The FRONTLINE Interviews

Marianna Sotomayor

Journalist, The Washington Post

Marianna Sotomayor reports on the U.S. Congress for The Washington Post. She previously covered politics for NBC News.

The following interview was conducted by FRONTLINE’s Jim Gilmore on Dec. 7, 2021. It has been edited for clarity and length.

This interview appears in:

Pelosi’s Power

TOP

Marianna Sotomayor

Chapters

Text Interview:

Highlight text to share it

Pelosi’s Demeanor

So talk a little bit about Nancy Pelosi and what she's like when you meet her, how she's viewed on Capitol Hill.Who is Nancy Pelosi?

You know, when you talk about Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and the first kind of thing that comes to mind is, she's always smiling.It could be the hardest situation possibly on Capitol Hill, but she's walking around in those high heels, kind of smiling, looking around.

And if she's not doing that, she's usually on the phone, looking at the floor, very concentrated in what she's talking about, whether she's talking to a member or, you know, someone on her staff over the phone.Or she'll be huddling with a member, trying to talk to them about who knows what, because she is very much involved not just in that person's districts; she knows where her members stand on certain issues.And they might be talking about a specific policy that may not be front of mind to reporters at that time.She very much anticipates what's to come, but at the same time tries and quells those tensions early on, because as we've seen, she's been tested time and time and time again with tighter margins.And many people, whether it is staff, members or even Republican counterparts, will say her power is in being able to keep her members together and united.

Pelosi and Trump

The first meeting that she has with Trump, she goes up with leadership.… At some point, as she told us the story yesterday, Trump leans forward and starts saying, "I won the popular vote…," and then he starts talking about the number of people at the inauguration.At some point, Nancy Pelosi looks at him and says, "Mr. President, that's wrong.” …She speaks out of turn because she's in the minority now.But she stands up to him in the very beginning.How do you think that first meeting defined how she would deal with him philosophically, tactically, strategy-wise through the next four years?

You know, when you think about the relationship Pelosi has had with Trump, she has been open to meeting with him.She has never been the kind of person to say, "I don't want to talk to you.I am standing far enough away."She did need to engage in some way, and she knows the responsibility of having to do that, regardless of who the president is.However, that doesn't mean she's just going to sit in a corner and listen to someone say something that she disagrees with.

And I think one of the poignant moments of, you know, when people think about Nancy Pelosi and Trump, is the moment where she stood up to him.That picture where she's in a room with the Cabinet, a room mostly full of men, and she is standing up and kind of pointing at the president, kind of telling him what it is.

And for people who love Nancy Pelosi, that was almost like the reigning picture; that's how they remember her.And maybe after, when she walked out of that same meeting with her coat and sunglasses, it became kind of this, like, pop culture moment. …

Let's talk about 2018 and the midterm elections, which bring the majority back to the Democrats.An important election.A lot of the strategy was developed by Nancy Pelosi or with her people, the fact they would more or less ignore Donald Trump and talk about the beneficial things that the Democrats had done, will do.Talk a little bit about that success of that strategy in 2018 and how important it was for the Democrats.…

Yeah, so looking at the 2018 midterm election, there was a moment for the Democrats to be able to regain the majority in the House.And Pelosi in some ways saw that, sure, you can in some districts really hit on Trump.Especially those more progressive ones, ones where Democrats are going to naturally turn out, you might bring in more people.But for the most part, she has been very keen on what we call frontline districts, frontline members.Those are, of course, members who represent swing districts, the most vulnerable districts that could go one way, Democrat or Republican.She has always prioritized those.

And she knew that if you talk about Trump all the time, people are going to be turned off, or they're going to say, OK, you're just running against the president, not representing me; you're not representing what I want.And at the time, there was a threat of the Affordable Care Act being repealed.It's something that became a mantra for Republicans, saying, "We're going to repeal and replace Obamacare."And the message essentially was, if Republicans remain in power, they are going to continue to try and take this away.They have already under Trump, you know, tried to change immigration laws.They have tried to repeal Obamacare.But just think about the specifics.

And that's essentially the message that she wanted a lot of these new candidates and those running for reelection to say: Imagine a world without your health care access.Remember when you didn't have access to health care?That could happen. …

Division in the Democratic Party

So the effect of the 2018, the success depended to a large extent on her.Certainly she was an important part of it.Democrats are back in power.And lo and behold, there's this move within the moderate group of Democrats who happened to be five men, mostly white men, that were the ones that were sort of in charge of it, to take away her speakership and elect somebody else.What was that? …

You know, it was not necessarily too surprising to see a group of moderates starting to question whether Pelosi should … remain as the top Democratic leader in the House.And at that time especially, Nancy Pelosi's name was starting to become essentially this bogeyman for the Republican Party.Anytime any member was placed with her in ads or, you know, a Republican was talking about her on the campaign trail, that became essentially kind of like a model of what voters started to think about this scary Democratic Party.

So there was some of that concern where moderates just thought, OK, we need a new face.There's some people in the party as well, there were some minority members who also started to question, well, maybe, maybe we need someone, a fresher face, a newer generation, maybe someone who represents a minority group in this country, because that is also part of the Democratic Party.

But, you know, again, at the end of the day, Pelosi is very good at counting votes.She knew that this group was there, and she knew that there were probably going to have to be some defections, as has since happened, from those more vulnerable Democrats representing those districts.And they had to run essentially saying, "I'm not voting for Nancy Pelosi to be speaker."

She knew that was there, but at the same time was able to essentially talk with these members and say, "I'm not trying to be speaker or the minority leader for the rest of my lifetime.At some point, I'm going to have to let this go.I see myself as that transitional figure.So give me a couple years to get us in the right place, a stable place.I will help comb the new and next generation of leadership.But just give me that time, especially right now under the Trump administration."

Talk a little bit more about how … the Republicans had been using her as a tool to define the Democratic Party, the elite San Francisco liberal that Nancy Pelosi supposedly was painted to be.Why was that such a successful tool for the Republicans? …

So Republicans were very successful in framing Nancy Pelosi as this bogeyman, essentially, because many Republican voters, it is considered that there is a group of them who are sexist.They don't like that feminist power, as some people have said.And you kind of saw that in the Trump era, right?There was a lot of his own sense of being this machista, as we say, this macho guy, and she was a parallel to that.

Talk about the division in the Democratic Caucus at this point.… When the impeachment question, which came up very early—especially progressives were pushing to impeach—she held them back.She was not for impeachment, and that caused discontent.But there's also discontent between the moderates and the progressives.And there are very few—the majority is very slim. …

Yeah, so after that 2018 election, you saw a newer generation of Democratic members come in.They quickly became known as the Squad, and they are a group primarily then of freshmen women, led by Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who became a very popular name, even before coming to Capitol Hill and stepping into those hallways because she actually ousted former Congressman Joe Crowley, who was essentially seen as the successor to Nancy Pelosi whenever she were to step down as speaker or the top Democrat in the House.

So it was kind of emblematic of this newer movement, a more grassroots movement where, you know, you didn't need as much of leadership's financial support, for example.They could fundraise on their own.They were able to bring in this momentum of many Democratic voters just being angry at Trump, being upset that not much was being done, but also not just upset about him, but the fact that, you know, Democrats wanted to deliver on health care, on climate change, on immigration, on all these issues that are of importance, but just couldn't get there.

So they really did see these new freshmen women as ones who could kind of push leadership or influence, use their own microphones to push the party.And that's essentially what you started to see happen.And because of that, you did see more of those divides between these liberals and moderates.

…That kind of came to a head during the next presidential election in 2020, where Democrats weren't expecting to lose as many seats as they ended up losing in the House.And you really saw the tension flare between those vulnerable Democrats, those that could easily be swept out of Congress this next election.They essentially were saying, why are we using the rhetoric of the progressives?This does not resonate with a majority of the country.We need to tamp down their language, because that is hurting the majority of the Democratic Party.

And that in some ways is the start of what we have seen Pelosi have to balance now in the tightest majority lead ever that we have seen, especially for someone like her who has been tested time and time again by the factions and by very tight vote margins.

And the role of her dealing with the impeachment, how did that come into play?

Pelosi at first was not necessarily a fan of just impeaching Trump right out of the gate.There were many members, both these new group of progressive members who had come into the House in 2018 and also some older members who considered themselves also some liberals, who were just introducing resolutions to start informal impeachment proceedings of President Donald Trump.

She kind of pushed those away.She would say, "What he has said, what he has done is wrong; I don't agree with it; the Democratic Party cannot stand for it."

She's an institutionalist and knows that impeaching someone carries weight, regardless of who it is.You don't want to set the precedent of that not mattering anymore, that not having the impact that it usually has carried in history.

So it really came down to President Trump at the time back-channeling with Ukraine and talking about the elections, or the possibility of that, that Democrats as a whole really started to push leadership, and she personally also thought, OK, this could be grounds for impeachment.This is something where you are talking to a foreign country to potentially harm American democracy.And when you put it in those ways and those terms, that essentially set the groundwork for her to agree to impeach Trump for the first time.

Talk a little bit more about AOC and the Squad when they come to Washington.How do they view Pelosi?Pelosi was originally the progressive from San Francisco, and that's certainly the way Republicans always painted her.Talk a little bit about how the Squad folks viewed her and how Pelosi viewed them.

So it's interesting.When the Squad came in, unsurprisingly they were a little skeptical of Pelosi.They did see her as this woman, the first woman to ever be able to reach the place where she was, of power and influence, but at the same time they also thought that she was representative of an older generation, one that does not necessarily reflect this more empowered movement within the Democratic Party.

So you did see them be very vocal, but at the same time you have seen somewhat of an evolution within members of the Squad, because they also realized they had to learn the ways of Congress.Of course generations can change, movements can influence legislation, but the way that Congress works, there's still a rhythm to it; that if you one day would want to end up like a Nancy Pelosi, you have to understand the ways of leadership, the ways to balance and understand different members.

So they understood that they had to learn, essentially.That doesn't mean that they took to Twitter to speak out against leaders.That didn't mean that they would host Instagram Lives and talk directly to younger voters to try and curtail some legislative priorities and essentially push Democrats to go further on some issues, but they weren't necessarily ones to go against Pelosi in front of her, right?If they're behind closed doors, they listen; they might speak up, which is actually something that Pelosi values.As someone who has learned to speak up in a room to something that they don't agree with, she values when people may push her a little bit.

And I think that also kind of helped Pelosi realize, OK, I know and I understand that this is—this is what these people are thinking.They do represent a swath of the party that can't be ignored.

And she herself is considered pretty progressive, so she does have relationships with them.That, again, does not mean that if she needs to call them into the office she won't, but she tries to keep them at bay as well.

But that wasn't certainly the way that it was in the very beginning.That moment when AOC comes to participate in the sit-in in her offices, what does that represent? …

The Squad essentially used organizing grassroots tactics.There was a newer generation that wanted to essentially force and demand Democrats to answer to things that many voters, many activists were pushing for and have been pushing for.

So it was not that surprising to see Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez join these groups.But it was a little bit shaking to see her actually go into Pelosi's office on Capitol Hill, not in the Capitol, and essentially squat with a number of these activists who were pushing for climate change reforms immediately.And that is something that typically has not been done or been seen.And the congresswoman was not afraid to do that and didn't really back down on why she was pushing that.

