macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I heard the word "bullying" used. It is ironic that that word would be used in a vote that would deny 22 million Americans access to affordable health care. Again. I want to underscore for our colleagues. some of whom may not have read the Congressional Budget Offices report. that this comes from the nonpartisan entity that advises both parties in Congress. In fact. the head of the Congressional Budget Office was appointed by our Republican colleagues. It is they who are telling us that. with this vote. 22 million Americans would be denied access to affordable health care. That seems to qualify as bullying if anything does. Mr. Speaker. lets review the situation with respect to Planned Parenthood. This Republicancontrolled House had its standing committees investigate Planned Parenthood. including the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. They had hearings. and they hauled up the head of Planned Parenthood to some of these hearings. At the end of those hearings. the Republican chairman of that committee concluded that Planned Parenthood had engaged in no wrongdoing. He said that on national television. Despite that finding. back in January. our Republican colleagues went ahead and launched this attack on womens reproductive health and defund Planned Parenthood. That was bad enough. Since that time. we have had even more evidence. We have had the grand jury proceeding in Texas that exonerated Planned Parenthood. They began the investigation against Planned Parenthood. and they said they would go where the evidence led them. At the end of that evidenceseeking effort. they exonerated and vindicated Planned Parenthood and called for the indictment of the people who had wrongly accused them. That was the result. Yet here we are on this House floor today as if nothing had happenedignoring the evidence that the grand jury heard and continuing on this witch hunt of the special committees against Planned Parenthood. So. yes. maybe this day is making history. It is probably one of the saddest examples of a Congress run amuck. when. for the 62nd or 63rd time now. we are trying to repeal the Affordable Care ActObamaCareand. for the 12th time. trying to launch this attack on womens reproductive health and on Planned Parenthood despite all of the intervening and previously existing evidence. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield 112 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin . a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Not having access to any affordable health care certainly doesnt meet anyones definition of patientcentered healthcare. Our Republican colleagues. when they first launched the attacks on the Affordable Care Act and ObamaCare. said: We are going to repeal this. and we are going to replace it. Well. we have voted. as of today. 63 times to dismantle it. How many times have we voted to replace it? Zero. Zero times to replace it. My colleague. Mr. KIND from Wisconsin. raised an important point. The way our healthcare insurance system was working back in the early 2000s. millions of Americans were denied access to health care because of a preexisting condition. because their kid had diabetes or asthma. Premiums were going through the roof and skyrocketing. The Affordable Care Act has now provided affordable health care to millions more Americans and. as we have heard from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. passing this bill would actually take it away for 22 million Americans. Despite all that. despite the 63rd attempt to get rid of it and deny that access to health care. not once have we heard the replaced part of that Republican agenda. So. Mr. Speaker. it is a sad day when you want to take away access to affordable health care from 22 million Americans and dont have a single alternative to put on the floor of this House. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. We have heard a lot of talk about premiums going up. The dirty little secret. which every Member of this House knows or should know. is that premiums have been going up consistently for a very long period of time. The issue is: How fast do they go up? If you look at this chart. you will find that. for employersponsored insurance. which is what most Americans are on. premium increases were huge between 2000 and 2010. before the passage of the Affordable Care Act. 9.5 percent. After the passage of the Affordable Care Act. those premium increases have dropped substantially. 4.8. now 2.7. When Members of Congress get up here and talk about premiums going up. ask yourself the question: How fast are they going up? Because before the Affordable Care Act passed. it was through the roof. and they have dramatically slowed. I said our Republican colleagues did the repeal part. but not the replace part. So they want to take out the part that has slowed down the premiums and go back to the day when you had skyrocketing premium increases. So we need to talk in a factbased conversation here on the floor of the House of Representatives. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas . a distinguished member of the Committee on the Judiciary who is focused on an evidencebased approach to all of these issues.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I thank the distinguished gentleman from Maryland. I do want to say to the gentleman that. as you well know. the Judiciary Committee. in many machinations over the years. has looked at this question of choice and the constitutional right that comes from Roe v. Wade. Unfortunately. our voicesthose of us who are there who argue the constitutional premisehave not been heard Let me stand in opposition to. again. a Groundhog Day announcement. which is again trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act. The good news is that this is my daughters birthday. So I can celebrate February 2nd in a good way. This approach to again try to take away from the millions of people in Texas who are uninsured the right to be insured. to have insurance with preexisting conditions. and this horrible provision to defund Planned Parenthood. which is a health prospect and a health project that gives good health care to women. is absurd. Let me also say. Mr. Speaker. that we face some troubling times when people are unemployed. and Planned Parenthood has provided resources to those vulnerable women. I cant understand why this bill continues to come up. I am glad to stand in opposition to support Planned Parenthood and its funding and to recognize that the Constitution does protect choice. We do need to provide health care.