macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 1998-04-01
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. reclaiming my time. I appreciate the gentleman from Arizona. Wednesday night is freshmen night. typically. The freshman class is one that tries to reserve an hour every Wednesday to talk about the values of our Republican party. We are joined by many other Members from other classes. senior Members. as the gentleman from Arizona is. who has been one that we look to for leadership and guidance. one who inspires us and who is a great colleague for us as new Members. Our goal and objective in these Special Orders is to really draw the distinction between the two parties that are here in Washington. because it really does matter. People think that there are two parties that are somehow the same. And there are votes on occasion where our votes seem to be commingled. But. by and lairge. the philosophies that divide us and separate us are legitimate issues. they are legitimate cause for having two sides. Thomas Jefferson observed 220someodd years ago that. in all political systems there really arejwo sides. there is the side that believes in more government. the side that believes that the government is the best way to organize our societies. and then there is the other side that believes that we should look to individuals and families and people as the definitive feature in establishing the character of a society or community. Well. we. as Republicans. differ very greatly from our Democrat side. the Democrats being the side that does believe in more government and that government is the organizing factor in our society. And the quote that my colleague highlighted here is probably most indicative that I have seen in recent days about the difference between them and us. They believe that there is no cause for tax cuts. In fact. they have worked routinely in this Congress to increase taxes to oppose every effort that we have made as the Republican party to turn more wealth away from Washington and back to the people of the country and to the States. That philosophy of less government. more reliance on States and individuals. is something that we fight for all the time and routinely. I want to yield. if I can. to the gentleman from Texas . who is leading this Congress with a bold plan. a bold idea. a bold proposal to rein in the size of Federal Government. the scope of our government by a responsible mechanism that is used in several States called sunsetting. So. with that. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
Date: 1998-04-01
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

The gentleman hit the nail on the head. Because anybody who was observing the House floor just 20. 30 mnnutes ago when the left wing of the Democrat party was here speaking could see very clearly that they are in fear themselves of these ideas. these Republican ideas about changing government. lowering tax rates. constraining the size of the Federal Government. They are afraid of those ideas. If they really do represent a philosophy. as they do. a philosophy that is constructed entirely upon the notion of power obtained through government. then any idea that threatens that power structure is a real threat to their way of life and changes life as they know it. That is a frightening notion to people who love big government. And I will tell my colleagues why. Because it does turn the tables and changes the dynamic. Right now in Washington. as we have discovered as Members of Congress. a tremendous amount of the leverage belongs to the bureaucrats. They know they are going to stick around forever. these people in government. these bureaucrats. and my colleagues and I we are going to come here and serve a few terms and do the work that the people have sent us here to do and then we are going to go back and live in a society that we have helped create and the laws that we have cast votes upon. But those bureaucrats are going to be here forever. They know. as long as they can keep the rules rigged as they are today. that their life is going to go on and on unimpeded. What really frightens these leftwingers over on the Democrat side of the aisle is that our ideas would really force the country to ask this question: If we were to start all over again today with this program or that program. would we create it to be what it is today? And pick an agency. any topic. There is not a single agency in the Federal Government. I would submit. that this Congress would ever establish just as it is now if we started all over again. We would not do it. You take a look at the IRS. It is volumes and volumes of absolute nonsense. Nobody would sit down and invent that system. But the reason we have it is because the rules are always in favor of the government and the bureaucrats and these policies- that are H2046 CC never ever challenged. And that is what sunsetting accomplishes.
Date: 1998-04-01
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

You know there are some people here in Washington who really hang their hat on and pretend that they are somehow holding government accountable through the reauthorization process. You know. we talk about that a lot in Washington to a lot of folks back in our districts. they do not knowwhat reauthorization means. but this is when agencies come up for reauthorization or review. It is not a sunset. it is just when the Congress feels like it getting around to looking at an agency again from A to Z. and there is no compelling need to make any meaningful reform. The Congress could decide to do nothing. and the agency will go right on as if no one was looking. You know that is what many people here celebrate as holding government accountable. but the reauthorization process does not work. And you know you hear. about this all the time. The Higher Education Reauthorization Act is going to be coming to the floor here soon. just program after program. We are reauthorizing programs. and that is the only time when this Congress makes any kind of an attempt to evaluate or review these agencies. but again it does not have the real teeth of sunsetting or termination dates on these regulatory programs. No bureaucrat is ever forced to come and prove the worth or merit of their program or their job or their function of government to this Congress. and it takes a majority vote voting in the affirmative to repeal a program rather than what ought to occur here is that it takes a majority of votes. majority vote in an affirmative way. to keep a program. And that is what we are trying to turn around and really turn the tables on government to give the leverage to the people of America to pry bad programs out of the system and to strengthen. retain and in fact improve those programs that can be improved and that are worth keeping.
Date: 1998-04-01
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. I want to wrapup by summarizing a number of things we have discussed in a very quick way. and that is we really are talking about a great number of ideas to shrink the size of the Federal Government. to return authority and wealth and power back to the people. and basically to give more freedom and liberty to Americans throughout the country wherever they may be. But the reality is. there is about two minutes left until the end of April Fools Day here in Washington. D.C. in the eastern time zone. which means that in 14 days. a little over 14 days now. at about this time. American taxpayers throughout the country are going to be lining up to get to their Post Office to file their tax returns in time in order to stay within the law of the Internal Revenue Service Tax Code. I hope they will be thinking about this conversation tonight. and maybe contrasting the difference between our Republican message of freedom and liberty and lower taxes and the Democrat message of more government and no tax cuts. no tax cuts. The tax collectors for the welfare State. as you have pointed out in the quote you brought here tonight. have stated right here on this floor just a few weeks ago that the fact is that Democrats are not for tax cuts. That is the real difference between the two parties. We really are looking for ways to liberate the American people. to lower tax rates. Here is something I want to point out. Families paid 5 percent of their income in Federal taxes in 1934. Today. the average family pays 20 percent of its annual income to the Federal Government. the highest since World War II. That is no April Fools Day joke. Right now the average American family pays about 40 percent of their total income in State. Federal and local taxes. 40 percent. That is no April fools Day joke either. Our goal and our vision in general terms and over a broader context is to lower the effective tax rate on the American family to no more than 25 percent. That is something we are not joking about either. We are quite serious about it. We will be back at this microphone time and time again talking about this vision of freedom and liberty. lower taxes and less government. I thank the Speaker for recognizing us today. and allowing us to participate in this special order.
Date: 1998-04-22
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. today we celebrate Earth Day. aday to remember that we must all be conscious of the obligation we have to be sound environmental stewards. In centuries past. mankind was occasionally careless or unaware of the need for environmentally responsible behavior. but modern science has brought about new awareness of the problems that shortsighted practices pose for future generations who inhabit this resourcerich planet. The good news is that the scientific age has also brought about.the technological revolution to both combat environmental degradation and to maintain the integrity of our natural surroundings. Businesses across the country now adopt environmentally safe practices. due to their awareness of their importance to our future and because technology is now available to make such practices an everyday reality. Earth Day is a day to bring both parties together. for all Americans value clean water. clean air. and a healthy planet. Let us celebrate today. that special day.
Date: 1998-04-22
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. I will yield to the gentleman from Michigan in just a second. Because it is interesting. at the crossroads hearing that we had in. my district that I mentioned. the topic. of course. was education. but one of the State Board of Education members. an elected official. in speaking about a variety of education issues. mentioned the marriage tax penalty that existed where a married couple. where two individuals who are earning incomes get married. they move into a higher tax bracket or a portion of their income does. But he spoke about. just on a philosophical basis. how this Federal Government consistently beats up on families that are the most central and social unit in America and makes it difficult for a variety of reasons. And he looked to that particular example of a fallacy in our tax code and was able to show very dramatically to the chairman and 1. who is here now. about the direct impact that that has on local education. on families. on just the ability of families to be functional in America today. whether it is health care. whether it is keeping their children on the straight and narrow or educating them appropriately in school. The chairman is here with us tonight. the gentleman from Michigan
Date: 1998-04-22
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Shrinking the size of the Federal Government has benefits not only for education but for everything we do as Americans and for the constituents we represent back home. Right now. the Federal budget is $5 trillion.
Date: 1998-04-22
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

The debt is $5 trillion for the national debt. The amount we spend every year. $1.7 trillion to run the Government this year. for example. But that $5 trillion debt that we consistently run up. even with this surplus that we talked about that we have here in Washington. we have to realize and remind people that this is only a surplus the way the Federal Government does its accounting. We are still moving in the right direction. There is no question about that. We are able to put more resources into relieving some of these debt issues.
Date: 1998-04-22
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Well. whatever we can do to lower the size of that effective debt and move not only authority but real wealth back to the States and the people allows us to speak more forcefully and more seriously about improving our local schools. about improving local economies. the ability to pour capital back into the private sector rather than hoard it here .in Washington. either held as debt or spent on a number of government programs is a choice that we just have to make in favor of States and the people. And we talked about education a lot tonight. The problem we are really dealing with the U.S. Department of Education is the disagreement that we have. and the debate that is at the center of education issues is not about whether resources ought to be spent in classrooms. On that point we all agree. The question is. how do we do that? For those of us who are conservatives here and try to figure out how to make our government operate more efficiently and really improve classrooms. our big concern is the 40 to 60 percent of the money that we are spending right now out of the Federal budget never makes it to a classroom. It gets soaked up by bureaucrats here in Washington. never leaves the city. When it goes back to the States it gets soaked by various Federal bureaucrats and State bureaucrats at the local level. We believe very firmly that in order to reduce class sizes. in order to allow technology to be used appropriately in classrooms. in order to allow for innovations in education to occur at the classroom level. we just need to get the Federal Government out of the way and allow the wealth that the country is generating to be spent on its legitimate intended purpose. which is to help children. It is not occurring today. and we are fighting very hard to make that happen.
Date: 1998-04-22
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. I will yield time to the gentleman from Illinois in a minute. What I have here in my hand is about 2 days worth of responses to a public opinion survey I sent out in my district about the topic of education. And my colleagues can pour through these. And we have to respect the confidentiality of those who sent them. I do not want to disclose any names. But just in general. I asked about a number of education topics. But in the comments people wrote in. it was alarming to go see how many times parents expressed real concern for drugs in their schools. that their concern. the most precious things in the lives of these parents are their kids and they send them to schools to learn and they have these great hopes and ambitions for their children and their families. We ought to be. when it comes to schools. talking about class size and curriculum and the real issues that are confronting our children in schools. Butto see the concerns of parents over and over and over again expressed in a way that goes right to this drug issue. it is a tremendous problem throughout the country. And parents in America should not have to worry about sending their children to a public school and having them confronted with the reality of drug addiction. drug abuse. and illegal drugs at all. The gentleman from Illinois is here. who is one the foremost leaders in the Congress on trying to reduce the rate of drug abuse in America. especially among children. I would yield to him at this point.
Date: 1998-04-23
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. many people remember the Presidents Surgeon General claiming that the answer to youth violence was safer guns and safer bullets. that the answer to sexual promiscuity among Americas youth is condoms in schools. Now we have the answer to the escalating drug problem in America coming out of the White House. free needles to heroin addicts. Imagine that. Mr. Speaker. governmentsubsidized free needles to heroin addicts. I submit the following: Any President who supports and would promote the subsidization of free needles to heroin addicts is just as guilty as any drug pusher or any drug user who causes death and destruction among Americas communities today. This level of social decay is unacceptable. This Congress needs to stand firm against the White House. The partnership for a DrugFree America has met its match. The White House and the heroin industry formed the partnership for free drugs in America. Common sense needs to rule the day. We need to stand firm. In a minute another member of the Presidents party is going to step to the microphone. and I want to ask directly. is he going to stand with Americans against this free needle exchange program. or is he going to talk about something else today?
Date: 1998-04-23
Speaker: SAM JOHNSON (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I want to talk about another ridiculous Washington budget rule called paygo. This rule promotes big government spending while Americans pay taxes. higher taxes. as a matter of fact. Under paygo. if we eliminated every welfare big government program. we could not give any of those savings back to the American people in the form of tax relief because of our own rules. It means we have to raise taxes to lower taxes. We have to change our rules. Yesterday the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. J.D. HAYWORTH) and I introduced a bill just to do that. We must be able to cut big government spending. get Washington out of Americans lives. and give the money back to the American people. After all. it is your dollars. It is wrong that we cannot. for example. cut a $3 million TV documentary on infrastructure awareness and use that same money to eliminate the marriage penalty tax. Do Members not think families are more important than welfare government programs? Paygo is a stumbling block to good government. It must go.
Date: 1998-04-23
Speaker: SAM JOHNSON (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman. I happen to disagree with our previous speaker. The DeLay amendment really corrects a problem that I have spent most of my political career trying to fix. When I was in the Texas statehouse. I spent a lot of time speaking out against the antics of a judge named William Wayne Justice. a Federal judge who in 1980. singlehandedly took control of and weakened the Texas prison system. which I think Is a little bit out of line as far as our States rights policies are concerned. . Judge Justice felt our State prisoners were cramped and "unhappy with their living conditions." so he forced Texas to turn jails into country clubs so that dangerous criminals. could be more comfortable. He even ordered Texas to provide these criminals with color television. He ordered that 11 percent of Texas prison beds be empty at all times. and mandated that cells built for two prisoners only hold one. and that cells built for four prisoners only hold two. Consequently. we have got over 5.000 empty beds in the Texas prison system because of a Federal judges ruling. and that caused overcrowding and it caused extra expense. These mandates have done nothing but set criminals free. increase overcrowding. and waste billions of taxpayer dollars. I want everyoneto understand it is our Texas lawmakers that were forced to release hardened criminals on the order of a Federal judge. This means that criminals have been released back on to the Texas streets. all because a Federal judge was more concerned about the comfort of criminals than about the safety of lawabiding citizens. This amendment will do what the Texas legislature tried to do and could not. stop Federal judges like William Wayne Justice from pushing their agenda at the expense of public safety. This language states in no uncertain terms that Federal judges cannot mandate early release of violent criminals. It also nullifies current consent decrees like the one inflicted on Texas by Judge Justice. This is common sense legislation. It Is long overdue. The people of Texas have waited 20 years for relief from this Federal judge. Let us not make them wait any longer. I think it is long overdue. Mr. Chairman. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. because it is going to make America a lot safer by keeping your violent criminals behind bars..
Date: 1998-04-23
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

Mr. Speaker. today I rise to talk about the value of an excellent education. I would like to tell you about Shelby Vick. a student from my hometown of Fort Collins. Colorado. Shelby Corbitt Vick was born November 15. 1986 and is the eldest child and only daughter of Joseph James Vick and Patricia Bums Vick. She was born in Fort Collins. She attends St. Joseph Catholic Elementary School as a 5th grader. Shelby has one younger brother. Emmett James Andrew Vick. Emmett is nine years old and was also bom in Fort Collins. Shelbys mother and father both graduated from the University of Texas at Austin. Her mother is a homemaker and volunteers extensively at Shelbys school. Her father is an attomey who practices in Fort Collins and Greeley. Colorado. Shelbys interests include horseback riding and anything to do with horses. Shelby is a voracious reader. Shelby enjoys playing volleyball and basketball on her schools team. Shelby plans to attend college and become an author writing stories about horses. Recently Shelby entered a nationwide history essay contest. She has written an exceptional essay which was chosen as the national winner of the 5th Grade American History Essay Contest sponsored by the National Society. Daughters of the American Revolution. Mr. Speaker. I hereby submit Miss Vickis winning essay for the RECORD and enthusiastically commend it to my colleagues.
Date: 1998-04-28
Speaker: RICHARD D. BENNETT (republican)
Chamber: H

Chief Counsel. Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. Rayburn House Office Building. Washington. DC. DEAR MR. BENNETT: I am writing in response to your letter of April 7. 1998. requestIng the Department of Justices position on the granting of immunity to Irena Wu. The Department of Justice has no opposition to the Committee granting immunity to Ms. Wu. We appreciate greatly your coordinating with us on this matter. Sincerely.
Date: 1998-04-28
Speaker: RICHARD D. BENNETT (republican)
Chamber: H

Chief Counsel. Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. Rayburn House Office Building. Washington. DC. DEAR MR. BENNETT: I am writing in response to your letter of April 7. 1998. requesting the Department of Justices position on the granting of immunity to Nancy Lee. The Department of Justice has no opposition to the Committee granting immunity to Ms. Lee. We appreciate greatly your coordinating with us on this matter. Sincerely.
Date: 1998-04-28
Speaker: RICHARD D. BENNETT (republican)
Chamber: H

Chief Counsel. Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. Rayburn House Office Building. Washington. DC. DEAR MR. BENNETT: I am writing in response to your letter of April 7. 1998. requestiffg the Department of Justices position on the granting of immunity to Larry Wong. The Department of Justice has no opposition to the Committee granting immunity to Mr.Wong. We appreciate greatly your coordinating with us on this matter. Sincerely.