macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I listened to my friend and the former chairman and his remarks. The reality is that the Presidents proposal and the Democratic proposal. we dont increase tax rates. but. yes. we do get rid of some of the tax loopholes in the Tax Code that are riddled with preferences that are there not because they make America more productive. but because someone had a powerful lobbyist who was getting a special interest break for them. If you think about it. if the government provides a grant of $1.000 to somebody. that is $1.000 in value. but if I say to you. Of the taxes you have to pay. I am going to give you a special break so it is $1.000 less. that is a pretty good deal. too. The reality is we spend $1.4 trillion. according to the Congressional Budget Office. each year on tax expenditures. more than on Social Security. Now. some of those are for good purposes. good public policy purposes. but some of them are for like corporate jets. and some of them are for hedge fund managers. Here is the thing. We think that we can get rid of some of those tax breaks to help reduce the longterm deficit. Our colleagues would just prefer to devastate our investments in education and other areas. Math is math. to the former chairman. The reality isand he knows itthat the portion of the budget we use to make these investments. the Republican budget does absolutely cut that to 40 percent below the lowest levels of the shared economy since we have been keeping records. That is a fact. Another reality is that this Republican budget doesnt balance unless you are using phony math. Mr. Chairman. I am now very pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin . a great member of the Budget Committee.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am a little surprised the gentleman from Indiana brought up what is called the OCO funding. These are the funds in the overseas contingency operations account for overseas contingencies. like wars and other contingencies that come up. The reality is that what the Republican budget does here is create a slush fund out of the overseas contingency account. It sends a signal that we are confused about how we are going to fund our defense obligations. and it is in total violation of what the Budget Committee itself stood for for years. I want to read. Mr. Chairman. from the 2015 Republican budget. It is just a year ago. but we have got real amnesia among our Republican colleagues. Here is what they said in their report: Abuse of the OCO cap adjustment is a backdoor loophole that undermines the integrity of the budget process. The Budget Committee will exercise its oversight responsibilities with respect to the use of the OCO. The Budget Committee will oppose increases above the levels the administration and our military commanders say are needed to carry out operations unless it can be clearly demonstrated that such amounts are warrelated. I didnt write that. Our Republican colleagues put it in their report. It is like. ooh. didnt mean it. So I am really baffled that our colleagues keep bringing this up. It is a total violation of what the Budget Committee has always stood for on a bipartisan basis. With that. I yield 3 minutes to the gentlelady from New York . the ranking member of the Small Business Committee and a great friend to entrepreneurs around the country.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman. Mr. MCCLINTOCK is right about this OCO slush fund. To the chairman of the committee. you actually made exactly my point in your remarks. I did support the OCO moneyagain. this is for overseas contingency operationsat the level requested by the President and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. our military commanders. It was higher a couple of years ago because we had tens of thousands more troops in Afghanistan. The gentleman may recall that we brought a lot of those troops home. As a result of that. we dont need as much money in our war account. the overseas contingency account. So what I did. Mr. Chairman. is exactly what our Republican colleagues on the Budget Committee said we should do at that time. in other words. I opposed increases above the levels the administration and military commanders said were needed to carry out those operations. Yes. I did support a budget level at the level the President and our military commanders said was necessary. but as Mr. MCCLINTOCK said. the Republican budget does just the opposite. It does what we said we would not doand I say "we." Republicans and Democrats alike. So it is important to heed our own words. otherwise. as the Budget Committee itself said. we will undermine the integrity of the budget process. That was the point Mr. MCCLINTOCK was making as well. I now yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon . the ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. He is somebody who knows we have to fund the modernization of our countrys infrastructure.