macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2006-03-28
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

I j want to piggyback on your obser tions. I am the least senior of the f of us. I am a freshman. and about months into my first term. We h talked many times on this floor in 30something Working Group about lack of outrage. the astonishing lac] outrage. the deafening silence on other side of theaisle about all tt things we are talking about. Why no hearings? Where is the countability? Why arent th~y dems ing some answers from this adminis tion about the results in Iraq. at how we got into Iraq. about the leac about the fact there were no wear of mass destruction? And how come havent had any hearings on the in ligence and whether that was manu tured. or was it shaped around the d sion that was already made ctearly this administration? Not one hear Not one hearing on almost anytl since I have been in the United Sti Congress. And what I have noticed. the ob vation I want to make is that we I had a very slow but now more rapid terioration of our system of checks balances. This Congress. the Re] lican leadership in this Congress ci care less about oversight. They wi just cede the whole ball of wax to administration. This administra has run amuck. That is how I reall3 lieve the American people feel. ThiE ministration has- been allowed. tc unchecked. unresponsive. No one any questions. You know what -was really irc what was really interesting. was thi appears as though the outrage built on the Republican side of aisle. our good friends on the Re lican side of the aisle. I noticed t was a whole lot of outrage that cropping up all over during the D Worlds Port deal. That sense of out on that side appeared to be in d proportion to the reduction in Presidents polling numbers. The li .his numbers got. the more out there appeared to be.I think that it probably would little bit more comforting for i Americans if the outrage was I consistent about Katrina and its a math. about the war inIraq. aboul deficit. about the debt. about the ruption. about the cronyism. and a the incompetence. This administr has veered so far off to the right. I is a stranglehold that the right hE the Republican leadership in this c try. They are so oat of the mainst. now.
Date: 2006-03-28
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Thank you. And what just keeps striking me about all of what we are saying is that it feels enveloped by the stranglehold that is around this administrations neck by the far right and that ideology. that the stranglehold of the far right on this administration and this Republican leadership drives their incompetence. drives their decisions on Iraq. drives their decisions on Katrina. or lack thereof. drives their decisions on the deficit. on the debt. We talk about incompetence. We talk about corruption and cronyism and incorhpetence. but you cannot detangle. disentangle their incompetence and their ideology because the two- are intertwined
Date: 2006-03-28
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

I will close just by saying this. It would be one thing. and the American people. I know. are understanding. this and have an evergrowing understanding with every day that passes and they observe this administration and the Republican leadership here. It would be one thing if they had the confidence .that. you know. they could just sub out the Republican individuals here and sub in another. a different Republican and get a more competent person. Unfortunately. it is not just that .the individuals here are incompetent or that this adminigtration is led by incompetence. It is that the ideology and the incompetence are so intertwined that it doesnt matter which Republican you swap in. We have seen the board lit up here where you have moderate Republicans. arms wrenched behind their back when. they are trying to express what is supposedly their conscience. and instead they are forced to vote according to the ideological stranglehold that is around the *neck of the Republican leadership and the Republican Party. And so it doesnt matter who you swap in and out. If the ideology doesnt change. which it is clearly not going to. then you will just get more the same. Just like you .will have more of the same in swapping the individual. one individual for another in the White House. as the President did today. and -what youwould see if we didnt make the change that is so necessary with the leadership in this country. I appreciate the opportunity to join my colleagues here again in the 30something Working Group.
Date: 2006-03-29
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker. traditionally. the higher education bill has been an opportunity for this Nation to pause and think about the role of higher education over the coming years in American society. in Americas economy. in Americas national security. Every 4 or 5 years we reauthorize that act. That is not what happened this time. and that is why you have opposition to this bill across the higher education community. across America from every sector. because we did not do that. Instead. the higher education bill was hijacked. It was hijacked by those in the Republican Party that wanted to take the savings from the student aid accounts and give them to the.oil companies and to the energy companies for their tax breaks. To continue to pay for the tax breaks for the wealthiest people in this country. they hijacked those moneys that Americas families. and students have been paying over the years. the excessive fees and excessive rates that they have- been paying. and rather than reinvest them in Americas future. rather than reifvest them in the institutions of higher education. in the families and students who are attending those institutions who are tryifig to get those advanced degrees to participate. they simply tobk that money 3 months ago and walked off with it. And now what we have here are the leftovers. the leftovers that state lofty principles and ideals. but fund none of them. The Budget Committee is slashing education funding. The caps have suggested that they want cuts beyond what the President has suggested in his budget. and that is the status of higher education in America today. What does it mean? Members recall
Date: 2006-03-29
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I hope this will not come out of his time. but I certainly want to associate myself with your remarks in thanking Sally for all of her work in a most cooperative way. but keeping us on our toes a lot of the time over here. So we thank you and wish her well for all of her service to the committee. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Chairman. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia .
Date: 2006-03-29
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I. too. want to thank the chairman of the committee and the ranking member and the chairman and ranking member of the subcommittee for their work on this important issue. However. I. too. reluctantly must oppose this bill because. I believe it falls short. and I think it would be wrong to give the American people. the impression that we are meeting the challenges in higher education when we are not. It was just 2 months ago that the President of the United States stood before this Chamber at the podium before us and delivered his State of the Union address. In that address. he told the people of this country the United States must do more to maintain our competitive %dge in the global economy. He was right about that..Those were fine words. and in fact. the Education and Workforce Committee has been debating and looking into those issues for some time now. but the issue is not identifying the problem. That is the easy part. The challenge is doing something about the problem. And inthat regard. .this body and the Bush administration. unfortunately. get failing grades. because we all understand that a key part of- maintaining our competitive edge in the global economy is to make sure we invest in the skills.and education of our work-" force. We need -to make sure our people have the training they need in what is increasingly a knowledgebased economy. andto do that. we need to make the necessary investments. Yet the day after the President stood before this Chamber and delivered his State of the Union address was the day this House passed a reconciliation bill that cut $12 billion out of the Federal student loan program: $12 billion. Now. we all know that usually when this higher education bill comes before this House. it contains those flnding provisions. the provisions for student assistance in this country. But. unfortunately. those were taken .out of this bill and dealt with separately and cut by $12 billion. So now this body doesnt have to. deal with that issue with the bill before us today. But those are the facts. We also need to invest more in our K12 education system. And it was just shortly after the President delivered -his State of the Union address that he delivered a budget that cut the No Child Left Behind from its authorized level. It was $15 billion short of what We had promised there. If we. are going to be serious about this issue. we need. to make a commitment at the national level to address the competitiveness challenges in our country. We dont do right by the American people when we say one thing on the big day of the State of the Union address and then we bring a bill before the Congress that doesnt contain the necessary investments in funding to make sure that we meet the challenges. And so. Mr. Chairman. I must reluctantly oppose this bill because it would be wrong to send a message we are doing something about the challenges when in fact we are not.
Date: 2006-03-29
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. we have seen the amendment and discussed it with the chairman. and we -have no objections to the amendment.
Date: 2006-03-29
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. you said several times "Middle Eastern." The fact of the matter is that any money from any source would be reported. is that correct?
Date: 2006-03-29
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I thank my colleague. the ranking member of the committee. and I am pleased to join with Mr. CASTLE -and my other colleagues in supporting this amendment. and I want to commend the gentleman froni Delaware for his leadership on this very. very important issue. I think it is vital in our Nation that we encourage more and more young people graduating from college to go into the teaching profession. to teach throughout our communities. but also to encourage many of them to go into those communities where they are most needed. where you have many more atrisk youth than others. That is what this. particular amendment does. and the Teach for America program is a great example of this idea in action. If you look at their history. you see it is one of making sure that we do do a better job of getting into communities with these young teachers. By 2010. Teach for America will increase the number of highly accom.plished recent college graduates teaching. in underserved urban and rural communities in the United States from 3.500 to 8.000 reaching nearly 700.000 underserved kindergartenl2th grade students every day. It recruits at over 500 colleges and universities across the country. and this year 19.000 individuals of all academic majors applied for the Teach for America program. They come from colleges all over the country and are represented with the full geographic diversity of our Nation. I am personally proud to say that 138 seniors from the University of Maryland system applied for the Teach for America program. And they do a great fob of encouraging more people. as I said. to get into the classroom. If you take a survey. and they did. 10 percent of those who were accepted to the Teach for America program stated that they would not have considered a career in education if they had not participated in this program. Currently. 60 percent of Teach for Americas .10.000 alumni are working within education to effect fundamental change. Last years 2005 National Teacher of the Year was a Teach for America alum and is still teaching math in the District of Columbia public school system. the same school system he began in 8 years* ago. So we want to encourage these students as they graduate and become teachers to go into these communities and then stay in those communities. So L think. Mr. Chairman. in closing. I just want to again commend my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their efforts in this area. I think it is a very. very important initiative and one that I commend to all our colleagues in this House.
Date: 2006-03-29
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Reclaiming my time. Mr. Chairman. I want to thank my colleagues for this amendment. I have had wonderful experience with the Teach for America teachers in my congressional district. This past week I was up in the Lakota Nation on the reservations of Rosebud and Pine Ridge. and met a number of Teach for America teachers there and the coordinators. And I think in that case. we always talk. about them being for 2 years. I think almost 30 percent of the teachers are planning to extend themselves for another year on those reservations. in Indian and public schools on the Indian reservations. and they are doing a magnificent job. So I would urge the passage of this amendment and thank Mr. CASTLE. Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. FORD. Mr. REGULA and
Date: 2006-03-29
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Madam Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank the gentleman for offering this amendment. I think it is an important addition to this legislation. and I urge my colleagues to support it. Madam Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2006-03-29
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I was disappointed to hear that once again the Womens Educational Equity Act is proposed for zero funding under the Fiscal Year 2007 budget. Since its inception in 1974. WEEA has proven an extremely effective in providing opportunities and support for young women.
Date: 2006-03-30
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I thank the gentleman fcr yielding. I. too. want to thank the gentlewoman for offering this amendment. and I would ask everybody to. support it. I thank her for all the work she does on behalf ol homeless youth. We appre-. ciate it. and I am sure they do too.
Date: 2006-03-30
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. if the gentleman would further yield. they could go to their own districts. This is common across the country. Young people are being held in locked detention because of the simple fact that we cannot get a diagnosis. We cannot put together a treatment plan because they are on a waiting list for the services. They do not get services. In many cases. those services have been ordered. but they do not get them. They get a waiting list. and you are right. then we pay this exorbitant cost to keep them in there. but more importantly. denying them the treatment that they need. So. increasing the number of providers so that we can address these concerns and these problems that young people have is just absolutely important. The idea of making these providers eligible for loan forgiveness is a service to our community. and I am sure that the House will support this amendment.
Date: 2006-03-30
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman and Members of the House. I oppose this amendment and I hope most of the Members of the House will also oppose this amendment. The issues that are called into question in this amendment. the use of. the gen.tleman said preferences. but of any data. any factors in deciding the makeup of a university student body has already been decided by the Supreme Court. The fact of the matter is that quotas are unlawful. but universities have a right to a diverse student population. and they are allowed to use a diverse range of factors in compiling that university. I believe that the King amendment goes beyond that decision. and the amendment also does not provide for the protection of student privacy. In fact. it does just the. opposite of that. The fact of the matter is this information is- already available to those parties who are interested. They can get it through the Freedom of Information Act or the universities. obviously. At least in our State. they are continuously discussing operating and changing and reviewing their admissions policy because they are in constant deterz mination of trying to provide diverse opportunities to a diverse population of qualified students. I would hope that we would reject this amendment. It is interesting that we just had an amendment we adopted to reduce paperwork. and now we are going to put on a whole new set of requirements of annual reports and different kinds of data and how it has to be collected and weighed and all the rest of it. with no showing that it has been improperly done or anything wrong has happened. We are just going. to load down the universities. Mr. MCKEON has an effort where he is trying to reduce the cost of higher education by making sure universities are not engaged in those practices that are not necessary and that drive up the cost. And this comes along. outside of the Supreme Court decisions. butside the current practices of universities and suggests that somehow they should just continue to develop this information with no showing or grievance. If a person has a grievanceor showing. or people are interested from an academic point of view. from a social policy point of view. or from any point of view. the fact of the matter is that the information is currently available. I wouldhope that we wouldreject this amendment when it comes to a vote in the House. Mr. Chairman. I yield to Mr. KILDEE.
