The FRONTLINE Interviews
Barbara Lee
U.S. Representative (D-Calif.)
Barbara Lee has served as a U.S. Representative (D-Calif.) since 1998.
The following interview was conducted by FRONTLINE's Jim Gilmore on Nov. 3, 2021. It has been edited for clarity and length.
This interview appears in:
TOP
Barbara Lee
Chapters
Text Interview:
Highlight text to share it
January 6
Congresswoman, let's talk about Jan. 6.What was Nancy Pelosi's, the speaker's, aspect that night?How did she seem to you?Was she emotional?Was she stoic?
No.On the night of Jan. 6, the speaker was determined.She was determined that we were going to get back and certify the elections, and she didn't miss a beat.I remember being in the undisclosed location, and she came in there and said, "We're going back."And we went back, and we did what we had to do.And I think I was there until the end, probably 3:30 or 4 in the morning.And she was Nancy Pelosi: She was the speaker, and she helped with the peaceful transfer—well, almost peaceful transfer of power.
What was the Democratic Caucus's attitude?Angry?How were people feeling?Were people already talking about the need for impeachment?What was that like?
Well, people were just trying to survive that day, because when you look at what took place, in retrospect, that was a dangerous moment.I mean, they were gunning for the speaker, for Vice President Pence, whoever they could find.And so it was a very scary day in many respects, and I think most of us were trying to figure out what happened and how did it happen and why weren't—how did it get that far, to where people almost got—well, people did get killed.And so what was it that broke down that allowed that to happen?And the speaker, being a target of it, we all were very concerned and worried about her.And she didn't miss a beat, and she just kept going.
Was impeachment something that came up that night?
I don't remember anyone talking impeachment that night.We were trying to just get through this moment, to make sure that the elections were certified.
The next 13 days, before the inauguration, Speaker Pelosi was in some ways standing in the breach.There was concern over an existential threat, of course.A lot of people were talking about that.The next day she and [then Senate Minority Leader Chuck] Schumer, in fact, even called the vice president to see if he would invoke the 25th Amendment.Of course, the conversation with [Joint Chiefs of Staff] Gen. [Mark] Milley, as well, took place.What did she feel her role was, her constitutional role was, during that period of time and how she took that very seriously?
Well, during that period of time, she knew she was standing in the gap, and she was very determined that these insurrectionists, these individuals who attempted a coup—and that's what it was, an attempted coup—that she was not going to let that happen and that she was going to make sure that the president was sworn in.And of course, during that period, she made sure that all of the security issues were addressed and began to drill down and investigate and look at what took place.
So she had a major job, in terms sort of just making sure democracy was prevail[sic] and that the Capitol was safe and that people who were hurt, injured or killed, that their families were consoled and respected and provided all the condolences and sympathy to the families.And she was very concerned about the Capitol Hill police and the trauma and the injuries that they, you know, actually received during that terrible period.
So she was doing a lot.But as a mother of five and a grandmother of several young children, she was very adept at what she was doing.
Pelosi and Motherhood
Talk about that: the importance of being a mother and grandmother, what she learned from that, how she deals with her caucus in some ways.She almost seems like a mother/grandmother to the caucus.What is that about her?
Well, she knows that people have different points of view, different ideas, different personalities.Having raised five children, that's a lot of children to really understand and really provide the best parenting that she could and best mothering.And she's a phenomenal mother and grandmother and always includes her children and grandchildren in her life, in many respects, even now in her public life.
And so she's very clear about her caucus members and their needs and their aspirations, and tries to make sure that everybody reaches their full potential, just like she has done with her children and grandchildren.
A lot of people see her as very controlled and unemotional, hard to understand who she is as a human being.Her rising up the ranks of power, this is very unusual for a woman of her generation.Was this to some extent a necessity, to be guarded, or do you think it's something else about her?
Well, I don't see her as being guarded.I mean, I'm sitting in Democratic caucus meetings or in her office in meetings, and she's very real.And she's very tough, but it's tough love.And so she was the Democratic Party chair in California.That's when I met her; I believe it was 1984, at her house.And she, yes, like many women, she sort of set the trend for women's leadership and did it the way a lot of women have to do it, and became the state—was the state party chair and did a phenomenal job with the convention.
And she was mentored by many people.Her parents were political.She comes from a political family in Baltimore, so it's natural for her.She knows exactly what she's doing because this is, I say, in her DNA.
Pelosi’s Roots in Baltimore and San Francisco
Talk about the Baltimore roots and San Francisco roots as well.She came from safe Democratic areas.She grew up in Democratic politics when she was a child.It was very partisan politics, because it was all Democratic.You were concerned about your caucus, basically.What did she learn from all of that that allowed her to come to Washington and really rise up the ranks rather quickly?What was it about her that the Democratic caucus saw, what tools she brought to bear that made her the perfect person to become a leader?
I think her values, in terms of coming to Congress, talking about the children, talking about child poverty and eliminating it, and talking about HIV and AIDS and issues that most members of Congress weren't talking about.And so she had a vision.And yet coming from a political family, she understood that she has to bring people together, and I think she brought some negotiating skills that many members don't have, because she comes from a political family, had five children and has had to negotiate different points of views and come to consensus with people in her personal life.And she's a natural because she learned the art of politics through her childhood and in her family.
And she understood Republicans as well?
Yeah, she still understands Republicans very much so now.And yes, she leads Democrats, but she always talks about, "Let's make this bipartisan," and she always tries to make sure that what she does is bipartisan.But of course, sometimes it works; sometimes it doesn't.But I've never heard her say, or seen her just say, that this is only for Democrats.I mean, we're fighting now for Democrats and Republicans because we're not getting Republican votes.
Say, for example, in the CARES package, we made sure that Republican constituents were taken care of, in terms of their lives and livelihoods through this pandemic, and we're doing that under her leadership.So we're very clear about her values as a Democrat but trying to bring the country together.
Pelosi and Bush
Let's talk about under [President George W.] Bush.She finds herself the first woman in a leadership meeting at the White House, and she writes about realizing that, for a couple hundred years, all these decisions were being made on the direction the country would take, and there was never a woman sitting in on the meetings.How important was that to her?How important is it to understand that historic moment?
Well, she's very humble about that moment, because she knows that when she's in that room—and she has cited this over and over again, when President Bush was president—that the weight of the world was on her shoulders, but also the weight of women.Women never had a seat at the table; they never had their perspective; they never had their lens on public policy in the White House.So as speaker, she feels a duty and responsibility to make sure that she speaks up and that she speaks out for those who have never had a voice.And that, to me, is remarkable, because some oftentimes believe that they can go into the room and then not say anything for anyone; they're just happy to be there, but not Nancy Pelosi.She's happy to be there, yes, but for a reason.
She was also very vocal, as you were, on Iraq early on.And she's whip at this point.Her views—what was that all about?This willingness to stir up partisan sentiments about that issue.She was viewed very dimly by the Republicans back at that point for standing out against a war which a lot of other Democrats were agreeing with.What did that say about her?Why was that important?
It was important because she had been on the Intelligence Committee, and she knew there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.And remember, the Iraq War was based on lies.It was based on being told that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and that we had to go in and save the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein, from using weapons of mass destruction.That was a totally—it was misinformation, and it was a lie.
And so she knew that our young men and women were being put in harm's way, and they're being put in harm's way because of the Bush administration not telling the truth and being forthcoming.And she was very protective—still is—of our troops and what they need and how the military option should be the last option; that we have other means of addressing global peace and security and national security.
And so yes, she was very adamant about the Iraq War.Voted against it and always talked about she knew—because she knew that it—that war should not have been fought.
It seems the country came around afterwards.The 2006 midterms was used as a very important political position of the Democrats, and it succeeded.
Yeah, absolutely.And people began to understand.And remember, there were marches and rallies and public outcry.Myself and Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey [D-Calif.] and Maxine Waters [D-Calif.], we formed what we called the Triad, and we worked with the speaker to try to bring forth author—repeal of the authorizations, trying to withhold funding, using the power of the purse strings.We did, legislatively with the speaker, a heck of a lot on the inside to try to call attention to the fact that we needed to bring our troops home and end the war in Iraq.
And politically it worked for her in a lot of ways because of that.Did it help her in rising up the ranks of leadership?
I think she was on the trajectory then.It wasn't only the Iraq War.It was many, many issues that she was able to shepherd through as the speaker, bringing, yes, Democrats together, but also Republicans.And so I think that she was—there were several, you know, inflection points and points in which she soared, but she does the work each and every day.And so, you know, people always talk about how smart she is, because that's Nancy Pelosi; she's very smart on policy and on politics, and she knows how to work in this space, to move the country forward.
And I think, you know, as a person of faith, I think the Scriptures say, "By their deeds, shall you know them."And I think that's kind of reflective of Nancy Pelosi.
What did she learn from the financial crisis?Number one, she agrees with Republicans that she will hold hands and jump off the bridge.Nobody was happy about it.She was able to bring the votes that she promised, but Boehner was not.He was not able to control his caucus.Did she learn something from that moment, about Republicans could or could not be trusted to be good partners in even these elemental decisions to save the economy?
I think she knew that.I don't think she learned anything.She knows them very well.And it was tough.And I can remember, it was tough with Democrats.It was tough with myself.Initially I voted against the bill, and then, you know, she rounded us up, and we committed to Nancy Pelosi that we would support her efforts.But she knew what the Republicans were up to, and she knows them very well.
The historic moment, how that moment changed history in a lot of ways.In some ways, it led to discontinue in the Republican Party, and the rise of the Tea Party to the Freedom Caucus in the liberal ranks, and it also raised a lot of anger, the right to occupy group and such.Was there a new era after that?Did things change dramatically because of that decision?
I think it was the Affordable Care Act, when you look at the rise of the Tea Party.There were people who came to Capitol Hill the day that we were voting on the Affordable Care Act, came to the Capitol, and they actually spat on our beloved Congressman John Lewis.And I remember walking through that crowd.It was very scary.And that's the moment, I think, that the rise of the Tea Party became the MAGA party, in many respects.
And she was phenomenal in that, because there were so many times that the Affordable Care Act could have dropped off of the radar.And I was chairing the Black Caucus during that period, so I was in a lot of meetings, and I saw how she put together the strategy with the president and with our caucuses.And it was a very, very heavy lift, but she did it.And because of that, millions of people now have healthcare.
So I think, when I think back, I think that was the moment that, you know, she'd solidified her leadership, in terms of working for the people and making sure that people had access to affordable, accessible healthcare.
Pelosi, Obama and the Affordable Care Act
She told the White House and the Obama administration from the very beginning that you can't depend upon the Republican votes here.We have the majority; we can pass this; we can pass a bill that's even more revolutionary and will be more successful in helping people if we just go along with the Democratic votes.But the Obama White House had a different point of view.They wanted to be bipartisan.Talk about that debate and what she understood about the realities of Washington that possibly this new president didn't quite understand.
Well, she knew the Republicans, as I said.She knows them.She knows what they'll vote for, support, and what they won't.I mean, they were actively undermining President Obama's agenda.We saw that each and every day.And she knew that.And she knew that if we were going to do the right thing by providing economic security, health security, education, all of the efforts, in terms of economic growth and job creation, that we had to do that ourselves, because she knew the Republicans.
So she always tries, though, having said that, to get bipartisan support.But she knows the bottom line is, if she can't, at a certain point, you have to work for your constituents and work for the country.And she continued to communicate that, and I think we saw with the Affordable Care Act, I don't believe we got one Republican vote.
And it got even harder after [former Sen.] Scott Brown [R] won in Massachusetts.At that point, she was pushing the White House that you can't go small, because Rahm Emanuel was talking to the caucus and saying, "If we can't win the big bill, we'll go small."And she was saying: "No, we go big.We go big or else you lose me."So she was playing hardball on that.What was your point of view about that and how she handled it?
Yeah, she handled it exactly the right way.We had to go big.I mean, we had the House, the Senate and the White House!Come on!If we can't do it then, if we couldn't do it then, how can we ever do anything big and bold for the American people?And so she insisted on that.And I mean, she was with us, trying to fight for the public option; many of us wanted that.And of course we couldn't get the votes totally from the Democrats to do that, but she worked through the negotiations, and still we had a good bill, the ACA.
And she went as big as she could go.And I think that's important, an important lesson, because once we have power, we have to use our power, and we have to use it in a way that's not necessarily demonstrative of incremental change, but we have to go big.And if we go big, then maybe we'll get a heck of a lot more than if we just went small.
But to get that bill passed, there's one meeting where she brought a lot of the progressive women together, and I believe you were there.There was a lot of concern about the Stupak-Pitts Amendment.And she basically laid it out that, yeah, you can't get the perfect here.We've got to get what we can.And she basically knew that there were a lot of these women and others within the caucus that were going to, if they took this vote, they could lose their seats.Talk about that moment and her, and what she was thinking, and how she knew she needed to get these votes, even if it hurt the caucus members.And of course, it was one of the reasons why the next elections were so damaging to the caucus.Talk about that moment and what you saw in her.
Well, she knew that she had to make sure that the negotiations continued to move forward, that we could lose everything.And she was, at that point, I think, concerned about the policies of universal, accessible healthcare for everyone.And the politics she's always concerned about. She always thinks about member impact.And so she was thinking about member impact and trying to craft a path forward, where it would not impact in such devastating way members.
And yeah, I remember the Stupak amendment, and I remember I was part of those negotiations with the White House and in the meetings.And I didn't like the way it came out myself.But it did, and we crafted a very narrow, you know, amendment or provision of the bill and voted for it.
But she's always concerned about member impact, and so she was balancing member impact, concerned about what just the overall vote would mean, but she also knew that these were members who she was really going to fight very hard for, to make sure they won reelection.
Republicans Campaign Against Pelosi
The election was not a good one for the Democrats.It wasn't good for her; she lost her speakership.And also, it was an election that she was focused on.Seventy million dollars of ads were bought by Republicans to attack her, not the president.They weren't going for the president; they were going for her.There was a bus traveling the country, the "Dump Nancy Pelosi."Why did the Republicans play that card?
Well, they tried to make her out of something or someone who she is not.I mean, they tried to scare people.They weren't accustomed, and the country wasn't accustomed, to having a woman as speaker.And much of this was very sexist, I think.And I think they tried to demonize her.And she fought back, of course.She was very clear about what they were doing.I have never seen her take any of this personally.She knew exactly what they were up to, and she fought very hard in those elections to win the election.
And so I think it was the sexism that was involved, and them trying to demonize the country and trying to scare people about having a smart, brilliant, strategic woman as speaker.And that's what they do, though.That's what they do.
But she's a human being, and that's got to affect her.If it doesn't affect her, she's got to worry about how her grandchildren will hear these things and what it will do to them.In a deep, very human way, isn't that something that must have affected her deeply?
Sure.She's a human being.She's very sensitive, and she's very caring.And you know, I'm sure it does, because of who she is.But she's a woman of faith.She really draws on much of what she grew up with, and that's a loving family.She draws on her faith.And she knows what she's doing.And so we all have moments of—I won't even say sorrow, but moments where issues and people impact you personally.But you move on.You go through the—you process that, and then you move on, because you know you have to live up to your oath of office.And that's what she does.
