macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2013-07-17
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. in April. the International Energy Agency concluded that despite some progress in deploying clean energy. that the average unit of energy produced in the world today is essentially polluting as it was 20 years ago. As President Obama stated at Georgetown University last month. we cannot afford to slowwalk our transition to a lower carbon future. Climate change and its consequences are not waiting and neither can we. The good news is the transition to a cleaner global economy presents a great economic opportunity for the United States. Bloomberg New Energy Finance estimates that private clean energy investment will more than triple by 2030. We should be fighting to attract that investment here in the United States. but we are at risk of missing out on that opportunity. China and other countries have made firm national commitments to generate more electricity from clean energy sources. and that reality is reflected in their current levels of investmenta $65 billion investment in China compared to $35 billion in the United States. Madam Speaker. we should not lose this competition. we should not jeopardize our future. and we should not jeopardize the climate. This is an opportunity for a winwin.
Date: 2013-07-17
Speaker: MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: New Mexico

I thank the gentleman from California. Madam Speaker. I could stand here all night talking about the many reasons why our country needs comprehensive immigration reform that keeps families together. provides a tough but fair pathway to citizenship. enhances border security. and thats in line with our core American values. But tonight. Im going to focus on why immigration reform is good for the American economy and good for the economy of New Mexico. Nationally. its estimated that immigration reform will create 121.000 jobs a year and boost American GDP by $832 billion over the next decade. Nearly every day. we hear Members from both parties talking about the need to reduce our debt and deficit. Well. the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has determined that comprehensive immigration reform will reduce our national deficit by nearly $850 billion over the next two decades. In New Mexico. comprehensive immigration reform will create 6.000 jobs over the next decade and increase our GSPgross State productby $3.8 billion. These economic benefits and new jobs will have a ripple effect. leading to even more economic activity. higher productivity. more critical investments. better wages. and even more jobs for New Mexicans and Americans. Simply put. we cannot afford not to pass comprehensive immigration reform. Our economic future demands it. and thats why Im glad that so many of my colleagues are taking to the floor this evening to make the case for comprehensive immigration reform because the American people need to know that its good for the economy. good for business. and good for job creation. The Senate has done its job and acted in a bipartisan manner. Now its time for the House to do its job so we can send a comprehensive immigration reform to the Presidents desk and finally fix our broken immigration system.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: BEN RAY LUJAN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: New Mexico

Mr. Speaker. as fires across the West grow more intense and superstorms in the United States do more damage. it is clear that the cost of inaction on climate change is growing. The economic toll that it is taking on communities across the country is impacting the American people. Hurricane Sandy cost the United States $70 billion in damages. many lives. and lost economic output. In my home State of New Mexico. where wildfires have burned all summer. many communities that rely on tourism and access to our majestic lands have seen their businesses negatively impacted. Farmers and ranchers in New Mexico have had to sell off their herds because of drought conditions that made it too expensive to feed their animals. Opponents of efforts to address climate change and to transition to cleaner fuels and renewable energy often cite the cost of these efforts. What they fail to account for is the increasing cost that global warming is having in the form of more severe droughts. more dangerous wildfire seasons. and increased devastation from superstorms. Mr. Speaker. if we continue down this path and fail to take steps necessary to address climate change. the costs will only continue to grow and the impact on our communities will only increase. Last week. I joined my colleagues in the Safe Climate Caucus in sending a letter to Speaker BOEHNER asking him to schedule a debate on the House floor to discuss climate change and our Nations response to this growing threat. The time for action is now. We must not sit idly by and ignore the facts and ignore the science while communities in New Mexico and across the country experience the negative impacts of climate change.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: CAROLYN B. MALONEY (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: New York

Mr. Speaker. I would like to invite my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in asking the Citizens Stamp Advisory Committee to issue a staff stamp in honor of Diwali. H.R. 47 has over 41 bipartisan cosponsors. Diwali marks the beginning of the Hindu new year. one of the oldest and most storied holidays in the world. It symbolizes the triumph of good over evil and of light over darkness. Diwali is celebrated by over a billion Hindus. Sikhs. Buddhists. Christians. and Jains alike. It has been celebrated and honored in the White House by both parties. But Diwali has yet to join the legion of holidays that we honor with a stamp. Yesterday. Congressman BERA. along with the Indian American leaders. including Ranju and Ravi Batra. delivered over 1.300 personally signed letters in support of the stamp to the Deputy Postmaster General. They also delivered over 400.000 signatures on a petition in support of the stamp. The time has come to issue a Diwali stamp. Please join me in asking the Citizens Advisory Committee to do so.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I yield myself an additional 30 seconds. I hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will agree that a bipartisan Elementary and Secondary Education Act authorization is the right process we should move forward. This is about every child in our country getting the education they deserve. regardless of poverty. disability. or other challenges. To walk away from that commitment means letting our students down. letting the parents down. and letting down taxpayers who demand accountability. It means letting down teachers who deserve support. It means letting down businesses who are counting on our school system to produce college- and careerready graduates. It means letting down our future. We can do better than this. We can do it way better than this. I urge a "no" vote on H.R. 5. and I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to the underlying bill on behalf of an entire generation of south Floridas children. The stakes could not be higher. Our K 12 public education system is essential for preparing the next generation of Americans to excel in life and to compete for the highskilled. highwage jobs in the global economy. Its why access to quality public education has been a central priority for me throughout my legislative career. Yet faced with this national priority. the bill before us is a step backward. not forward. It locks in $1.3 billion of irresponsible sequester cuts. including tens of millions of dollars that will come straight out of the classrooms of Broward and MiamiDade Counties. which I represent. For an outstanding teacher like Joan Rapps at Mirror Lake Elementary in Broward County. it means fewer resources for her second graders. less extra help. and fewer opportunities to develop as a professional as she strives to help our students rise above all hurdles. We cannot allow this to happen. This Congress could be working to make it possible to have an excellent teacher in every classroom. engage parents. and empower educators with the resources they need to help every child achieve success. Sadly. with this bill. we are doing the opposite.