Reps. Pressley and Omar Just Clapped Back at Pelosi

The “squad” expressed their frustration with the House speaker and members of the Congressional Black Caucus.

Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) during a forum on Friday, May 3, 2019, at Tufts University in Medford, Mass.Josh Reynolds/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

It’s been a week of escalating tensions between various factions of the House Democratic caucus. After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi dismissed the influence of four of the House’s most liberal lawmakersā€”Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.)ā€”in an interview with the New York Times, Ocasio-Cortez shot back, accusing Pelosi of “explicitly singling out newly elected women of color.”

Some long-serving black House Democrats fiercely rebuked Ocasio-Cortez’s characterization. Rep. Lacy Clay (D-Mo.), for example, said she had played the “race card.” The exchange threw fresh fuel on a feud between members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the Justice Democrats, the left-wing political organization that helped to recruit and elect the four women last fall. Justice Democrats have recruited Democratic primary opponents to challenge Clay and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), another CBC member, with the arguments that neither lawmaker has done enough to serve their black and brown constituents.

On Saturday morning, speaking during a keynote panel at the progressive Netroots Nation conference in Philadelphia, some of the women lawmakers of color at the center of the controversy addressed it head-on. Without mentioning the black lawmakers by name, Rep. Ayanna Pressley spoke of the challenges they say they’re facing.

ā€œWe donā€™t need any more brown faces that donā€™t want to be a brown voice,” Pressley said. “We don’t need anymore black faces that don’t want to be a black voice. We don’t need any more Muslim faces who don’t want to be a Muslim voice. We donā€™t need any more queers that donā€™t want to be a queer voice.”

Pressley, like Ocasio-Cortez, defeated a long-serving Democratic incumbent during her primary last summer. Though Pressley is black, the CBC threw its weight behind Michael Capuano, who is white, in the majority-minority district Pressley sought to represent. 

Rep. Omar, who shared the stage with Pressley, addressed the remarks from Speaker Pelosi that first ignited the week’s tensions. She drew a distinction between her own political mandate, which is to faithfully represent her constituents in Minnesota, and Pelosi’s, which is to create cohesion across House Democrats. 

Pelosi’s comment to the Times, which ignited the controversy, had been in response to the four women lawmakers’ fury over the House’s decision to pass a Senateā€™s version of a border budget bill that did not contain sufficient protections for migrant children. Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib, Omar, and Pressley were the only four lawmakers to not vote for a House version of the bill that did contain those provisions because they did not support the providing any funding for that could be used to detain migrant children or conduct deportations.*

But she said that Pelosi’s scorn wouldn’t deter her and her allies from working on the causes they believe in. She ended her remarks with a call to action, noting that their ideas can only be implemented when there are more progressives who share their values are elected to Congress. “That will only come when we have you guys running for office with a platform that says, ‘This is going to be a country of the people for the people that is governed with justice in mind,'” she said.

*This story originally stated that Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, Pressley, and Tlaib were the only four Democrats to not vote for the Senate version of the border budget bill. Roughly 90 Democratic lawmakers voted against the Senate bill.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate