And how - you know, is there any sort of specific concern that this is going to affect not just political outcomes, but just the overall economy?

    MS. PSAKI: Sure. Well, Andrea, first, let me say that, you know, a lot of talk about inflation - I'm not saying from you, but in general out there - has been - it's become a political cudgel and it shouldn't be. It's impacting, as you said, millions of Americans no matter their political party. And that's certainly of concern to the President.

    I would note that everyone from the Federal Reserve to Wall Street agree with our assessment that inflation is already expected to be subs- - to substantially decelerate next year. I know you're not talking about that, but that's an important component here.

    And economists across the board also agree that the President's economic agenda - the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill that he will sign on Monday and the Build Back Better Bill that we're working to move forward - will not add to inflationary ples- - pressure, and will ease inflationary pressure over the long term.

    But when we move past the economic jargon, which I realize is what you're asking me, and talk about the real impacts on people's lives, we're really talking about costs to people. Right? And you talked about this on Wednesday. So it's cost of childcare, cost of housing, cost of gas, cost of household goods. That's how people are experiencing this on a day-to-day basis. And that is, of course, of concern to the President.

    Our view is that the real risk here is inaction. And the reason we - I wanted to do this slide today - one, I love slides and graphics, so on my first day back we had to have one - but is because if we don't act on Build Back Better, what we're doing is we are - won't be able to cut childcare costs in 2020. We know that is a huge impact on people's daily lives and American families.

    We won't be able to make preschool free for many families starting in 2022, saving many families $8,600. We won't be able to get ahead of skyrocketing housing costs.


    I mean, that's a part of this bill too. It has a major investment in building new housing - affordable housing units so that people can move into them and live in them and address the pending housing crisis.

    And we won't be able to save American - Americans thousands of dollars by negotiating prescription drug prices.

    So our view is this - this makes a strong case - this is a strong case for moving forward with this agenda because what we're really talking about is cost to American families, how it's impacting them. And that's something that if we don't act now, we won't be able to address these things in the short term either.

    Go ahead.

    Q Thanks so much, Jen. And welcome back. The President has picked Dr. Rob Califf as his pick for FDA commissioner. We've already seen Senator Joe Manchin come out in opposition against him, citing his "significant ties to the pharmaceutical industry," as Senator Manchin put it. Is the White House confident that Dr. Califf can get confirmed as FDA commissioner?

    MS. PSAKI: We are. And I will say that the President chose Dr. Califf - and this was in his statement, but let me reiterate some of this - because he's one of the most experienced clinical trialists in the country, has the experience and expertise to lead the Food and Drug Administration during a critical time in our nation's fight to put an end to the coronavirus pandemic.

    I'd also note that how we see this or how this President sees this nomination is a continuation of what he views as excellent work under the leadership of Acting FDA Commissioner Dr. Janet Woodcock, who's led the agency through a challenging time because of what's happening in the world and, of course, fighting the pandemic.

    I would note that four years ago - five years ago, sorry - my math was a little off there - he was confirmed by a vote of 89 to 4. One of those four is the individual you mentioned. And every senator can vote for or against members - or people who are nominated. That's their role. But we feel he's a qualified person who has the exact experience for this moment.

    Q Thank you. And how many Republicans should we expect to see at the signing ceremony here on Monday?

    MS. PSAKI: We will see. We've invited a broad group of Republicans: some in Congress, governors, mayors, individuals who played a role in helping move the Infrastructure Bill forward. And as we get close to Monday or on Monday, we'll provide you, of course, a list of attendees.

    Q Have any Republicans, like Senator Mitch McConnell, said that they will not be at that signing ceremony?

    MS. PSAKI: I think he's spoken to this publicly, so I'll point you to that. But, certainly, we have the invite out to a range of members. We're - we would - the President looks forward to thanking them for their work, for working together to get this done for the American people.

    Q And the -

    Q Have any confirmed at all?

    Q - last question on the President Xi meeting on Monday: Will the President hold a press conference afterward like he did following this meeting with President Putin? And does he plan to bring up the COVID-19 origins with President Xi, given he has said that China has been blocking investigators from getting access to information that's critical to them?

    MS. PSAKI: That is a remaining concern. And there will be a broad range of topics that will be discussed, and the President is certainly not going to hold back on areas where he has concern.

    Again, I would point you to the fact that we'll do this preview call on Sunday, where they'll talk in more detail. It's Monday evening, so I would not expect a press conference that - later after the call, given the time difference.

    Q But anytime next week to hear the President talk about this meeting?

    MS. PSAKI: I think there is one planned for after the - by - the meetings with the Mexican and Canadian leaders next week.

    Go ahead. I'll come back you. I just want to jump around.


    Q Sorry. You just said the real risk on inflation is inaction. But, so far this week, we haven't seen any action from the administration on gas prices. The President, in Europe, said, you know, we would see action sooner rather than later; on Wednesday, that it was his "top priority."

    So is he going to tap the SPR, ease biofuel blending requirements, ban crude exports? And if the answer is you still haven't kind of decided on any of this, is the message to Americans headed into Thanksgiving - where everybody will be driving to see their family and friends - that you think that the current prices are acceptable?