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman. actually. this Republican budget strips away provisions that are in existence today to make work pay. Child tax credits for working families. they get rid of the bump up. They get rid of the enhanced earned income tax credit for working families. As I said. they get rid of the higher education deduction for families so that they can send their kids to school. I also want to say a word about the transportation trust fund. because as the ranking member. as the senior Democrat on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee just pointed out. this Republican budget has no provision inside the budget numbers for dealing with the crisis we are going to face in a few months. Now. the chairman of the committee mentioned the deficitneutral reserve fund. section 510. I am looking at it now. Deficitneutral reserve funds can play an important role in signaling a policy direction. After all. these are 10year budgets. I would understand if we didnt know exactly what we were going to do with our transportation trust fund 10 years from now or 9 years from now. but we are talking about 11/2 months from now. We are talking about in the first year of this budget. In the middle of May. we are going to see a construction slowdown. Now. the Democratic budget alternative. we have a plan. The President put forward a 6year plan. $478 billion. It is included in his budget numbers. It is not like. okay. a little asterisk. we will figure this out in a month and a half. The President makes sure we dont have a shortfall. and. actually. he says we need to modernize our infrastructure so we can compete in this global economy. So. Mr. Chairman. it is just reckless to put forward a budget where it doesnt even provide any solution to something that is going to face us in a month and a half. Now I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey . a terrific member of the Budget Committee.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. as we have previously pointed out. this Republican budget keeps the revenues from the Affordable Care Act even as it claims to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Without that level of revenue. along with other savings. it doesnt come close to balancing. No accountant would certify this Republican budget close to balance. I am now pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: New Mexico

Mr. Chair. I want to thank the ranking member. This budget. the Republican budget. is a collection of $5.5 trillion of devastating cuts to both mandatory and nondefense discretionary programs. I have heard my colleagues say that we need to treat the budget like we do American families: when you cant live within your means. then you have to figure that out. The problem is. this is a budget that actually takes away those means. If we are going to talk about entitlement reform. you have to provide an investment and actually create jobs and create opportunities to have careers and meaningful wages. Now. as we debate these numbers. I really hope that my Republican colleagues. when they vote for this budget. will you really know what you are doing and what these numbers mean for hardworking American families? Because I know what the budget does and how it impacts them. Here is what it means. It means 290 fewer New Mexican children are going to have access to Head Start. It means 18.700 fewer New Mexico residents are going to receive job training and employment services. It means 59.000 New Mexican students are going to lose access to their Pell grants for college. It means 24.100 New Mexican seniors are likely going to have to pay more for their prescription drugs. And about 431.000that bears repeating431.000 New Mexicans receiving SNAP. half of which are children. will be in jeopardy of losing their nutrition support. Now. when we think about the budget. we cannot just think about the numbers that sit on a piece of paper. We need to think about the human meaning behind the numbers. We need to think about the child that will go hungry. the student who cant afford to pay for college. and the seniors who wont be able to pay their medical bills. We need to invest in economic security for everyone. I urge my colleagues to oppose this budget and. instead. pass a budget that lifts people out of poverty. invests in hardworking families who have been left behind by the economy. and that provides for shared prosperity.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I dont think that huge disinvestment in education. starting with early education going through K12. helps our kids in their future. I dont think that the efforts that strip away a lot of the job training programs help hardworking Americans. The Presidents budgets priority is to accelerate economic growth and have more broadly shared prosperity. I would remind my colleagues that the day the President was sworn into office we were losing 800.000 jobs every month in this country. The bottom was falling out. Now we have seen over the last 60 months 12 million jobs created. We have got a long way to go. but we are certainly on the right track. And the Presidents budget provides for additional economic growth in a fiscally responsible way. The Presidents budget reduces the debttoGDP ratio. The Presidents budget reduces the deficits share of the economy. But what the Presidents budget does not do is disinvest in our kids education. it does not increase the cost to seniors for prescription drugs and copays for preventive health care. and it doesnt get away from a lot of the important tax credits and relief for middle class Americans and those working to join the middle class. So. no. it does not do that. Now I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California . who knows a lot about the importance of economic growth. especially as it relates to small businesses. a distinguished member of the Small Business Committee.