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chair. I yield myself 11/2 minutes. Many of my colleagues have expressed concern over the fact that H.R. 5 takes the level of funding to the sequestration level. I think we ought to understand what this means in terms of ongoing improvement in the education program and the educational opportunity for those young people who are poor minorities and who go to some of the poorest schools in some of the poorest districts in our country. This is going to really grind down their ability to be able to respond. those schools. those districts. those teachers. those administrators. to the needs of those young people. What it means is they will not have access to the kinds of support services that are necessary so that they will truly have an opportunity. have a full educational opportunity. We know that in many instances. in many of these schools. these students and these teachers require additional resources. require additional support systems for these students. We know that when they are given those support systems. when they are given those resources. these very same children are able to thrive. We see that demonstrated all across this country all of the time. I represent some of the most difficult schools in the State of California in the most difficult areas in the State of California. where children navigate very dangerous streets to get to school and to come back. yet we see students who were given that opportunity to have a firstclass education are now attending Brown University and the University of Nebraska and UCLA and other such institutions. The fact is these children can learn. The question is whether we will supply them with the resources so they can have the opportunity to do so. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself 1 minute. For the most part. this managers amendment is technical changes to the underlying bill. For the same reasons that I oppose the underlying bill. I oppose the managers amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2013-07-18
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 16. line 6. strike "lowperforming schools" and insert "neglected. delinquent. migrant students. English learners. atrisk students. and Native Americans. to increase academic achievement of such students". The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 303. the gentlewoman from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H

I thank the gentleman for his expression on this particular amendment. Let me frame it. as I close. thanking my colleagues and expressing my commitment to the concept that no child should be thrown away. With formulas changing. block grants being promoted. the idea of a State being shortchanged in its awards means that there needs to be focus and refocus. and that is. from my perspective. to look at those children. whether theyre rural or urban communities that need to be educated who could be considered neglected. delinquent. migrant students. Englishlearners. atrisk students. Native American youth. and to determine again. to find a way to focus those dollars in a way that will lift. in essence. all educational boats. Sometimes that will be an enormous challenge. as this formula has evidenced. And I would like to see that no matter what happens in the underlying bill. that we have these children protected. many of whom are in the school districts that I represent. including formerly the North Forest Independent School District. that could have benefited from those resources. having given to them a number of rural school districts in Texas that could have benefited from targeted dollars. to be able to keep them as existing viable school districts. teaching their children. not closed school districts. So I hope that as we proceed that the message that comes. ultimately. from Members of Congress is that we promote education first. and the children at risk will never be lost in the debate. but well always support them. I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chair. I rise to claim the time in opposition. The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. and Members of the House. I oppose this amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan because I think this amendment continues the ideological approach here that we have in taking away Federal dollars under H.R. 5 from the poorest schools in our systems. serving some of the poorest children in our country. at a time when this legislation locks in the post -sequestration funding for the schools now. as H.R. 5 does. and mandates that those scarce dollars go to the private sector. Now were mandating that those schools now get involved with the private sector. I dont know. maybe its different in your States. But in my State. when local school districts put together their budgets. when local school districts consider engaging in developing new programs and new curriculums. they invite the community to come in and participate in those discussions across the board. Nobody has to mandate them to do that. They do that because those are community schools. Those are trying to serve the community. Whether its at the elementary level. or at the high school level or at the community college level. this is what they do in developing those curriculums and developing those assessments that are taking place. And so I dont understand. In a bill that rails against Federal mandates. were now on to our second mandate under this legislation. Why are we creating these mandates for these local districts that know better. that know how to do it best. according to all of the statements here? Why are we then mandating from the Federal Government to do it this particular way? In my community I would say they already do it this way. but I dont think they need to be mandated to do that. And for these reasons. I oppose this amendment because I think it continues the ideological bent that somehow. while mandates are bad for schools when they come from the Federal Government. apparently. when they come from the Congress theyre good. So well try to sort this out in the meantime. But in the meantime Ill oppose this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chair. I rise to claim time in opposition. although I am not opposed to the amendment. The Acting CHAIR. Without objection. the gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I thank the gentlewoman for introducing this amendment. I strongly support this amendment for all of the reasons that she laid out in her remarks in support of her amendment. I believe that. in its current form. H.R. 5 would undo decades of progress and relegate students with disabilities to a secondclass education. Thats why the disabilities community stands united in firm opposition to this bill. It astounds me that this body is considering enactment of such draconian policies. I thought that by 2013 bipartisan consensus on natural ability and potential of all children would be commonplace. but I was wrong. One of the biggest victories we had under No Child Left Behind was the attention to students with disabilities. with the assumption that this population of students can and will achieve. Students with disabilities have thrived under these high expectations. H.R. 5 returns us to the era of soft bigotry and of low expectations with respect to students with disabilities. and that is unacceptable. This Republican bill completely removes students with disabilities from the accountability system. greenlighting States and districts to assess any student with disabilities to a lower standard by allowing States to develop and assess students based upon a lower set of standards regardless of the severity of the disability. This would return us to a time when students with disabilities are hidden and not given access to quality education. That was the situation when I came to this Congress. Im no prouder of any act that Ive ever authored than the Children With Handicaps Act. now known as IDEA. the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. We cannot undermine that legislation and the progress and achievements that those children and their families have made and to see their successes. And now to suggest they will not be in an accountability system so that we hold schools accountable for the achievement and the successes of those children is just unacceptable. I strongly support the McMorris Rodgers amendment. and I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Colorado.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chair. I rise in strong opposition to the Reed amendment because it weakens accountability for ensuring that our Nations students are achieving at high levels. This amendment seems like a good thingallowing schools to measure in areas besides reading and mathbut the amendment is so vague that it will allow almost any measure to be used. and thats not what we need in the system at this time. Adding measures to this amendment does not fix any of the problems to help students. Too often. weve seen throughout the course of the last many years that adults try to make themselves look good by hiding and masking how well their students are doing academically by trying to seek other systems of measure that will make a school look better. even though the students inside that school are not performing at top level. For those reasons. I oppose the amendment. and I yield to the gentleman from California .
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I thank the gentleman. I agree with the gentleman that the testing provisions included in No Child Left Behind as well as the implementation of these provisions is imperfect and outdated. Unfortunately. ESEA authorization is 5 years overdue and the majority appears to have no interest in working with us to develop a bill that can pass both the House and the Senate. However. Ill gladly work with you to address the issue of testing in Americas schools to ensure that while we continue to measure whether or not students are achieving at grade level. we will also ensure such assessments be done in a way to improve both teaching and learning.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment although I will not be in opposition. The Acting CHAIR. Without objection. the gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I rise to express appreciation for Mr. BENISHEK for this amendment. The gentleman from Michigan has an admirable goal. which is to improve career and technical education. Members of the Congress are well aware of the needs in all of our local communities. As new systems of manufacturing are brought online and as new innovations take place. we want to know how well our students are doing and how well our schools are doing in helping to prepare those students for job opportunities that are presented in these many craft areas. I would urge Members to support this amendment. and I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to the amendment. though I am not opposed to the amendment. The Acting CHAIR. Without objection. the gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I urge support of the Heck amendment. and I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada .
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chair. I claim the time in opposition to the amendment. The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chair. I yield myself 3 minutes. I rise in opposition to the SchockMeehan amendment because it really is a political exercise that fails to fix the problems of H.R. 5. the Letting Students Down Act. The amendment is an ideological attempt to give school districts more control. but actually doesnt do that. It just creates more paperwork. more bureaucracy at the Federal level by consultations and chances to dispute regulations. many of which are already allowed in Federal law. but this would be a separate subset to require that. I have been here a long time. and I cant think of any administration that gave both States and local school districts more options. more flexibility. more ability to design the systems under which they want to work than the Obama administration. which now there are 37 States who have undertaken Race to the Top. which gave them great flexibility. and there are 40 States that have undertaken waivers. which give them even more flexibility. When you talk to the superintendents and you talk to the Governors in those States. they are delighted to have that flexibility to design the systems that they want to be able to design and to improve the systems and to get better achievement by their students. Now we are coming along with some continuation of some outdated. very conservative argument that all these problems are at the Federal Government. The fact of the matter is no administration has unleashed the skills and the talents and the desires of local school districts and States than this administration. This is an ideological bent. It is an ideological fix. It is not going to end. What it doesnt do is it doesnt correct any of the very real and very big problems that underlie this amendment in the underlying bill. because the underlying bill gets education funding and it locks in the sequestration levels that are going to grind down every school district that has poor students and poor schools in that district. and it lets States dramatically reduce the funding for those districts. The priority of this Federal spending is to try to equalize the opportunity for those poor minority children. and it diverts funds for teachers away from poor schools and districts toward the wealthier ones. It eliminates the block grant funding for vital programs with no accountabilityno accountabilityhow those funds will be spent. We just saw an amendment offered here earlier today because people recognize all that does is just diminish the resources that are available for those populations with special needs. I oppose this amendment. as I do the underlying legislation. and I would ask my colleagues to vote against it. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2013-07-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chair. I demand a recorded vote. The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII. further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania will be postponed.