macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: TED LIEU (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chair. I rise to oppose this bill. America is an exceptional nation. One of the reasons we are the best country in the world is that we believe in science and we believe in innovation. Our country has always believed in physics and in chemistry. and we trust scientists. The National Science Foundation has helped this country grow in terms of innovation and in terms of amazing scientific discoveries. It is not broken. So why are we trying to meddle with what the scientists have done? The chairman mentioned some examples of grants that sounded sort of funny. I understand that most of the Republican legislators do not believe in climate change. but the overwhelming majority of scientists do. as does the U.S. military. as does ExxonMobil today. One of the grants had to do with how people learn about climate change. That is vitally important because climate change is going to affect our children and our grandchildren. It is true that some of these grants sound funny. That is because scientists do all sorts of things that. to a layperson. may not be very obvious. Because I am not a scientist and because most people are not scientists. I think that is perfectly fine. that we dont have all sorts of redundant writings that explain what an experiment does. Let me give you one example that is on the NSFs Web site. One of the grants is to study funnylooking colored clay in France. bluegreen clay in another country. It sounds like a really silly grant. doesnt it? It turns out that. when they looked at it. there were properties in this bluegreen clay in France that kill bacteria. antibacterial properties that can help deal with MRSA. that can help deal with superbugs. This can be a groundbreaking grant. a groundbreaking discovery. but under this bill. it might have problems being funded. Ultimately. what this is really about and what I have learned now in Congress is that often we are very arrogant. We do not trust scientists. We do not trust the people in America. This is an arrogant bill that sort of says we know best. not the scientists who are doing peer reviews of what grants to fund. and that we know which experiment might do exactly what. It turns out. in science. lots of times scientists study one area and get a completely different. amazing discovery in a totally unrelated area. We need to fund basic science. We need to take our hands off this. We need to trust scientists and trust the people in America. Do not pass this bill. We are not that arrogant. We should not determine what scientists are to be doing and that we know better than they do. because we do not. I ask for opposition to this bill.
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to point out that this grant was mentioned earlier in remarks. In defense of their misguided efforts. some of our colleagues like to pick certain grants and make fun of themjust as has just been saidand then say they are not worth funding. One of the grants that my colleagues like to pick on is a grant entitled. "Ecosystems Resilience to Human Impacts: Ecological Consequences of Early HumanSet Fires in New Zealand." It may be easy for some of my colleagues to question why the Federal Government should spend money on studying fires that were set in a foreign country hundreds of years ago. Apparently. it is harder for them to spend 5 minutes reading the abstract. It turns out that those early settlers in New Zealand caused the loss of more than 40 percent of the forests in just decades. By studying the longterm effect on the ecosystem impacts of those longago fires. we can gain knowledge to help natural resource managers make smarter decisions about how to mitigate. prepare for. and respond to massive wildfires in our own country. It is right in the public interest. Just to put an economic figure to this. in 2012. the United States spent $2 billion to suppress over 65.000 wildland fires that burned over 9 million acres. It sounds like this is of national interest to study the long term impact of fires that were set so many years ago. I choose to stand with the scientists when it comes to science. For that reason. I really uphold this misguided bill. Mr. Chair. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. once again. I stand with the scientists. I also stand with the Presidents potential statement. If this bill is presented to the President. scientists have recommended that he veto it. I stand with the scientists again and ask the people to vote against this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chair. I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3293. the socalled Scientific Research in the National Interest Act. a bill that would actually hinder the National Science Foundations (NSF) ability to meet the dynamic demands of science and provide resources across all scientific disciplines without political manipulations. This bill is simply another in a line of Republican efforts to politicize science and jeopardize discovery and innovation. The NSF engages in remarkable. groundbreaking work. We must continue to support this organization and ensure that America remains a worldwide leader in scientific advances. To that end. I cosponsored a number of amendments with my colleague from Virginia. Mr. BEYER. that would allow NSF scientists to further our understanding of climate and environmental science. Unfortunately my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have displayed such open hostility towards climate science and research that they wont allow a vote on these amendments. While I believe its important that the NSF hold itself accountable regarding the research it funds. politicizing scientific research is shortsighted and can damage our ability to compete in the world economy. H.R. 3293 would interfere with ongoing efforts at NSF to better quantify and communicate the value of the research it funds. Mr. Chair. I am also concerned that this legislation will have a chilling effect on many of the scientists at NSF and throughout our scientific community. This bill would force scientists to secondguess their research based on political whims and require them to justify all their actions according to shortterm returns. stifling highrisk. highreward research and innovation across all fields. We must not squelch creativity. critical thinking. and the open exchange of ideas. Federal agencies like NIH and NOAA are headquartered in my district and I represent countless federally funded scientists who are advancing knowledge. discovering cures. and developing innovative technologies. I am committed to ensuring that the NSF and all of our research agencies have the resources they need without being subject to superfluous political tests. The valuable work done by our scientists and researchers at NSF and other institutions not only leads to the development of new innovations. but also enables our Nation to attract and retain the top research talent in the world. In order to continue to compete. we need sustained investments free from political interference. I strongly oppose this bill and any other efforts to needlessly politicize scientific research. The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired. Pursuant to the rule. the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 5minute rule and shall be considered as read. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 3293 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled.
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Page 3. line 15. through page 4. line 15. amend subsection (b) to read as follows: (b) DETERMINATION. A determination referred to in subsection (a) is a justification by the responsible Foundation official as to how the research grant or cooperative agreement(1) by itself. or by contributing to a portfolio of research in that field or across fields. is in the national interest as reflected in the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1861 et seq). namely to promote the progress of science. to advance the national health. prosperity and welfare. and to secure the national defense. and (2) is worthy of Federal funding. as demonstrated by having met the merit review criteria of the Foundation. The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 609. the gentlewoman from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. my colleague from Texas. the chairman of the Committee on Science. Space. and Technology. has stated many times that H.R. 3293 is consistent with the policy announced by NSF in January 2015. He also frequently cites a year old comment by NSF Director Dr. Cordova about this bill. However. it is one thing to use such vague statements in defense of this bill. it is quite another thing to look directly at the NSF policy issued by Dr. Cordova to see what it actually says. I will quote directly from NSFs January 2015 policy: The nontechnical component of the NSF award abstract must serve as a public justification for NSF funding by articulating how the project serves the national interest. as stated by NSFs mission. to promote the progress of science. to advance the national health. prosperity. and welfare. and to secure national defense. As Dr. Holdren. the Presidents Science Adviser. said: According to the clear wording and intent of the 1950 act that created the National Science Foundation. promoting the progress of science through basic research is in the national interest. Likewise. Dr. Cordova. in describing what she means by "national interest." points directly to the 1950 NSF mission statement. In her policy. there is no separate list defining national interest with criteria that. in fact. promotes more applied research. not basic research. While the words "promoting the progress of science" appear in the bill before us. they do so only as an afterthought. in dead last place and added only after many versions of this bill. Now that we all understand the National Science Foundations actual policy. I can briefly explain my amendment. By tying the term "national interest" to the 1950 national statement. my amendment brings the bill truly in line with the National Science Foundations own policy for transparency and accountability. My amendment also provides clarity to what we mean by the words "worthy of Federal funding." by stating that anything that has passed the rigor of the National Science Foundations peerreview process is "worthy of Federal funding." In short. my amendment fixes the underlying bill by removing restrictions that may stifle highrisk basic research. and by taking decisions about grant funding out of the hands of politicians and putting it back in the hands of scientists. where it belongs. The National Science Foundations 1950 mission statement. implemented through its gold standard meritreview process. has served science and this Nation so well. Lets leave it intact by passing my amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. this does not do any more than what was intended under the law. It leaves it in the hands of the peer review board and not the politicians. It does nothing to make this bill worse. In fact. it improves it so that it can meet the charter of this Congress in doing its work. Every grant that goes out of the National Science Foundation is peerreviewed in a system that was set up 60 years ago. It has worked well. We have gained great research. I dont think that making sure that the politicians have something to say about it makes it any better. It makes it worse. I ask for the adoption of my amendment. Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I demand a recorded vote. The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII. further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas will be postponed.
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Page 3. line 22. strike "and". Page 3. line 23. redesignate paragraph (2) as paragraph (3). Page 3. after line 22. insert the following: (2) is consistent with established and widely accepted scientific methods applicable to the field of study of exploration. and The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 609. the gentlewoman from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. let me thank the gentleman from Texas and the ranking member for their support. With that. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas .
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Page 3. line 22. strike "and". Page 3. line 23. redesignate paragraph (2) as paragraph (3). Page 3. after line 22. insert the following: (2) is consistent with the definition of basic research as it applies to the purpose and field of study. and The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 609. the gentlewoman from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I restate my earlier premise that science is the work of the 21st century. Maybe we will be saying the 22nd century. Because when you are innovative and do research. you create jobs and opportunities. This amendment establishes that basic research is in the national interest of the United States. Let me suggest to you that we have a lot of universities in this country. When I travel. I always hear individuals seeking to come to be taught in American institutions of higher education. It is because of the creative thought and. in many instances. the research that is done. whether in medicine or all the forms of science and technology. because we have a freeflowing basis upon which people can think and invent. I want that to continue. I want the National Science Foundation to be at the cornerstone of that. I will include in the RECORD an article titled. "The Future Postponed." Why Declining Investment in Basic Research Threatens a U.S. Innovation Deficit. [From the Massachusetts Institute of Technology]
Date: 2016-02-10
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H

I thank the gentleman for supporting this amendment. and I thank the ranking member for supporting it. In closing. Mr. Chairman. let me say that. in addition to following protocol. we must invest funds. money. in basic research. But I also want to take note of something that I have watched over the years. and I have added amendments. and I have seen the growth. One of my first acts on the Science. Space. and Technology Committee was to utilize laboratory tools or equipment that were no longer needed by the Federal Government in its national science lab to give them to middle schools and high schools so that they would have access to this kind of equipment. Many of us know that there are schools all throughout America who are deficient in science labs. I see them in my district. I hear about them. I think the other important point is that. over the years. we have expanded the research collaboration to Historically Black Colleges. HispanicServing Institutions. Native AmericanServing. rural. and colleges that serve the economically disadvantaged. Those are good things because we dont know where the genius is America and how many people may come up with outstanding research. So I hope that we do focus on how important basic research is. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas .
Date: 2016-02-11
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I rise today with great enthusiasm to honor and salute Yolanda Adams. an enormous and wonderful talent of gospel music. and to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Yolanda Adams Morning Show. Many know that I introduced legislation to make September Gospel Music Heritage Month in order to honor the many talented Americans who enjoy singing. writing. and providing inspiration through gospel music. Elvis Presley won his first Grammy with gospel music. I remember young Yolanda Adams singing in a church in Houston. and the inspiration she gave even then. She was a young teacher who worked until she finally knew that her talent was worthy of presenting it to the American people. Yolanda Adams rose to fame as one of gospel musics greats. making her debut in 1988. I remember her song. "Just as I Am." Since then. Yolanda has been wowing gospel audiences. She has been before the President of the United States and all over the world. but yet she is a humble person. Following her illustrious music career. she began the Yolanda Adams Morning Show. These shows often dont last. but her spirit has guided it forward. She connects with listeners. bringing them warm and inspirational messages. Her music and growth has been wonderful. Mr. Speaker. Yolandas cohosts. Anthony Valary and Marcus D. Wiley. give love and camaraderie every morning. They make it not just a morning show. but a celebration of friends and family. I am delighted to stand here today to call Yolanda Adams an American treasure. She is a native daughter of Houston. and someone who understands Gods blessings. but is not selfish. She provides those blessings to others through her musical genius. Congratulations to Yolanda Adams for 10 years of the Yolanda Adams Morning Show.
Date: 2016-02-11
Speaker: DANNY K. DAVIS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Illinois

I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding. Mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to H.R. 3442. and I do so because the bill imposes burdens on Treasury that are totally unnecessary and will do absolutely nothing to improve our national debt. It is Congress that makes spending and revenue decisions. and it is Congress responsibility to raise the debt limit. when needed. to enable Treasury to fulfill the debt obligations that we have made. If you owe. you pay. Rather than wasting our time on a redundant report by Treasury that does nothing to grow the economy. we should focus our time on creating jobs and strengthening families. I can think of many things that we could be talking about: raising the minimum wage. creating summer jobs for youth. creating jobs through infrastructure development. supporting businesses to hire more workers. and increasing grant aid to families so that they can afford college. Although our economy has demonstrated some solid labor market trends. we know that there are still individuals who are not benefiting from the tremendous economic recovery that we are experiencing. For example. the University of Illinois at Chicago just completed a study that showed that half the African American males in the city of Chicago between the ages of 2024 are not working and not in school. And we could be using this timeour timeto figure out ways to bring these individuals into the labor market so that they become productive citizens. rather than reviewing another report that tells us nothing that we dont already know. So I oppose the legislation not because it is such bad legislation. but it is just a waste of our time. energy. and effort. We need to be figuring out ways to solve problems.
Date: 2016-02-11
Speaker: BRENDAN F. BOYLE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Pennsyl

vania. Mr. Speaker. I rise today in honor of Sanford Harling III. a widely known and wellloved 12yearold from Norristown. Pennsylvania. affectionately known as "Man Man." Sanford tragically died after he selflessly dove back into the flames of his own burning home to rescue his father. who was bedridden while recovering from hip surgery. Unbeknownst to Man Man. his father had already escaped through a secondstory window. Although this courageous 12yearold never reemerged from the smoldering ruins of his home. his memory now resonates well beyond his community thanks to this remarkable act of heroism. While the honor and recognition that Sanford deserves cannot return him to the embrace of his family. perhaps his shining example will inspire other deeds of lifesaving bravery and devotion. He will be forever remembered in our community and our country as a hero. I offer my deepest sympathies to the Harling family and to everyone who knew and cherished this young mans character.
Date: 2016-02-11
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I rise today in honor and in remembrance of former Representative Mike Oxley. As a valued member of this Chamber. Representative Oxley represented Ohios Fourth District for over twentyfive years and served as Chairman of the Financial Services committee. As only a freshman Member of Congress on his committee. Chairman Oxley met with me and helped me pass the Life Insurance Fairness for Travelers (LIFT) Act. which prohibited discrimination by life insurance companies based on travel to Israel and other countries without an actuarial analysis of risk. It was one of the first bills I passed in Congress. and his respect and inclusion of the minority Members of our committee taught me that things could indeed get done across the aisle. It is a lesson I have not forgotten. Many remember Representative Oxley for his tireless efforts in passing the SarbanesOxley Act of 2002. This law was and continues to ensure our confidence in public corporations and financial reporting in the private sector. However. more than his legislative accomplishments. I remember him for his involvement in the Congressional Baseball Gamean annual tradition that brings Members of both parties together for a good cause. No matter what he was involved in. Chairman Oxley was a fair and decent man who ensured all Members felt respected. As a cancer survivor. his loss to cancer is even more heartbreaking and makes me more determined to fight to defeat this deadly disease. Mike Oxleys work. integrity and passion for public service bettered both the Congress and our nation. It is with great pleasure that I honor Representative Oxley.
Date: 2016-02-11
Speaker: WATSON COLEMAN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.