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. As I said at the beginning of this debate. the one thing that the Republican budget. unfortunately. will do immediately is make life harder for hardworking Americans. How does it do it? As I indicated. it actually increases the tax burden on working Americansmiddleincome Americans and people working their way to the middlewhile providing another tax rate cut for folks at the very top. For people who are working harder than ever and feel that they are just on a treadmill. it doesnt help them at all. In fact. they are going to move farther behind. in addition to the fact that they are going to pile more costs on to students by increasing the cost of student loans. It is right there in their budget. They are going to start charging you interest while you are in college. They are going to start charging seniors with high prescription drug costs even more because they are going to reopen what is called the prescription drug doughnut hole. I dont know how that is good for seniors in America. It is hard on seniors. hard on students. hard on working families. The Democratic budget. like the Presidents budget. meets those priorities. For example. working families are facing huge childcare costs. so we propose a significant expansion of the child independent care tax credit. We make it a little bit easier for those families who are working but who want to make sure their kids have quality childcare. We make it easier for them by providing them a significant tax credit for that cost. For couples who are working. we scale back the marriage penalty so the second worker doesnt begin work at the same higher tax rate as the first worker in the household. That is the kind of important relief we provide to middle class families and to those working to join the middle class. The Republican budget actually gets rid of some of the important provisions that are already there to help those families. but our budget does this in a fiscally responsible way. As we have seen. the Republican budget doesnt balance. not by a long shot. I mentioned a quote in my opening remarks. I am going to quote the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chair. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I do want to say a word about the impact on seniors. We have already talked about the fact that the Republican budget will immediately increase the cost to seniors with high prescription drug burdens. it will increase the copays immediately for preventive services. Let me just say a word about what it will do to seniors who are in nursing homes and other settings that rely on Medicaid. The previous gentleman just mentioned the number of people in his district on Medicaid. Let me just say that seniors and people with disabilities account for 85 percent of Medicaid spending. 65 percent of that spending is to the aged and the disabled. 20 percent to kids. Now. here is what the Congressional Budget Office. the nonpartisan folks. said about the Medicaid cuts of this magnitude in the Republican budget and the impact that they would have on States: even with significant efficiency gains. in other words. even if you imagine that the States are going to somehow come up with incredible efficiencies. even with that. the magnitude of the reduction in spending relative to such spending in other scenarios means that States would need to increase their spending on these programs. make considerable cutbacks in them. or both. in other words. you are just passing the buck down to the States. So they have a choice: either they raise taxes to make sure that folks in senior homes. seniors in nursing homes dont take a hit. or seniors in nursing homes take a hit through fewer benefits. You just cant have it both ways when you are cutting $900 billion out of the program that helps seniors and the disabled. right? Okay. Here. States. you do it on your own. we are just going to give you $900 billion less. Any nonpartisan person looking at this would arrive at the conclusion the nonpartisan budget folks at CBO concluded. which is: either States are going to increase their taxes to maintain those services. or those people are going to get less services. That is why this Republican budget is hard on seniors. just like it is hard on students and why it is hard on working families around the country. As I said. it is great if you are already at the top. right? If you are a millionaire. you are going to get greenlighted for the RomneyRyan tax plan that cuts your rate by 30 percent while increasing the tax burden on working Americans. That is just not right. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I thank Mr. VAN HOLLEN for his leadership on the Committee on the Budget. As ranking member of the Committee on Financial Services. I would like to express my serious concerns about how this budget resolution undermines our financial stability. protection for American consumers. and the entire housing market. It is now 7 years since our countrys financial system was rocked by Wall Street greed and predatory lending. All of our constituents bore witness to an economy where family members lost their jobs. friends were made homeless. and everyones savings. no matter how modest. were depleted. In all. trillions of dollars of wealth vanished in the span of a few months. When some of the money returned. it was not shared equally. Democrats in Congress worked to prevent a repeat of this disaster by. among other things. putting in place the tools necessary to prevent bailouts of megabanks and creating an independent regulator solely tasked with defending consumers from financial harm. Rehashing failed policies. the Republican budget resolution would repeal these tools and bind the hands of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The Republicans would return us to a system where a company like AIG would once again threaten the entire financial system. The Republicans would return us to a system where lenders can make predatory mortgages to some of the most disadvantaged communities. including communities of color. but that is not all. This budget resolution goes even further. It would privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac along the lines of the failed PATH Act. a terrible piece of legislation rejected by everyonehousing advocates. realtors. mortgage banks. academics. and. I might add. a majority of Members in the House. Why do we all reject it? We fear it would be the end of safe mortgages like the 30year fixed rate mortgage. We fear it would favor only the big megabanks. hurting community banks. We fear that it would further widen the wealth gap in this country. This budget resolution is built upon a flawed foundation that harms some of our most vulnerable communities. I urge that the Members of this House oppose the Republican budget resolution.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. not only does the Republican budget not balance. but it doesnt eliminate one special interest tax break for the purpose of reducing the deficit. Not one. These are tax breaks that powerful interests have put into the Tax Code over many years. Apparently. it is okay to deeply cut our investment in our kids education. Apparently. it is okay to increase the cost of prescription drugs for seniors on Medicare. but. for some reason. we are not going to get rid of one corporate tax break for the purpose of reducing the deficit. Those are not Americans priorities. Mr. Chairman. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland . someone who understands the importance of moving America forward. my colleague and friend and a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland . the Democratic whip. who understands the importance of a growing economya growing economy with shared prosperity and a growing economy with fiscal responsibility.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. this budget doesnt make tough choices. The Republican budget makes bad choices. It doesnt cut one single special interest tax break in the Code while it makes deep cuts to our kids early education. That is a bad choice. not a tough choice. Mr. Chairman. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia . a distinguished member of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. just for all Members listening. the last gentleman was talking about the differences between the two versions of the Republican budget. I want to point out that the President of the United States funds our defense budget in the straightforward way and in the way that the Joint Chiefs of Staff have asked for. funding the base budget as it should be and funding the OCO budget as it should be. I now yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia . the ranking member of the Education and the Workforce Committee who understands that growing our economy depends on our kids getting a good education.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I am now really pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio . a terrific member of the Budget Committee.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I think our colleagues can hear that there is an awful lot of confusion and uncertainty among our Republican colleagues about funding our national defense. The Presidents budget is very clear. He funds the national defense the way the Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed is best for the country. Mr. Chairman. I am now pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas . a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee who fights for justice and other really important causes.
Date: 2015-03-24
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Let me thank my good friend from Maryland for his leadership consistently that really speaks to the hearts and minds of Americans because we know what Americans want: just a simple opportunity to live. thrive. and to create the values that we have built this country on. If you work hard. you are successful. Mr. Chairman. the budgeteers on the majority side have a very poor track record when it comes to economic forecasts and projections. Let me also acknowledge the chairman of this committee for the work that he has done. We just happen to disagree. Ever since the Affordable Care Act was passed. it has been the challenge of Republicans to suggest that it wasnt working. We have close to 11 million people insured. Some populations who were never insured now have high numberscitizens who were uninsured. And so the idea of the Affordable Care being a failure. you are just dead wrong. I am very glad to support the Democratic alternative because it is the opposite of the Republican budget. which says work harder for less when we know what Americans need and what they want for their families. They want to be able to buy a home. they want to be able to send their kids to college. and they want a secure retirement. Under the GOP budget. it is harder to buy a home. absolutely almost impossible to send your children to college. and certainly harder to enjoy a secure retirement. House Republicans oppose increasing the minimum wage. claiming that it costs jobs. Wrong again. For every increase in the minimum wage. it has been accompanied by an expanding economy. House Republicans opposing comprehensive immigration reform. wrong again. Studies conducted by groups as far apart as the Chamber of Commerce and the AFLCIO indicate that the gross domestic product will grow $1.5 trillion over 10 years. This is a sorry track record of economic forecasting. and therefore. this budget is one that I have to oppose because it favors the wealthy over working class families and those struggling to enter or remain in the middle class. I oppose the Republican budget because it asks major sacrifices of seniors who can barely make ends meet and fundamentally alters the social contract by turning Medicaid and the SNAP program into a block program and Medicare into a voucher. The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.