Washington, DC – Today, Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries joined MSNBC All In with Chris Hayes to emphasize that Democrats will continue to protect children and families from extreme right-wing priorities and find bipartisan common ground whenever possible to make life better for everyday Americans. 

HAYES: I’m joined now by Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Democrat from New York. Very good to have you here.

JEFFRIES: Evening, Chris, great to be with you.

HAYES: I want to talk about a piece — let’s start with legislation today. There was a vote today in the House. And I want to read your quote on it and your characterization of it. It would be a nationwide ban on trans youth in sports or at least in sports of the gender they express. The House Republican —you called it— the House Republican Child Predator Empowerment Act, does not promote fairness and safety in sports. It will unleash horrific child predators on girls and young women throughout America. Unacceptable. There are only two Democrats who voted in favor. It passed on a fairly narrow party line vote. Why? Why do you characterize it this way?

JEFFRIES: Well, House Democrats believe that fairness and safety in sports, particularly as it relates to our children, our girls and boys who are playing either non-competitive sports, recreational sports and competitive sports all across the country—these are important principles, and we support that. However, House Republicans are not serious about addressing any issues related to competition and safety. Their legislation is irresponsible. Effectively, what it would do, is sanction – without any guardrails – adults, including predators, from engaging in inspections of genitalia in children as young as four years old. Now, in the sports arena, we’ve seen repeated instances of sexual abuse. Gymnastics, that’s been the case. In wrestling, that’s been the case. In football, that’s been the case. And in many other areas. And to have the federal government weigh in aggressively and sanction this type of invasive inspections clearly would create a situation where childhood predators would be unleashed on the children of this country. And that’s why you saw a significant number of Democrats say this is federal government overreach and it’s unacceptable.

HAYES: Yeah, there’s many —as you’ve noted— many stories. Of course, Michigan State gymnastics. A very famous story out of Ohio State with a wrestling team there with a doctor. The wrestling team – of the men’s wrestling team at Ohio State, an enormous scandal that did lasting trauma to many of the men who were victimized there by a doctor associated with that team. The enforcement mechanism here is essentially genital checks and this law would essentially give any adult cover to do that under the guise of the law’s enforcement is my understanding.

JEFFRIES: That’s correct. That’s the plain reading of the bill. And that’s why we characterized it as such, particularly in this sensitive area as it relates to sports activity where, as you pointed out, Chris, there have been repeated instances of massive sexual abuse that has taken place. And this would lead to that occurring in spades all across the country.

HAYES: You have your work cut out for you as the leader of the Democratic Party in the House. Obviously, you are in the minority, although it’s a very slim minority. There is reporting that the House is going to undertake this big, beautiful bill. POLITICO today saying that the Speaker, Mike Johnson, ‘the House will need to coalesce around a strategy and write a budget resolution by February 10th, setting up Floor debate and adoption that week. The Senate would then debate the measure the following week.’ All of this is meant to create a reconciliation vehicle in which every single priority of the Republicans can be put into one bill and passed—I think they’re banking on this—by a 2 or 3 vote party-line margin. What’s your plan to stop that?

JEFFRIES: We’re willing as House Democrats to find bipartisan common ground with the incoming administration and our Republican colleagues on any issue, whenever and wherever possible, in order to make life better for the American people, particularly as it relates to driving down the high cost of living. But at the same period of time, it appears that our Republican colleagues aren’t really serious about lowering housing costs. They’re not serious about lowering child care costs. They certainly are not serious about lowering health care costs or bringing down the cost of groceries. We’ve not seen a single plan since the election. What they do want to do, Chris, is to pass massive tax breaks for billionaires and wealthy corporations. And then they want working families and middle class folks and the poor, the sick and the afflicted to pay for it, saddle us with trillions of dollars of debt and at the same time cut things like Medicaid or nutritional assistance for children and families and veterans benefits. We’re not going to tolerate it. The votes will not be there for this type of scheme on the Democratic side. And we believe that we’re going to have to take this fight to the public domain, make sure we can win the battle for public sentiment. And the reality is, if we’re successful in that endeavor, then I don’t believe, with their narrow Republican margin, they can pass anything close to what is being discussed by the Speaker or by House Republicans.

HAYES: I mean, on the upside, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg personally and their companies would probably pay a lot less less in taxes. So there’s always that, on other side of—on the other side of the ledger. I want to ask you about relief for the folks in California. Obviously, Governor Newsom saying—and I think this is proved to be true—this is likely to be the most expensive natural disaster, climate disaster in the history of the country. I’ve already seen multiple Republicans, both in the Senate and the House say, ‘Well, we got to see what we’re going to get back from these Californians and well, we’re going to put some strings attached.’ ‘We’re going to tell California how California should govern itself, because we don’t like the way California does it.’ Of course, nothing like that for the folks in North Carolina or in the Southeast who were hit by disasters earlier this year. Nothing like that in Texas after the freeze. As there should be. Right? You should get relief. What is your position and the Caucus’ position on strings attached to disaster relief to California?

JEFFRIES: We had a discussion about this today in the House Democratic Caucus and the consensus position, I think, it’s fair to say, is that we do not support conditioning any aid to everyday Americans whose lives have been wiped out as a result of extreme weather events and in this case, in California, by these raging wildfires. Homes have been destroyed. Schools have been destroyed. Small businesses have been destroyed. Churches and synagogues and mosques have been destroyed or are in harm’s way and it is unconscionable that Republicans are suggesting imposing right-wing partisan conditions in order for California taxpayers to receive their tax dollars. California is one of those states, in fact, that sends about five times as much to the federal government every year than they get back in return. And so, we’ve got to be there for the people of California. We will be there for the people of California, just as we have been for others across the country.

HAYES: That is the social contract, in my view. Senator Tommy Tuberville of Alabama should look up that ratio for his state. It might be interesting. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, thank you very much.

JEFFRIES: Thank you, Chris.

Full interview can be watched here. 

###