macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2011-03-01
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. todays legislation proposes to extend Federal Government operations for an additional two weeks while cutting roughly $4 billion in spending from FY 2011. if the proposed cuts are ultimately extended for the rest of the fiscal year. Democrats understand the need to get serious about our deficits and debt. but we also understand the difference between making smart. deliberate cuts to spending while maintaining targeted investments that create jobs. grow our economy and strengthen our international competitiveness. In that regard. I am especially disappointed that the majority did not make in order an amendment offered by ranking Member DICKS. which would have restored some of the education cuts in todays bill by finding the necessary savings in unused Census funds. It seems to me those are the kinds of distinctions. priorities and choices this body should be able and willing to make. Furthermore. based on our experience with H.R. 1. 1 am concerned that the majority is ignoring the explicit advice of two fiscal commissions and a growing chorus of bipartisan commentators warning that we must not in the guise of fiscal discipline cut so indiscriminately. so fast that we sabotage job creation and weaken our ongoing economic recovery. Madam Speaker. sooner rather than later. we need to come to a final agreement on federal spending for the rest of FY 2011. That agreement should chart a credible course towards long term fiscal sustainability while making the kinds of investments that will allow us to win the future in the 21st century.
Date: 2011-03-01
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Madam Speaker. I rise today in support for H.J. Res. 44. the Continuing Resolution (CR) to make further continuing appropriations for Fiscal Year 2011 to keep our Federal Government open through March 18. 2011. Though I have serious reservations about this CR offered by my Republican colleagues. I absolutely refuse to let our Federal Government close on my watch. Allowing the Federal Government to close while this nation continues to recover from its economic downturn does no good for anyone. Closure of the Federal Government at this juncture would deal a crushing blow to the people all over the United States who are looking to Congress to do its part in bringing about muchneeded economic relief and to get this country back on course. Moreover. states all around this nation are in the midst of recovering from their own economic crises. The closure of the federal government would deal them a crushing blow. Worse still. it would only serve to increase the hardship and suffering visited upon the citizens of those states. We must remember that these citizens are also our constituents and we must not let unfettered zeal to make spending cuts blind us to the point where we allow cuts to the funding necessary for economic recovery. This insufficient. fake CR contains many horrible cuts to important programs. It unjustly heaves a heavy weight upon the backs of the American people who should not be made to bear this burden. These cuts include but are not limited to: Critical Education Funding at All Levels from Head Start to Higher Education Health and Human Services Funding Energy Funding Critical Transportation Funding Military and Veterans Affairs Funding Science and Technology and NASA Funding However. this is only a twoweek CR and the critical funding it cuts can be recouped and restored. I look forward to fighting hard over the next two weeks to restore this crucial funding. The cuts contained in this CR squarely impact the people and programs we need to support the most in order to bring about job creation and sustained economic growth. I am committed to doing all that I can to restore these funds while making fiscally responsible. well deliberated appropriations for funding the Federal Government for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2011. I urge my colleagues to join me in this commitment.
Date: 2011-03-01
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Marchant Speaker. yesterday I came to the floor Young (FL) of the House. and I think I was genuinely pleading with my colleagues in er vote from responding to the tragedy of an incident that occurred last Thursday. when a person who was supposed to have ed his vote been attending to seven babies under 3 years old now has been found allegedly as passed. to have left to have gone grocery shopping. to have come back to a grease fire in the kitchen. and to have found that four babies. 3 and under. were killed. Two are now in the burn unit. These are possibly babies supported by Federal funding for child careby someone porte Pursu 22 years old and licensed by the State ionthe unfinof Texas. In all we do to provide fundronal of the ing for desperate parents. can we at royal oft te least expect the criteria to be reasonwill put deabe able? Now we have the District Attorneys .peakers ap- Office indicating that they cant find the suspect. that he has fled because they waited 3 days to file any charges against someone who was responsible for four dead babies. We understand they have asked the U.S. Marshal. We dont even know whether they have E PANE asked the State Department to help. It is a crying shame. and I am getting to the bottom of it. Dead babies ?ennsylvania deserve justice. ission to adte and to re-
Date: 2011-03-01
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. I rise to join the vast majority of Americans. on both sides of the gun debate. who want a safe and sensible gun policy for their families and for the United States of America. In the aftermath of the recent tragedy in Tucson. one eminently reasonable place to startone place where gun rights advocates and gun control advocates should be able to find common groundis the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act . introduced by my colleague Rep. CAROLYN
Date: 2011-03-02
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. this 1minute is from the heart. and it disturbs me and baffles me for a country that I love. I dont believe there is anything more precious than for Members to stand up and pledge allegiance to this great Nation and to be taught as children about the American Dream. Thats why Democrats have focused their life journey on creating jobs for Americans. Thats why we dont want to engage in frivolous budgeting that causes us to lose jobs. But why are Governor Walker of Wisconsin. Governor Kasich of Ohio and Governor Daniels of Indiana demonizing the American Dream. demonizing workers. teachers. transit workers. police and firefighters? Does anyone know that Wisconsin public workers offered $100 million last year to be able to help the State and have already committed to helping them this year? But. no. union busting is not union busting. It is quashing the American Dream. making it a crime to organize workers. What is America? I beg of them to stand against this kind of dastardly act. Democrats are fighting for jobs. Where is the American Dream?
Date: 2011-03-03
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. as I have done before. I rise today in strong support of eliminating the 1099 paperwork requirement on small businesses. In fact. I would remind my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that the only reason we are here todaythe main reason this is still an issue at allis because House Republicans opposed eliminating this provision when the Small Business Tax Relief Act of 2010 was brought to the floor of the House in July of last year. So this issue isnt new. and it really isnt a question of whether there is bipartisan agreement to repeal this onerous requirement. There is. The question is how you pay for it. And thats where todays bill goes astray. We can and should repeal the 1099 reporting requirement. But we should not do it on the backs of middle class Americans buying health insurance for their families who are playing by the rules and complying with the law. And I would point out that the law theyre complying with received a near unanimous vote of 4092 this past December. I stand ready and willing to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to find an acceptable way to pay for this repeal before the requirement takes effect in 2012. But I strongly believe that effort should focus on ending any of the myriad loopholes and unjustified subsidies in current law before imposing an effective tax increase on the middle class.
Date: 2011-03-03
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Madam Speaker. I voted against the H.R. 4. the "Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act of 2011" commonly known as "the 1099 provision". I would like to submit a statement for the RECORD to clarify my position on this issue. Forms 1099 have been used by the IRS for decades to better track income. The rules would have required businesses to file Form 1099 with the IRS to report payments made to corporations for goods and certain services to help the IRS collect taxes that are legally owed. and in turn. keep taxes lower for all taxpayers. Although I support the measure in principle. I do believe this type of reporting keeps track of what businesses owe the federal government in taxes and close any loopholes for any misreporting. In fact. during the 111th Congress. a repeal bill was approved by the Democratic House that would close tax loopholes for companies that ship jobs overseas and protected people from any tax increases with incomes below 400 percent of the federal poverty level (approximately $88.000 for a family of four) from having to pay back the IRS their tax credit if they saw a change in income. The Republican 1099 repeal removes this protection. So. if a family earning $88.000 a year gets a $250 Christmas bonus. and because of it. are bumped up to 401 percent of the federal poverty level. this family would be required to refund to the IRS the entire tax credit of $4.640out of their own pockets. As a Senior Member of Congress who proudly represents a vibrant small business sector. I know firsthand the value of small businesses in north Texas. I remain committed to improving tax administration and enhancing voluntary tax compliance without making the middle class pay. I look forward to working collaboratively with the small business community to improve the ability of small businesses to meet their tax obligations.
Date: 2011-03-03
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. on Monday. I met with parents of young children in Davie. Florida. in my district who attend early childhood education classes at Crayons Child Care. We spoke about how vital early education is in the development of young children. how early education increases high school graduation rates. how 50 years of solid research has shown that early childhood education reduces crimes and delinquency and yields up to a $7 return on every dollar invested. Unfortunately. though. with the passage of H.R. 1 just over a week ago. this body made the largest cut to education in our Nations history. Now. we all understand that our Nation needs to cut spending. but the society that balances its budgets on the back of its children should not be surprised when the spine of its future is broken. These children are 2. 3. and 4 years old. but the response from Republicans in the House of Representatives is that they would pay for it. That just doesnt make sense. It is morally wrong.
Date: 2011-03-08
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. just a few minutes ago I had the privilege of listening to Janice Kay Bobholz. a deputy sheriff from Wisconsin. Courtney Johnson. a teacher from Ohio. Ryan Fagg. an electrician from Indiana. Lynne Radcliffe. a school support staff from Ohio. and Tom Guyer. a U.S. Army veteran and a parole officer from Ohio. all of them pleading with this Congress to intervene or to cease the nonsense of their Governors who are union busting and breaking the backs of middle class Americans. They all explained how the unions were eager to work with these States on health and pension benefits. but yet. because of special interests and large corporate donors and private conversations of the Governor of Wisconsin talking about breaking the backs of the special 14 who are trying to stay out to help the working middle class. they are in trouble. Rather than creating jobs. rather than creating jobs as we are trying to do as a Democratic Caucus working on behalf of the American people. what we have is. frankly. a horrible undermining of rights in this country.
Date: 2011-03-08
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

I thank the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey for yielding. I thank Dr. BURGESS for his courtesies and also Mr. TOWNS for this legislation. Mr. Speaker. I rise to support H.R. 570 because. in having come from the gulf coast and in having gone through Hurricanes Katrina. Rita and Ike just in a few short years. I have seen the devastation of communities and know that a holistic approach to health care is vital. We have a vibrant dental community in Houston. Texas. In particular. I want to note that Senior Dr. Zeb Poindexter has served on the American Dental Board and is an enthusiastic supporter of accessing dental care services to the poor. When there is a hurricane or a natural disaster of some form. everybody falls into the same boat. After the devastation. again. of a tornadoor of a hurricane and of the tragic incident that occurred this past weekend in Louisiana. individuals are facing many needs. so having medical professionals assist them or even to provide them specific dental care after the devastation. having the dental community be a part of this disaster response team. is an excellent idea. I join my colleagues in recognizing the importance of access to dental care for those individuals facing disaster and also the importance of increasing the opportunity for poor Americans who likewise need access to dental care. Dental care can impact ones health. We have seen that in the past. and we have seen that with children. So I believe this legislation is in the right direction. and I add my support to it. I know that the gulf region will appreciate the fact that the dental personnel and professionals are added to our disaster relief efforts and our first responders who will respond to any disaster.
Date: 2011-03-10
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chair. I rise in opposition to H.R. 830. the FHA Refinance Program Termination Act. This legislation would end the FHAs shortterm refinance program authorized under the Troubled Asset Relief Program. A program designed to help homeowners refinance their existing mortgage for lower interest rates. With declining home values. borrowers are caught in mortgages that they can no longer afford. This is because their rates have reset or because their interestonly payments have not allowed them to grow any equity in their homes. They are making their paymentsbut just barely. Mr. Chair. we should continue to help hard working Americans who are paying their bills on time every month stay in their homes. Ending this vital recovery program with no alternative plan is just wrong. The Republicans reckless spending proposals will move our country backwards not only domestically but globally. Eliminating this program will cost us more in the longterm. While I believe cuts are necessary to address the Nations longterm fiscal problems. it must be done responsibly and with the American publics interest in mind. I encourage my colleagues to oppose this bill.
Date: 2011-03-10
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chair. the FHA Refinance Program proposed for termination in todays legislation is designed to provide distressed homeowners mortgage relief by using FHA loan guarantee authority to incentivize holders of existing single family loans to reduce the outstanding principal balance of their loans by at least 10% in conjunction with an FHA refinance when the principal balance of a borrowers loan is greater than the propertys current value. Importantly. participating homeowners must be current on their existing loan. and all other FHA safety and soundness underwriting standards continue to apply. Any losses under the program are covered by funds already set aside by the TARP. adding no additional exposure to the FHAs capital reserves. Mr. Chair. while I am aware ofand frankly. to some extent sympathetic tothe criticism and frustration around the pace and scope of this program to date. I would also point out that it has only been operational since October of last year. Furthermore. as a purely voluntary program. its success clearly hinges on the active participation of our major loan servicers. two of whomWells Fargo and Ally Financialhave just recently announced their intention to let qualified borrowers take advantage of the program. Finally. with an estimated one in five homeowners currently underwater on their mortgages. it is clear to me that the housing crisis is not yet behind us. By providing struggling but creditworthy homeowners with a reduced monthly payment and a mortgage that is more aligned with actual property values. the FHA Refinance Program can help prevent foreclosures and stabilize the housing market. which is in every Americans long term interest.