In a weird way, it's also, it seems—these are situations which put you, a human being, in a vulnerable position.She seems to have something in her which is also based in the old politics of the old days that she learned from her dad, maybe, and her brother.She gets angry.
Yeah, she gets angry.Why wouldn't she?It's a normal emotion.Given what I've seen her go through—and I've been here 23 years—she has a right to be angry.That's natural.And I think people see her when she's angry as a human being.
And it motivates her.
Oh, yeah.I mean, she lets her anger, though, not be divisive, but it—she makes sure that she moves forward, knowing that whatever she's angry about has to be addressed, and then generally it is.
Pelosi and Trump
Let's talk about Trump.She's now in the wilderness for a bunch of years.But does see Trump coming in as a potential way that maybe there's a way back to power for the House, for the Democrats in the House?Does she understand that her relationship with this president will be important?Does it affect that first meeting, where she goes to the White House, and she's in the minority at this point, and the president starts lying about the numbers of the popular—that he would have won the presidency with the popular vote, if it hadn't been for all this cheating going on, and she says, "No, no, Mr. President, the facts don't prove that to be the case."And she stood up to him in a way that nobody else seemed to do.What was the motivation for all of that?And was it, to some extent, an ability to strategize in a way that is pretty much amazing for a political leader to understand the game that well?
She had to stand up to him.And I think that shows her strength and her integrity, because she could have easily gone along to get along.But she knew that she had—and she knew Donald Trump and who he was, and wanted to protect her democracy.I mean, he came in on an agenda that was an agenda that was very scary from day one, based on white supremacy, based on autocracy, based on him wanting to consolidate power, to blur the division, you know, our three branches of government in terms of the separation of powers.She knew who he was.
And I think the entire time that Donald Trump was there, she was against standing in the gap.She was trying to make sure that she protected the gains that we had made, but also that she had to protect the country from this man, and that he was the greatest threat to our national security.And she knew that.And so she had to deal with that in a way that was very formidable, I think.
Division in the Democratic Party
… Talk a little bit about, at that point, in 2018-2019, moderates took her on in 2018, to some extent.In 2019, there's a whole new group of progressive women that are elected, and the Squad, of course, is the famous group.These are women that are progressive.She's a progressive.She was that young radical, to some extent, in very early days, and now she's got another group, and there's a bit of difference of opinion about where things could go and some arguments going on.How did she feel about that?Talk a little bit about those difficulties at that point, within the Squad, at a time where there's some division in the caucus due to the impeachment issue and such.How did she view that period of time and how to deal with it?
Well, she always wants every member to be able to go get on the path that they came to Congress to chart.She always wants them to have the committees.I serve as co-chair of the Steering and Policy Committee, and I'm in a lot of meetings with her, when she's talking about her members.And I was there in many of the meetings where we talked about committees, who wanted what and what would help elevate them, what their district needed, what their politics required.And she's always wanted to, regardless of whether you're a progressive or a moderate or a no-name, to make sure that each other is afforded the opportunities to determine their path in Congress.
And so naturally, that's a lot of members to juggle.And so she was able to make sure that they were put on a path that would allow them the opportunities to serve.And no one said that's going to be easy, but she always manages to do it.
And I think everyone respects her.They may or may not agree on every single policy, but I believe—and I don't know any member, any new member, any freshman, any member who has said anything about the speaker, other than respect for her.And they may or may not agree with the issues, but they certainly know that she's looking out for their best interest.
But she also knows she has to allow the new members, the children, to learn the lessons of how to succeed despite themselves, almost.That famous speech where she says, "Some of you people have come to town thinking you want to make this beautiful pâté, but the reality is that we make sausage here."Did she think the Squad and others would learn things along the way and that she just needed to give them time?
Well, again, she knows the system, the process.This is a very cumbersome process, and it's very complex.And I think as a parent, as a grandparent, as a teacher, I mean, she's teaching.She's helping people understand the process, to make them effective, so that they can get their job done for their districts in a way that demonstrates that they were properly elected; they were duly elected to represent their issues in their district.