Since, she has changed her ways.She has not necessarily been one to, again, storm into Pelosi's office or, you know, sit with activists physically in the offices, but she still is trying to hold Pelosi and the Democratic Party accountable. …

Talk a little bit about the difference between Pelosi's and AOC's point of view and the little bit of the argument they had that was eventually fixed up.But initially it's interesting about what that debate was about, and it was about power to some extent. …

So the dynamics between Speaker Nancy Pelosi and what many members refer to as the old guard, those who have served in Congress and been in leadership for sometime, versus the Squad really boils down to influence.You know, the Squad very much has its point of view, and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez came into Congress thinking this way, and still in some ways continues to espouse this, which is that they can easily reach millions of voters through their tweets, through any social media live videos that they do, and not to mention Republicans use that to their advantage.

So they are out there more than they can even control trying to make sure that they are very much pushing Democrats and the party as a whole to start embracing more of these positions that these Democratic activists for a long time have been pushing and just have grown so frustrated that the party itself has not been able to address in some form or fashion. …Pelosi and many of those members who have long been in Congress understand that in order to pass legislation on Capitol Hill and get it to the president's desk, it can't be as extreme as the Squad may want.And they see it as extreme, but the Squad of course sees it as, well, this is what Democrats have been pushing for for such a long time; why can't we get this specific thing and that specific thing?

But, you know, that has been a point of contention for a long time between Pelosi and the Squad, which only keeps growing and could potentially keep growing as now this more liberal wing is recruiting a number of people to primary a lot of these older-guard members who have long been in Congress.

But for Pelosi right now, she has been able to temper their demands a little bit by giving them somewhat of what they want.And you see that perfectly encapsulated in some ways in this Build Back Better social spending plan that addresses climate change and addresses changes to family life, universal pre-K, a child tax credit.The list goes on and on in terms of priorities that Democrats have been wanting to push for a long time.

So right now, that group, while they may be annoyed that they weren't in the room or that it doesn't go far enough, they are getting something, and they understand that in Congress, getting something is getting a lot nowadays.

One lesson she did want to tell them, and maybe they did learn it, but there was that moment where she said publicly, "But they're only four votes; that's not power."What was the lesson that she was trying to teach them there?

When Pelosi essentially tried to dismiss the Squad, she said, "You know, they're only four votes.It's a very small group."She was saying, "I know how to count votes.We have a majority of people.We can afford to lose those votes."The bigger thing that she was trying to say is, they don't influence the party.They can try, they can be loud, but they're not going to change the legislation.

That, of course, has changed nowadays, where Pelosi only has a three-vote margin.She can only lose three Democrats to pass anything by a majority.And those four votes have now grown to six.

Pelosi and the Democratic Caucus

The irony might be eventually that as successful as Pelosi has been, pushing back against powerful presidents and being able to control her caucus and the idea of what power is as far as she's concerned that she learned back in Baltimore with her dad and mom, is that there's a new way that people are achieving power and that in some ways the direction the caucus is going, and certainly Trump proved this to some extent, that the direction that the caucus is pushing the party could in fact be the thing that proves Pelosi's method wrong.

It's interesting now asking many members, what happens if and when Pelosi leaves?And many members do want to see a new generation.They do agree that her style of keeping the power at the top, that all the decisions come from the top and everyone else must follow, more or less, is not the right way to do things.And the current very-small-margin process that we've seen play out on Capitol Hill essentially validated that to many members, that OK, if we talk more one on one, if we hash out deals between the moderates and progressives, then we can actually move legislation forward.It doesn't have to be the deadline setting from the top down that we have to follow.We can, in some ways, set the rules, or at least move things forward.

But again, when you ask them that question, "Who do you want to see as the next top Democrat in the House?What values do you want to see?," many of them fear that no one can capture the fact that she has absolutely been able to, time and time again, to keep the caucus together, whether it's through a three-vote margin or larger.She has so far proven—and everyone has said—do not bet against Nancy Pelosi.And that is the reason why: She's able to keep everyone united at the end of the day.

Why is that?What's her ground game?How does it work?

Well, the one thing about Pelosi, and this is what a lot of members credit her for, is that because she's been in the Capitol for such a long time, she knows exactly what her members want.She knows what kind of districts they represent.So if someone comes up to her and says, "Well, I need this; I'm a moderate member," or, you know, "I'm facing really bad reelection chances," she'll say, "Actually, you're not, and this is why; this is how you should sell this particular message that's in this bill."

She—you can't really fool Pelosi.She knows her membership, the districts, the districts she needs to win to keep the majority or win back the majority.And she's very good at strategizing in those negotiations what members should prioritize, and she's not afraid to call them out.

And she's good at raising money, and she's good at counting votes.

Right, yeah.The one, you know, the one interesting thing, when you talk to members of the Squad, they realize their power and why they don't need leadership is because they can fundraise on their own.So the older tactics of, "Hey, sit down; if you can vote for this, I will give you how much ever fundraising money you may need," the members of the Squad don't need that.A number of progressives don't need that.They can easily fundraise off of small-dollar donations, given the fact that they have an outlet to millions of voters and supporters across the country.

Pelosi and Biden

So let's talk about the Biden agenda.Talk a little bit about how her past has prepared her to push through the Biden agenda.… What's she learned and what's she trying to do once Biden gets elected?

There were a lot of lessons learned after passing the Affordable Care Act, the main one being the fact that if you lose the majority, all of those policies, once they're implemented, voters will notice that.And voters may reward you down the road when Republicans are saying, "We're going to repeal this," or, "We're not going to give—we're going to take away that," that Democrats may be able to win in the long term.

But it might be a long term.So you need to get all those Democratic priorities done immediately, because who knows when else you will have the majority?And this is definitely the time for the Democratic Party to finally deliver on a number of promises that they have been making on the campaign trail. …

How different is her view towards what they're doing and how to accomplish that than President Biden's?Have they always worked hand in hand, or do they have a different point of view from what you've seen in pushing forth this agenda?

… It has definitely been a defining moment for Pelosi's leadership style.She, of course, during this process, once it got to crunch time, to try and just pass the infrastructure bill, try and finish writing and negotiating the bigger social spending plan, she was setting a number of deadlines, and she was asking the president for help.

… Biden came for the first time earlier in the fall to talk to House Democrats at a point when there very much was tension between progressives and those moderates in the caucus, and he told them, “Let's simmer this down.We're going to pass these two bills together.That is the path forward.”Pelosi sometimes needs someone else to come in and say, "This is the way we're going to do things."And in that time, it did help essentially get Democrats to continue finishing what they had to do for the next month.

But Pelosi had been saying, "We're going to vote on the bipartisan infrastructure; we're going to vote for this," at a time when the votes just weren't there, and the members knew that.So there was, in some ways, growing doubt of, why does she keep saying we're going to be doing something when the votes aren't there?

And the real sticking point between Biden and Pelosi during this process was, she had asked Biden to come down and talk to House Democrats for a second time and ask them, "Today we're going to vote on the infrastructure bill.Here is my framework, my proposal of what's going into the social spending plan, as you've all asked.So it's time to vote."That was Pelosi's position.That was leadership's position.And they very firmly believed that if Biden said it, there would be the votes at the end of that day.

However, … progressives actually spoke to top White House senior officials the evening before Biden's visit to House Democrats and essentially said, "You could present us a framework, but the votes just still aren't there among progressives."And that's why Biden went and told House Democrats, "I really need your votes"—it was kind of like a pep talk—"I really need your votes.I really need you all with me," but never said the keywords "You are voting on this today." …Right after Biden finished speaking, Pelosi stood up and said, "You heard the president; we're going to vote on this bill."And there were members who said, "No, he didn't."And that was probably a low point for her, where she really, again, tried to keep this caucus united when, again, she could only afford to lose three votes.But the majority of the members just weren't there with her to try and vote.

So frustrating for her that the president wasn't basically backing her up in the way that she knew she could get the job done?

Exactly.She has asked the president during different times not just for advice and back-and-forth, but when she has gone to the president and said, "I need you to do it," and the president didn't, knowing full well that the caucus just wasn't ready to vote, that was a big disappointing moment for her, and many people around her have since said that she was extremely angry.

Because it could have blown it apart, and she knew just how tenuous it all was.

Absolutely.

So what were the stakes?If it had all blown up, what were the stakes that she understood for her and for the Democrats?

… Well, Pelosi knew that if they weren't able to vote on the infrastructure bill, on the social spending plan, it was likely that all of this would blow up.Democrats wouldn't be able to pass legislation on everything that not just Biden promised on the campaign trail, but a number of her members, not to mention senators have been promising for almost a decade in reforms, in changes that their voters wanted to see.

So it wasn't just going to be, oh, we're not going to have this bill; it was likely—and she knew this—that Democrats were really going to have a problem with their voters for potentially the next decade, if not longer.There could be an uproar within the party, within trusting members of Congress at a time where trust in government is already very low.

So you wrote, "The unusually chaotic and messy process that has defined the recent negotiations has made clear the growing divisions in the Democratic Caucus and leadership's eroding power."Explain that for us.I think it's an important point.

Sure.

Leadership during this process has very much taken a top-down approach, essentially telling members, "This is what you're going to do."And that has long been Pelosi's leadership style, coalescing the power among the top rung of the party.

During this negotiating process, you saw a number of different factions.You have the Congressional Progressive Caucus.You have more of a moderate wing.You have a fiscally conservative wing called the Blue Dogs.Everyone was trying to raise their voice and say, "Well, this is what we want."And of course it's incumbent upon leadership—and leadership has done this—to hear their concerns and try and find a common group.

They were able to do that for several months.The problem was, once you started to get down to crunch time, leadership was saying, "OK, we're going to vote on this today."A lot of the membership was saying, "Wait, but my concessions haven't been addressed," or, "I can't vote for this.I can't vote for this bigger spending plan without the infrastructure bill."

So there were still too many demands, too many unknowns out there that brought the voices from the bottom up.And leadership hadn't necessarily needed to deal with that dynamic, because, again, … Democrats had a bigger caucus.They didn't have such a narrow margin.But we can only lose three votes; every single voice matters. …President Biden said it in terms of the Senate, where you can't lose any votes, so everyone, every Democrat is essentially a president; they can make themselves known.

Well, you have a very similar dynamic in the House, where everyone, except for three people, are necessary to come together.And that is very difficult when you have a majority of over 200 individuals.

Pelosi’s Leadership Style

You repeatedly say that her tactics have been power comes from the top down.But repeatedly yesterday she told me the way this works is change comes from the bottom up.The way this caucus works, it comes from the bottom up.What's the truth there?

So, you know, I do think that when Pelosi says change comes from the bottom up, she is right.She recognizes that how she was leading or what the Democratic Party was pushing for even two, five definitely, decades ago is very different from what they want now.She has had to be a leader who listens, and many members do appreciate that.She appreciates when they push back, when they make their opinions known.And she will listen. …While that commentary may be more about the change in the tide of the Democratic Party, her own leadership style, especially when it comes to, at the end of the day, when we have to take votes, when she senses that the votes are there, it becomes more of a leadership is telling what you all to do; you'd better fall in line.

… Is she feared?

Pelosi is feared a little bit.Members have had moments with her, and they always remember the time that she has become very stern and told them as it is.You know, a lot of members laugh about that in hindsight, but they remember, right?And that kind of goes back to that story when one of her friends saw all of her children folding the laundry.They can all do that, but it takes some rough-handing a little bit to make sure that they are able to get something done.

So while it's not an often personality of hers is my understanding, when she wants to impress something upon someone, she does it, because she knows people remember and likely fall in line.

She uses the carrot and the stick.

Correct.

Let's go to the specifics of what happened in the middle of November, why she backed off and separated the infrastructure bill from the social policy bill and what she does when she separates it to win over the progressives, progressives who at the beginning it's 30 votes against this, and then it became 20 votes, and then it became 15 votes, and eventually it became very few.Talk a little bit about that point where she comes off of that and why.

So Pelosi initially, and her leadership team, did not see the need to pass the infrastructure bill and the Build Back Better Act, that social spending plan, together, in tandem.She thought, as one does in Congress, as Congress has typically worked, if one bill passes one chamber, you can easily put it on the floor.So they saw that as two different wins, essentially, for the president, two different events to tout what Democrats were able to get done.

But she is a master vote counter, and when it was raised to her that progressives wanted the assurance that their priority bill would get passed because they didn't trust a lot of those moderates who were behind that infrastructure bill to actually support what some considered to be more liberal policies in the bigger social spending plan, the progressives made that known to Pelosi and said, "You know, there's roughly 30 to 40 members within the caucus who aren't going to vote if infrastructure's just put on the floor.We need to wait, and we need to pass these two bills together."

She allegedly—or she reportedly was not happy about that.She was not happy with that pushback.But again, when it comes to counting the votes and calling members and kind of getting a sense of where they are, she quickly understood … that was the only pathway forward in the House.

So how does her ground game, the famous ground game, finally overcome that in this situation?

That being?

The fact that she's able to divide the two bills and get them both passed.

So it was months of negotiations where Democrats, both progressives, moderates, trying to hash out a deal to build this spending plan while Pelosi held on to the infrastructure bill to appease progressives.They needed a lot of buy-in from the Senate—Sen. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, who are keeping a lot of what they wanted close to their vest.So House Democrats essentially made this bill hoping that the Senate would like it.

But then we got to a point where Pelosi realized, "OK, it's fall; we're getting really close to the end of the year; we should start passing this," and started to propose, we should pass the infrastructure bill all by itself.It received the same pushback.There might not be 40 members, but there's still 25 members who aren't going to vote for a standalone bill.

And she kept putting these deadlines out and putting these feelers out, and still, members were not going to budge in the Progressive Caucus.And that was very difficult for her because she is someone who is able to negotiate and say, "OK, please fall in line.What can I do to make sure I can get your vote?"But that style just wasn't working. …So once progressives actually were able to get the text of the legislation, they were happy, and they were ready to move not just the infrastructure bill, but also their priority bill.They said, "OK, we're ready to go."

However, moderates, who have also kind of been a thorn on leadership's side from here and there, said, "You know what?I actually need to review the numbers.We need to make sure everything adds up."And that was another added wrinkle to making sure you can get both of these bills on the floor.

And it literally came to the day where everyone woke up thinking the plan was "The House is passing both of these bills" to "I don't think we have the votes."And again, you could only lose three Democrats.By the morning, there were six moderates who just weren't there; they couldn't vote for this bill without more assurances.And as much as Pelosi tried to assure them this bill is going to be paid for, as much as the White House tried to do the same thing, they just weren't budging.

So essentially, leadership had to turn and say, "We're going to likely have to make the progressives bend on this whole new formula of how we should pass these bills." …

So leadership was surprised that they couldn't get now a different group to actually bend and vote.And they realized throughout this process just the difficulty to be able to vote on anything with that three-vote margin.So Pelosi essentially called other resources, other people that she knew could be her front line, defend her position.And who does she call upon?The Congressional Black Caucus.

And the Congressional Black Caucus, they themselves were already growing frustrated and saying, "We want deliverables for our communities, so here is the resolution."And they essentially got together with Pelosi, proposed that they vote the infrastructure bill and also vote on this procedural rule to advance the Build Back Better Act, but keep it in their back pocket for when those moderates could get all of their financial assurances and put it on the floor.

What does all this say about Nancy's leadership style, history, knowledge?What does it say about Nancy Pelosi?

You know, during this entire process, members have been skeptical of whether Pelosi could pull off what she's most famously known for, which is keeping the caucus together and delivering the votes at the end of the day.And there were many moments where people wondered what her calculations were, why she was trying to push something when the votes weren't there.

But at the end of the day, because she was able to deliver the infrastructure bill, and a couple weeks later vote the Build Back Better Act through the House, that reputation came back.Members realized, oh, my gosh, what happens if we lose Pelosi?Who's going to be able to, even in the toughest of times with the smallest of margins, be able to muscle through huge, transformative legislation that will impact Americans and keep all of us together?

That is the question that many Democrats are still wondering, because they give her so much credit for mastering that.

They get the $2.2 trillion Build Back Better bill through.The point of view of Republicans, [Senate Minority Leader Mitch] McConnell, is, "Great.You're driving your people off a cliff in the next election."So talk a little bit about the reaction of the Republicans in Pelosi's view.

… Speaker Nancy Pelosi has not been one to entertain a number of Republican messaging attacks here and there.She has learned to try and ignore them.But one, of course, is the fact that Republicans are in a good place to take back the majority in the House, and also potentially the Senate.

Pelosi is very keen on what's happening on the ground.She knows and can sense when things are up in the air for Democrats.And you saw that after Republicans swept the Virginia governor's race and their state legislature.And that was actually alarm bells for not just her but also a number of her Democratic Caucus members to fall in line ahead of these series of votes. …Pelosi and Democrats in charge of messaging are really hoping that these two bills will deliver very quickly to the American people a lot of their promises, that they are able to feel, you know, the child tax credit; they're able to see shovels in the ground by summer of 2022 in hopes that also the economy is in a good place so that way they are able to keep their majorities.

McConnell sees it in a very different way, that here again the Democrats and Nancy Pelosi have handed him a tool to beat them over the head with and to use Pelosi, again, one more time.

Well, yeah.I mean, you won't hear Democrats say that they're thinking that they're going to lose the majority in the House, but Pelosi sees things long term.The lesson from the Affordable Care Act is you may lose the majority; these are tough votes, but years down the line, once American voters start to feel the impacts and are threatened by Republicans who may want to repeal or not reauthorize a number of these priorities, voters remember that.And that is something that Pelosi's trying to make sure members say to their constituents: Remember that Democrats are the ones who passed this all by themselves.Remember that once you feel these things, it's the Democrats who were able to do it, not the Republicans.

Meanwhile you might lose the House for another 10 years.

Yeah, because of redistricting, too.That's a whole other factor.

Pelosi’s Legacy

… So finally, we're coming to a point where she might retire.Is Pelosi the last of this type of legislator that we will see?… Is this a changing of the guard?Is this a loss for the Democrats that will be very hard to deal with?How do you view that?

Many Democrats see that when Pelosi and her old guard leaves, it will be a moment to define the Democratic Party, not necessarily away from what she believes in, given the fact that she will have been the major player in passing a majority of Biden and Democrats' agenda through Congress at different points in time, but Democrats largely do see it as an opportunity to redefine the party.They want to see new leaders who aren't just this newer generation, but, as many members have told me, "look like America."They want to diversify their ranks.

But when it comes to the legislative knowledge, the way that the House floor works, the ability to keep members together and remind them what unites them and how you're able to find a common place, it's unclear if anyone has that right now.According to a number of members in the House Democratic Caucus, they do believe that that kind of institutional knowledge comes from someone who has seen tides change, who understands the way that Congress works just by being there for a long time.

So as much as there's been criticism about members who have stayed in Congress for a long time, members do see that as a benefit for being able to understand the way that things work on Capitol Hill.

Latest Interviews

Get our Newsletter

Stay Connected

Jon and Jo Ann Hagler on behalf of the Jon L. Hagler Foundation

Koo and Patricia Yuen

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.