Date: 2011-03-10
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

First of all. the gentleman from Alabama was arguing the merits of the legislation. These are findings that pertain to the results that would occur from the language in the bill. The bill is eliminating the existing funds or leftover funds for FHA refinance. The amendment clearly lays out the impacted persons connected to the elimination. Therefore. this is germane because it relates to the language of the amendment and the intent of the amendment. Twelve million people left behind. thousands of homeowners in different States. and the fact that there is no other solution to these homeowners except FHA refinance. it is a germane amendment. The findings are simply laying out the impact. We do that in all of our bills to put findings on what the impact of legislation would be. I ask the Chairman to consider the gentleladys amendment being germane. The findings are germane. and it is doing simply that of listing the elements of the impact of this legislation. I ask for a waiver of the point of order.
Date: 2011-03-10
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Madam 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 all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
Date: 2011-03-10
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Madam Chair. I rise today in support of this amendment that I am sponsoring. My amendment replaces the FHA Refinance Program Termination Act and would allow the use of unexpended funds to create a program that will allow qualifying homeowners to apply to refinance a 30year mortgage at 4 percent as long as the mortgage they are refinancing is on their primary home. that they are up to date on their mortgage. and that their annual income. adjusted gross income. does not exceed $180.000. People back home are hurting. and they are desperate to keep their home. I know there are many who have lost their homes. There are some who are behind on payments. and they havent kept up with their payments. but what about the people who have actually held onto their home? They have actually paid. They have had to actually give up their car. they are walking to work. they are taking the bus because they understand how important it is for them to hold onto their house because a house is not just a house. Your primary residence is your home. It is where your kids are. It is where they find a stable life. So while this program is not perfectthere is not a perfect program we have come up withwe have tried to help people who have been losing their houses. people who through no fault of their own. who have either lost their jobs. have had to take a lesser job. who were swindled. who were talked into loans they didnt understand what they were signing because they were hit by the subprime lenders. and they are paying too much. and people are sometimes paying in the double digits with respect to their loan. Maybe they are at 10 percent or 9.5 percent 12 percent on their loan. This program would actually say to those who somehow have held on. we are going to refinance your primary home at 4 percent because there are a lot of people who could do this and their payment would come down significantly. but today. they cant refinance. To refinance today on a 30year loan is 4.9 percent. There are a lot of people who are paying 8 percent. It means a lot. It could be anywhere between $2 and $2.000 in their payment a month. But they cant qualify. They dont have the chunk of money they need. their home is underwater. et cetera. So this is a very important thing we could do. Lets take the money. Lets take that money that we have not spent on this program and lets put it to help the people who have done the right thing. the people who. no matter what. have continued to pay on their loan. because there are many of them out there. I would hope that we could find a compromise. that we could find a way in which we can keep people in their homes. No program is perfect. but I think we have the opportunity to do the right thing. Madam Chair. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2011-03-10
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Madam Chair. this is about eliminating a program. I understand that those people who are behind on their payments. youre just going to let them go. Youre just going to let them lose their home. Then theyre going to have a hard time finding an apartment. I understand that. But this is about helping the people who truly. the middle class. the lowerincome class. who have a home. who need to hold onto that home. I do believe that this is germane to the underlying bill. I respectfully request that we consider this amendment. The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to speak to the point of order? If not. the Chair is prepared to rule. The gentlewoman from Illinois makes a point of order that the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California violates clause 10 of rule XXI by proposing an increase in mandatory spending over a relevant period of time. Pursuant to clause 10 of rule XXI and clause 4 of rule XXIX. the Chair is authoritatively guided by estimates from the chair of the Committee on the Budget that the net effect of the provisions in the amendment would increase mandatory spending over a relevant period of time as compared to the bill. Accordingly. the point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order.
Date: 2011-03-11
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. it is difficult to sit and not say anything about how we are damaging our future. We cannot consider the kind of cuts that are proposed to our future and think that this country will be prosperous. This plan eliminates the funding for math and science partnerships. We must make strategic investments in STEM education in order to maintain a competitive workforce. This plan eliminates Even Start. Reading is Fundamental. and Striving Readers. It cuts more than $1 billion from Head Start. This represents a massive setback for youth who are most in need. This plan is especially damaging for our youngest children just beginning their academic careers. These children will fall behind before they even get started. The Reading is Fundamental program has provided books for young children whose families cannot afford them. Mr. Speaker. we must not allow our country to continue to fall behind in competitiveness.