And so she really lays out the complexities of the process so members can learn.And I think that's really a strength that she has.And each and every day, I mean, I'm still learning new, you know, strategies and procedures and processes.The legislative process doesn't happen overnight, and you never probably know it all, because every day is dynamic.
And so she explained to the new members that, you know, it is dynamic, and it is about process.And you—we want—she wants them to be successful, so she has to explain how it is done for their own agenda, for their people, in terms of public service and their political agenda.
The difficult position she was in, where a lot of progressives were calling for impeachment, and a lot of the base was wanting somebody to stand up to the president and calling for impeachment, and yet she was saying: "Wait a minute.I've got to deal with the moderates as well.We don't want to lose seats.We want to be able to win back Trump districts that were Democratic, that Trump took over."She was a realist and practical, but at the same point trying to fight against this idea that impeachment just for the sake of impeachment was a good thing, despite the fact that the Senate would never vote for it.Talk about the difficult position she was in at that point.
Well, it was difficult, but it was a challenge that she always meets.I mean, she knew, I think, that we had to get there.But she also knew it was going to take a heck of a lot to get to that point.And that's what she went through, was making sure that when we got to the point of impeachment, that everyone understood why, and that the support would be there, and that the caucus would be unified around it.It wasn't just that you could do it today, because we know who Donald Trump was and how he had violated his oath of office from day one.I knew that, and I'm one who wanted it done, yes.But I saw how she made sure that every step of that process would lead to the ultimate outcome of impeachment.And I think that's another indication of how she leads, bringing people together for the good of the country.
The State of the Union in February of 2020 and her dramatic move at the end, ripping up the speech: What was going in her head?Why did she do that?What motivated that?Was that anger about Limbaugh getting the Medal of Freedom?When you saw that, what did you think?
I don't know what was going on in her head, but I was so happy she did that.I said, this is awesome; this is exactly what needs to happen right now.This man is up here telling all these lies, for example—I mean, that was a terrible, dark speech, and the speaker let everybody know that by what she did.And I think that was a moment, for me, that I took so much pride in.And I, in many ways, cracked up but I said this was really Nancy Pelosi at her best.
Pelosi and Biden
And lastly, coming into the Biden years and trying to sell the Biden agenda, what did she learn from all of those years?What made her the person that took the stance that she did, the willingness to work with the president, to push the president to go big, go quick, to get this amazing legislation through, more aggressive, bigger than anything we've seen in generations.What's going on behind all that?
Well, I think she recognizes, once again, we have the House, the Senate and the White House, and we can't miss these opportunities, because so many people have really had very difficult times.They're living on the edge.So much poverty in our country.So many low-income people, middle-income people, who barely made it through the pandemic, and so many people died through this pandemic.And I think it's a passion that she has because of the moment that we're in, seeing so many people die, so many people get sick, so many jobs lost.And we've been fighting to save lives and livelihoods.And I think she senses that—she knows that this is a moment of urgency and many—in many ways a state of emergency for the American people.
And so she's driven, I think, by that and by recognizing we have to deliver, because we have three branches of government that are now headed by Democrats.
Latest Interviews
Latest Interviews
Policies
Teacher Center
Jon and Jo Ann Hagler on behalf of the Jon L. Hagler Foundation
Koo and Patricia Yuen
FRONTLINE is a registered trademark of WGBH Educational Foundation. Web Site Copyright ©1995-2025 WGBH Educational Foundation. PBS is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Funding for FRONTLINE is provided through the support of PBS viewers and by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Additional funding is provided by the Abrams Foundation; Park Foundation; the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation; and the FRONTLINE Journalism Fund with major support from Jon and Jo Ann Hagler on behalf of the Jon L. Hagler Foundation, and additional support from Koo and Patricia Yuen. FRONTLINE is a registered trademark of WGBH Educational Foundation. Web Site Copyright ©1995-2025 WGBH Educational Foundation. PBS is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