Date: 2006-03-30
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I would just say it is an interesting academic study. and I am sure some of the information would be of interest to people. but why dont you just have the Department of Education periodically sort of select some universities and test it. rather than putting the burden on every university. whether large or small. rich or poor. private or public that has to .submit this information on an annual basis" where in fact there may not have been any compl aints or there is support for that policy. if it has been publicly reviewed or however they handle it. The suggestion here that every university would have to go through this process is just kind of a mindless Federal Government approach to imposing these burdens on people without consideration of the cost. the need. the results. or any of the rest of it. I thought we were getting away from that policy. Talk .about onesizefitsall. here is onesizefitsall. And when they say. well. we dont do that. -who. is going to check that that is really true? Yet you start this whole process. And I would say. by the way. that the names arent redacted. The Social Security numbers are not redacted.
Date: 2006-03-30
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself 5 minutes. The Democratic substitute has been made in order to address some critical shortcomings in the underlying bill. My cosponsors. Mr. KILDEE. Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. and
Date: 2006-03-30
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

stand between a qualified student and a colMr. Chairman. will the .gentleman lege education. Congress should riot miss an yield? . . % opportunity to help American families pay for
Date: 2006-03-30
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

good on our promise to put a college eduThat was a 6.8 cap with a variable rate cation within the reach of American students underneath. and families. I urge my colleagues to support
Date: 2006-03-30
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I rise today because I believe my Republican colleagues are sending a mixed message by offering this legislation. This bill increases the authorization for the maximum Pell grant to $6.000. reauthorizes funding for Hispanicserving institutions and historically Black colleges and universities. From the looks of this authorization bill. you. would think the majority leadership in this Congress cared about getting low- and middleincome students through college. .However. this authorization bill does not fund these programs. Just 2 months ago. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle voted. to cut student aid by $12 billion by passing the budget reconciliation bill. I dont understand why my Republican colleagues care more about giving tax breaks to the wealthy than helping low- and middleincome families send their children to college. . The budget reconciliation bill raised interest rates on. parent student loans. raised loan consolidation fees. and required that student and parent borrowers pay a 1 percent insurance fee on college loans. We need to do something to help people get through college. not charge them a 1 percent insurance fee and make their education even more expensive than it is now. � Since 2001. college tuition in this country has increased 40 percent. Students are graduating with over $17.000 of debt. And what has Congress done? Weve consistently flatfunded Pell and raised the maximum Pell award by small amounts that dont keep up with rising tuition rates. including this increase. When Pell first started. it covered over 70 percent of the average cost of a 4year education. Now. it pays for 30 percent of the cost of a college education. While I appreciate the effort of the bill sponsors to increase the Pell maximum grant. it is still not enough to truly help lowindome families send their children to college. I hope in the future appropriators will enable us to show a.true commitment to higher education by bringing us an appropriations bill that reflects the priorities outlined in H.R. 609. Working families need more than the num-. bers offered in this bill. they need to see real dollar. put into these programs. My Republican colleagues have not adequately funded the very programs they are on the floor supporting today. I hope that in the future. we fund the programs that are so important to us today.
Date: 2006-04-04
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I .too rise in support of House Joint Resolution 81 to appoint Dr. Phillip Frost of Florida for a 6year term as a citizen regent of the Smithsonian Institution. Dr. Frost. who is a medical doctor. is a noted collector of American abstract art and a philanthropist. who. since 1987. as was mentioned. has served as the chairman of the board and CEO of the IVAX Corporation. which develops and markets pharmaceutical products. Dr. Frost and his wife. Patricia. gave their 113piece collection of American abstract art to the Smithsonian American Art Museum in 1986. In another major philanthropic donation. they previously gave a $33 million gift to the University of Miami for its school of music. Subsequently. the school of music was named after Dr. Frost and his wife. Patricia. Dr. Frosts broad background in medicine. science. business. and culture will be a valuable asset to the Smithsonian. And. Madam Speaker. just as a personal aside. I have a personal relationship with Dr. Phil Frost. He is a renowned philanthropic contributor both in the community in south Florida and across this country. I have worked with him on several projects and also would like to note his deep commitment and involvement in the Jewish community in south Florida. and I km privileged to be able to stand before this House today and ask. unanimous support for this resolution. I urge my colleagues to support House Joint Resolution 81 so that this joint resolution can be signed into law before the May meeting of the Smithsonian regents.