macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

We have begun a proud tradition in south Florida. and we are looking forward to equaling over time the amazing success of the Boston Celtics. Having already experienced the joy of a national championship by the University of Florida Fighting Gators basketball team. basketball is alive and well in Florida. As you can see. we have some pretty good players down our way. But I want to jump off because Mr. RYAN did refer to the billions in debt. and you went through very eloquently. and I dont think people in America have a real idea. that is why I love that chart of the percentage of debt that each of those countries has of the United States. And when you graphically depict it across the entire country. it really. really drives the point home. But what I found. and I have a shorter tenure in Congress than you and Mr. MEEK and
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

You are absolutely right. and a little more reality to translate what we are talking about here into everyday economics. if you look at the 2006 tax reconciliation bill and compare it to benefit by income for the benefit that was given or the equivalent of the benefit to the amount of income that an American taxpayer brings in. for example under the 2006 tax cut legislation that passed out of this House overwhelmingly with Republican votes. an average American taxpayer that makes between $10.000 and $20.000 a year would get back enough to buy a Slurpee. But if you make between $40.000 and $50.000. you will get from the 2006 Republican tax cut bill about as much money to buy a gallon of gas. Now. if we are talking real benefits here. the realbenefits and who got the most out of the Republican tax cut bill this year. the reality is if you made more than $1 million. you get the equivalent of a Hummer. I dont know. if I am talking to the folks in my district. and I know the folks in Youngstown. Ohio. and the people on the Cape and in the Boston area. they probably. are not that interested in getting enough money back to buy a Slurpee. Something tells me. and at least when I go home. and I have a district that includes a lot of areas that have people of means. and I can tell you when I go to community events and bring my kids to the soccer game and drive my kids around in ourminivan. the people in the wealthiest parts of my district are coming up and saying keep the money because the needs we have in America are overwhelming. They are saying. you know What. I dont need the Slurpee. I can buy my own Hummer. If you are making more than a million dollars. you can buy your own Hummer.
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Yet the rank and file Republicans and the Republican leadership continue to try to profess that they are the party of fiscal responsibility. It is hilarious. It really is. In the legislature in Florida. we used to talk about statements like that not being able to pass the straightface test. It doesnt pass the straightface test. How do they say it without smirking? How do they say it without crossing their fingers and putting their fingers behind their back? We should check behind the backs of all of the Members when they are speaking on the floor here about how fiscally responsible they are because I am sure they are all like this. They cant cross themselves enough. It is really over the top. I was taught to tell the truth by my parents. Im incredulous how some of these Members get away with claiming fiscal responsibility.
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Look at this. To illustrate what you are talking about here. you have got interest rates that are bad enough in terms of interest people have to pay in order to get on top of their college loans. But college tuition itself has gone up. This is under the President. since President Bush has taken office. College tuition itself has gone up 40 percent. Then you take a look at gas prices which have gone up 47 percent. You take a look at health care costs. gone up 55 percent. This is the reality for Americans today. But median household income has dropped by 4 percent. I mean. dropped. So how are Americans supposed to make up this difference? What are they supposed to do when it comes to the income that they are bringing in and the everyday costs that are a part of their life? This is. like. for a mom who has got a bunch of kids. and she is trying to figure out how many of them she is going to be able to actually feed. which one do you let go? Which one is not important? Higher education? Putting gas in your car? How are you going to get to work? How are you going to get to the grocery store? How are you going to help your family day to day? How about health care? What happens. we all know. because everyones heard the story. I have constituents who dont even think about this stuff every day who can tell me. you know. most of the people that they know -who dont have health insurance have to wait til they are so sick that they have to take their family member or themselves to the emergency room so that they can get primary health care. I mean. which one do you eliminate? Which one is not important if your income is plummeting? Now. lets take a couple of other things that have happened under the Bush administration. You have got the typical family paying $1.200 more a year for health insurance. You have housing that is the least affordable that it has been in 14 years. I mean. just to give you an example. in the community that I live in. I represent south Florida. the average price of a house in the two counties that I represent is over $300.000. That is not affordable. I mean. that just puts home ownership completely out of bounds for. never mind the average person. even somebody making a decent living.
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

But this is the 30something Working Group. Mr. DELAHUNT. We identify. we are not. well. some of -us are not. that far from having been through exactly the situation.
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. DELAHUNT. let me just tell you. When my husband and I got married. wegot married in 1991. And I was 24 and my husband was 26. Within several months of getting married. we were able to buy our first home. We both had health insurance. We were not worried about how to put gas in our car. and neither one of us had college tuition debt. Fast forward to 15 years later. because I just celebrated my 15th wedding anniversary. and someone starting out just like we did eant afford a house in the community that I live in and represent. Literally they are driving their car around and have to pay more than $50 every single time. We couldnt have afforded that on the incomes that we made. We could back in 1991. but not. back in 1991 we could afford gas prices because they were in the $1 range. a little over a dollar. How are they supposed to do it? It is unfathomable.
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

What plan have you heard of from the other side of the aisle. from our good friends on the other side? Where is their economic plan? Where is their plan to fix it? What bills have they passed that reduce the deficit. that help Americans struggling to pay for gas. that help them pay for higher education? I mean. is it all you are on your own? It is all about you. and we are from the Government. and we are not here to help. We have a plan. We have a new direction for America which is laid out right there. I hear a lot of the Republicans on the other side of the aisle accusing us of not having a plan. We have got one. Where is theirs? Because if we keep going in this direction. we are headed for more deficit and more of our citizens twisting in the wind.
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. DELAHUNT. you are absolutely right. The contrast here is that when it comes to actually improving the economy and beginning to go in a new direction. the Republicans have no plan at all. More of the same. More deficits. more tax cuts for the wealthiest among us. more people who are going to go uninsured. more of the same. as opposed to the Democrats new direction for America. Mr. RYAN. that you have on the easel next to you. And I think it would be useful to take. Mr. Speaker. the Members through what the Democrats plan is if we take the majority back of this institution and the things that we would implement if we were able to actually implement an agenda..
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Sure. What former .House Speaker. leader of the Republican revolution on this Republican Congress said. he cited a series of blunders. You referred to our Republican colleagues incompetence a minute ago. Mr. DELAHUNT. Well. former Speaker Gingrich "cited a series of blunders under Republican rule from failures in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina." which we have been talking about this evening. "to mismanagement of the war in Iraq. He... said the government has squandered billions of dollars in Iraq." And our good friend Mr. TANNER. whom you just talked about. and the audit he wants to accomplish once we are in the majority. he analogized that legislation to a mechanic looking under the hood because that is really what is necessary here. I think I would want to make sure I had some Purell with me after we looked under the hood when the Republicans are put aside and maybe have a mask just so that I wouldnt become infected by some of the mismanagement and gross incompetence that has clearly occurred here under Republican rule. I mean. a deficit of more than $8 trillion. a debt that is more in the time that President Bush has been in office than all previous 42 Presidents combined. a war in Iraq that has created a cesspool in a country that was in bad shape to start with. but that literally the situation that they are in now in Iraq with the terrorism on the rise that exists there was created by this President and the Republicans war.
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

If the gentleman from Ohio would yield. because the contrast to what is going on in the cesspool that has been created by the Republican leadership in Iraq is that if we were in the majority in this Congress. we would implement the real security agenda. We would focus on making sure that there was a plan in Iraq so that we can train the Iraqi troops to take care of the business at hand in Iraq on their own and begin to phase out our involvement there. Yet there is no plan to do that. There is no timetable. There isnt anything coming from this President that would say when a percentage of Iraqi troops are prepared. that we are going to pullout X percentage of Americans troops. We have to make sure we start focusing on the terrorism here at home. What happens instead. in the debate we had the other day. where it should have been a debate. like you said. it was not a debate. but in the basic fillbuster. singlesubject filibuster in. which we were afforded no opportunity to present or talk about our alternative. instead you had bobblehead after bobblehead on the other side of the aisle just come up to the podium and shake their head up and down and say exactly what the administration wanted them to say. Then they put their votes up on the board and did exactly what was expected of them. vote to rubberstamp the exact same staythecourse policy that Americans clearly have indicated they do not want to continue. I dont know what hometown these people are going home to.
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

So that way we can get back to talking about what Americans priorities are here. making sure their kids can afford college. making sure when they are sick they can go to the doctor. but right now they cant because 46 million Americans dont have health insurance. making sure that gas prices arent over $3 a gallon. with record profits going to the oil industry. and this Congress. led by the Republicans. passing legislation twice last summer with every single Republican voting yes and them holding the vote open at least 40 minutes to make sure that they could twist enough arms to give away subsidies to an oil industry that is already making more money than they know what to do with. I mean. if you were watching Meet the Press on Sunday and you saw the three CEOs of the oil industry just completely not getting that they need to be part of this solution. and no one in this Congress. that is leading this Congress. except for us. who are making every attempt. no one asking the oil industry to step up and invest their revenue from their profits into alternative energy resources. It is just absolutely unbelievable.
Date: 2006-06-19
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

ExxonMobil. invested $10 million. and made $30 billion. $10 million in alternative energy last year. That is what they talked about on Meet the Press on Sunday. I mean. give me a break. Where is the commitment? Where are the priorities?
Date: 2006-06-20
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise today to address an ongoing moral crisis in this Congress and this administration. Through fiscal irresponsibility and corporate welfare. this Congress has eroded away at American values and standards. and decent. hardworking Americans are the ones paying the price. As Americans. we believe that anyone who works 40 hours a week. 365 days a year should be able to afford basic necessities for themselves and their families. The reality is that there are millions of workers out there trying to support their families on $5.15 per hour. and I think my state has most of them. And as everyone knows. $5.15 does not buy you a lot nowadays. Each day. millions of minimumwage workers are forced to choose between food. shelter. health care. or clothing. No American who works hard for a livifhg should have to make those types of choices. Mr. Speaker. it has been an appalling 9 years since we have seen an increase in the Federal minimum wage. The LaborHHS appropriations bill includes a provision to raise the minimum wage to $7.25. hardly a living wage. This was a chance for Congress to do the right thing. but the bill has not been sent.
Date: 2006-06-20
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. this week House Republicans will attempt to distance themselves from their 5year record of fiscal irresponsibility when they try to put through a lineitem veto. You may remember that President Bush said that he needed the lineitem veto in his State of the Union speech this year. This is nothing but a hoax. President Bush and the Republicancontrolled Congress have been partners in creating record deficits since taking control. complete control of our government in 2001. Over that time. more than 1.000 bills have been sent to the President to sign. and he has signed all of them. each and every one. And now the President wants a lineitem veto. If he was really concerned about the way the House Republican Congress is spending American taxpayer money. one would think that the President would have. voted some of these bills down which were sent to his desk. But. no. The President and the Republican Congress have turned a $5 trillion surplus into a $4 trillion deficit. And they have nobody to blame but themselves. So if the President really wanted to do something about spending. he should take some action now and veto some of these bills.
Date: 2006-06-20
Speaker: LINDA T. SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr.. Speaker. this week the LaborH appropriations bill was supposed to be on the floor. but at the last minute. the House Republican leadership stripped th bill from the schedule. It appears that the GOP is delaying a vote on this bill solely because it includes an incrpase in the minimum wage. The minimum wage is now at its lowest point in half a century. Last week the Appropriations Committee voted to gradually increase the minimum wage. This increase will provide a muchneeded boost to 7 million Americans. hardworking people who get up every morning and go to work. It is unfortunate that for almost a decade the Republican leadership has been forcing working families to make impossible choices. choices between paying the rent and buying groceries or between paying the heating bill and buying muchneeded prescription medication. An increase in the minimum wage is about fairness. and that is why the American people overwhelmingly support an increase. Now that the House Appropriations Committee has acted. it is time for the Republican leadership to bring this bill up for a vote. Mr. Speaker. the American people have had enough of not having enough to get by. IRAQ
Date: 2006-06-20
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. thank you for recognizing me for some comments on H.R. 5631 and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this balanced bill that supports our troops and addresses critial issues to our Nations safety and security. This bill provides $500 million in funding above the Presidents request for the equipment needs of the Army National Guard to provide items needed for homeland defense and disaster response. This funding is important to our district in Houston because it is susceptible to floodingas we are seeing right nowand the National Guard has played a critical role in responding to past tropical storms and hurricanes in our district and along the Gulf Coast. Many Guard units are leaving equipment in Iraq when they finish their tour for future troops to use. This cuts down on transportation costs. but it also leaves units here in the U.S