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. What the chairman of the Budget Committee said about the Affordable Care Act omitted the fact that a majority of Americans do not want to repeal and dismantle the Affordable Care Act. We would be happy to work with our colleagues in smoothing out some of the edges. but our Republican colleagues are only determined to take it down entirely without a replacement. In fact. when you ask the American public: "What one word describes how you feel about the ongoing political debate about the Affordable Care Act?" they respond: "ridiculous." "waste of time." It is a waste of time. Here we are for the 63rd time trying to get rid of the Affordable Care Act. It is not going to happen. The President vetoed the bill. We will sustain the veto. To add insult to injury. our Republican colleagues now want to ignore all the facts about the grand jury investigation into Planned Parenthood. which vindicated Planned Parenthood and concluded instead that they should indict Planned Parenthoods accusers. Mr. Speaker. we will sustain the Presidents veto. We will protect health insurance for 22 million Americans. and we will protect womens access to reproductive care. Lets sustain the Presidents veto. Lets get on with doing the peoples business here.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri . He is the leading Democratic sponsor of this bill. a member of the Financial Services Committee. and the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin . the ranking member of the Monetary Policy and Trade Subcommittee of the Committee on Financial Services.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California . a member of the Appropriations Committee and someone who has been focused on dealing with poverty.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. This bill contains several provisions which I wholeheartedly support and would like to see passed into law. For example. this bill includes a few provisions that were taken straight from bills that I have authored. including the text of my ProjectBased Voucher Improvement Act of 2015. which would increase the flexibility for public housing authorities to develop new units of housing to serve vulnerable populations. including those who are homeless in this country. It would also help to create housing opportunities in areas where vouchers are difficult to use. I introduced the ProjectBased Voucher Improvement Act to address the severe lack of affordable housing. which is contributing to the epidemic of homelessness across the country. The Section 8 projectbased voucher program is a valuable tool to help preserve and create more affordable housing. especially for the poorest and most vulnerable populations. Essentially. it helps housing providers leverage outside financing in order to create and maintain affordable housing in their communities. My bill would help us maximize the effectiveness of this critical program by facilitating the ability of PHAs to enter into agreements with private and nonprofit owners and to partner with social service agencies to provide supportive housing. This will. ultimately. help provide stable housing for our most vulnerable populations. Gaining access to affordable housing is becoming harder and harder for far too many families. We are in the midst of a homeless crisis in my district and in many districts around the country. and we need more affordable housing to help get vulnerable populations off the streets. By making this Section 8 projectbased voucher program easier to use. we could help to overcome this challenge. I hope that the information that has been shared by some of my colleagues has not been lost. I certainly hope that we all heard what Congresswoman BARBARA LEE said about residents who are paying 70 percent of their income for housing. and it has become commonplace around this country for our citizens to be paying 50 percent of their income for housing. This is totally unacceptable. I am very pleased that we are focusing on housing. I am very pleased as there are certain aspects of this bill that. I think. will be very beneficial to our residents and to our constituents throughout the country. I am hopeful that we will continue on this track and that this wont be the last housing effort that we make that comes out of the Financial Services Committee. I am very pleased to be a part of it. I am proud of all of the work that has gone into this legislation. I am very pleased that we were able to work out any differences that we may have had. I am very proud of Mr. CLEAVER and of
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chair. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to close by again thanking my colleagues. Mr. CLEAVER and
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I claim time in opposition to the amendment. The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to this amendment. I have concerns that there are a lot of unanswered questions regarding the new income verification system that is being proposed in this amendment. and I think it needs to be addressed. First. it appears that there would be a cost associated with this amendment. Housing authorities would have to spend some of their operating fund dollars to comply with the new requirements in this amendment. and that takes away from other important things that they must prioritize. It is important to note that the public housing operating fund and administrative fees are severely underfunded. so public housing authorities are already struggling to make ends meet. H.R. 3700 is intended to ease administrative burdens. but this amendment seems to be increasing burdens without any additional funding. In other words. it is an unfunded mandate. Secondly. it is unclear whether all housing authorities have the electronic infrastructure in place to securely maintain and protect residents personal financial data. which could include bank account information. in a manner that is inconsistent with what current financial regulators have. If housing authorities need to upgrade their systems. that would also cost money that is not provided for in this amendment. Third. it is not clear how this amendment would work for residents who are unbanked. This amendment virtually ignores millions of Americans that are unbanked. Fourth. this amendment seems to be addressing a problem that doesnt exist because I have not seen any evidence that residents are currently not providing accurate information when applying for housing assistance. Lastly. H.R. 3700 already includes a provision to address overincome households in public housing to help ensure that taxpayers are not subsidizing these households. For every piece of legislation that we pass. it should be carefully considered. which is why we should not adopt this hasty amendment that has not been thoroughly studied by congressional staff or our housing groups. the administration. and carefully negotiated by both parties. Mr. Chairman and Members. let me just say this: We have a good bill here. We have gone a long way in dealing with whatever concerns either side may have. We have a compromise piece of legislation. We have a consensus piece of legislation. Lets not mess it up. We dont need this amendment. I would ask for a "no" vote on the amendment. Mr. Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman and Members. I basically made an appeal to my Republican colleagues to reject this amendment. I basically talked about the fact that we have gone a long way toward reconciling our differences and that we dont need to endanger the bill at all with an amendment like this. I am not sure exactly what the gentleman is attempting to do. We already have systems in existence by which those who wish to live in public housing have to verify their income. I dont know what is being attempted here. If the attempt is to try and go to financial institutions and say to them. is it true that this person only has $5 in their bank account or what have you? I am not sure that the housing authority would want to assume that additional responsibility and that additional cost. so I have to continue to oppose this amendment. Perhaps there is a better explanation than I have heard. but I have not heard a good explanation about why we should adopt it. Mr. Chair. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I am pleased that the gentleman talked about having talked with the public housing authorities because we did. too. and they had no idea what your bill is. They didnt know anything about it. they didnt understand why it was being done. so we have a difference of opinion. I suppose. about what the public housing authorities are saying. I am saying that based on our inquiries. they did not support your legislation because they didnt understand it. They didnt know it exists. They didnt know what it was all about. I would. again. ask for a "no" vote on this amendment. Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida .
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

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: Strike line 17 on page 20 and all that follows through page 21. line 10. and insert the following:
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. my amendment would remove the harmful provision in H.R. 3700 that would effectively raise rent for thousands of families with children who are living in HUDassisted housing by limiting the amount they can deduct from their income for childcare expenses. These are parents. particularly single parents. who are already struggling to pay for the cost of child care in order to work or to go to school. I believe we should not be crippling their ability to juggle these responsibilities. We should be supporting them. I believe that my Republican colleagues share my concerns. We simply did not have the data that we needed at the markup to truly understand how this provision would affect these households. As I mentioned in my opening statement. the Republicans have indicated that they will support this amendment. which will remove this harmful language and preserve the current law. This will ensure that families with children will not be burdened with a rent increase as a result of this bill. I would like to thank my colleagues across the aisle for working with me on this issue to find common ground. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment. Mr. Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York . the ranking member of the Committee on Small Business and a member of the Committee on Financial Services.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MAXINE WATERS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I would simply thank all of the Members who have worked on this bill. and I thank all of the support that I am getting for this amendment. I want to thank the chairman. Despite the fact he had a rather difficult time on committee today. he conducted himself rather well. and I enjoyed working with him. I am very thankful that he is here to give support on this amendment and the leadership he has given. Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California .
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: New Mexico

The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Page 64. line 16. strike "and". Page 64. after line 16. insert the following new subparagraph: "(G) collaborating with the Department of Veterans Affairs on making joint recommendations to the Congress. the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on how to better coordinate and improve services to veterans under both Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Veteran Affairs veterans housing programs. including ways to improve the Independent Living Program of the Department of Veteran Affairs. and" Page 64. line 17. strike "(G)" and insert "(H)". The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 594. the gentleman from California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: AL GREEN (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: At the end of the bill. add the following new title:
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: AL GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. this is an amendment that is known to the ranking member as well as the chairman of the committee. I will not complicate it. It is a very simple amendment. It simply says that HUD mayHUD maydevelop a pilot program to consider additional credit scoring information. We know that there are people who have insufficient credit files and. as a result. they dont get consideration for a light bill. gas bill. water bill. or phone bill. These are some of the things that we have people making payments on quite regularly timely. but they dont get considered. We are simply asking HUD to develop a pilot program. We say "may develop." There really is no requirement that HUD do it within some statutory period of time. There is no requirement that HUD will perform this in a certain way. But just see if there is some way to help people who make these payments timely such that this can become a part of the additional credit information. Now. I am emphasizing "additional" because. quite frankly. I had "alternative" at one time. "alternative credit scoring." That created some confusion because we are not using this as an alternative. This becomes additional information. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-02-02
Speaker: AL GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. how much time do I have remaining? The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has 312 minutes remaining.