underequipped to respond to a natural disaster. The funding in this bill is necessary to ensure Guard units here at home have the equipment to respond to these events. I also want to speak briefly on two important projects included in this bill. The first is the University of Houston Consortium for Nanomaterials for Aerospace Commerce and Technology (CONTACT). For the past four years. the University of Houston has been partnering with several University of Texas System institutions. Rice University. and the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) -in the Strategic Partnership for Research in Nanotechnology (SPRING). Federal funding for SPRING will end in FY06. and CONTACT will carry on the work started under that partnership. CONTACT will have two main goals: to ensure our national air superiority through nanomatedals research and development. and to commercialize nanomaterials developed by scientists from Texas universities. This funding will make use of existing infrastructure and enable research. development and technology transfer that address three critical capabilities of the Air Force: power on demand. reconfigurable fullspectrum detectors. and interdisciplinary fundamental nanoscience and engineering. The second project will modernize the Standard Army Retail Supply Systems (SARSS) and Standard Army Ammunition System (SAAS) and combine the two systems into one by rewriting it in a Microsoft Windows environment. This programthe Army Legacy Logistics Systems Modernization (SAMSE)-modemizes computer logistics systems that are critical to the operation of the Army making them more efficient. This effort will link the STAMIS modules through the web. allowing for a sharing of information and a flexible supply chain that can be redirected seamlessly on the battlefield. The result will be more efficient field logistics management that will save money and provide soldiers with more dependable and reliable management systems. I applaud the Subcommittee and Committee for putting forward this balanced bill and urge my colleagues to join me in supporting it.
Date: 2006-06-20
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the last word. . Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to join with my colleagues in offering this amendment. I think we should all be able to agree on a couple things. This is an extremely important issue. It should be beyond partisan politics. We should use all our means to intercept communications from al Qaeda for our national security. We should also abide by the rule of law. The rule of law is not an a la carte thing. You dont get to pick and choose which laws you like and which .laws you dont like. We dont say to the American people when we pass statutes in this Congress and they are duly signed by the President in accordance with the Constitution. pick the ones you like to comply with and ignore the ones we dont like. Well. this President and any President should not be held to any different standard than the American people when it comes to abiding by laws duly passed by this Congress and signed by the President in accordance with the Constitution. and that is what this debate is all about. The amendment is very simple. It is so straightforward. I am just going to read a portion of it right now. "None of the funds made available in this act may be used to engage in electronic surveillance in the United States except as authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978" and other chapters cited here. In other words. comply with the laws passed by this Congress and signed by the President. Now. we have heard from our colleagues on the Intelligence Committee to trust us. this is a needed program. A lot of us havent had the benefit of that information. But I would say. many of us have not disputed the need for the program. Maybe we should have this program. We certainly want to intercept any communications from al Qaeda. But it does concern me that the members of the same Intelligence Committee cannot tell us whether or not the program as it is currently configured is complying with FISA. That certainly is not a classified thing. whether or not it is configured to comply with FISA. The fact that the members of the Intelligence Committee cannot tell us whether it is configured with FISA or not is troubling.
Date: 2006-06-20
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. reclaiming my time. absolutely. If it complies with FISA. it is fine. Now. what is troubling is the Attorney General was asked way back why he didnt come to Congress to seek changes to the law to accommodate this program. and he said he considered that possibility. but then he didnt think Congress would pass it. Well. if that is your conclusion. you dont get to just say. well. I am going to ignore the law and circumvent it. You have to work with Congress. What is really troubling is I think all of us here. if we heard the same information that members of the Intelligence Committee say they have access to. would also conclude it may be a necessary program. But if it is. lets put it within the confines of the law. That is all this amendment does. Yes. it authorizes electronic surveillance. We want it to authorize electronic surveillance. But we want to authorize electronic surveillance within the confines of existing law. and if existing law cant accommodate that program. lets come back here. lets pass a statute and change it. Those who say. FISA hasn.t been changed. it is outdated. the fact of the matter is we have made eight changes to FISA since its enactment in 1978. We can make more changes to FISA right now to accommodate this program. But lets just make it clear: If you dont think you can get a law passed by the Congress. you dont get to choose to ignore it. It is not an a la carte system. Our Constitution is based on the rule of law. We can protect the American people. we can intercept al Qaeda communications. and we can do it in accordance with the rule of law. I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment.