macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Let me thank the ranking member and chairman of the Rules Committee. Today. I rise to discuss just one portion of the National Defense Authorization Act. It is a section of the conference report that supports our Nations first responders. and I signed the conference report for that section only. In July of last year. I introduced legislation to reauthorize two programsthe Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program. the AFG Program. and the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Program. the SAFER Program. These programs were created to help local fire departments across the country maintain and increase their capacity to do all that we ask them to do each day. including fighting fires. responding to medical emergencies. and providing safety and aid in the face of disasters. either natural or manmade. Maintaining the equipment. training. and personnel to safely and swiftly respond to calls for assistance is increasingly difficult. Fire departments around the country have been forced to lay off firefighters and to do without needed equipment and training. The fire grant programs have played an important role in helping local fire departments overcome some of these challenges. providing over $6 billion in assistance since the year 2000. These grants have been essential to maintaining public safety in many communities. and theyre even more important in the face of our shrinking local budgets. Fire is a serious problem in the United States. killing over 3.000 people a year. which is a rate higher than in all other industrialized countries. Additionally. each year. nearly 20.000 people are injured. over 100 firefighters are killed in the line of duty. and $10 billion in property is lost due to fire.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I too believe in military preparedness. coming from a State like Texas. where the population of men and women who have served or are serving in the United States military is renowned and appreciated. As I look at the tourists who walk through the Halls. I wonder which of those young people will take an oath and join the United States military. And so when I see raises for the troops. it pleases. I think. all of us. Im concerned about the Afghanistan timeline. I had hoped that it could be expedited. I certainly do commend the Iron Dome because we saw it work with respect to Israel. I question. however. the drones that may have collateral damage. But I do think its important that this bill does. in fact. make a commitment to protecting the women and children in Afghanistan. responds to the issues dealing with sexual assault against military personnel. and particularly women. and is strong on Iran sanctions. But I rise today as well because I think when we talk about people. and we talk about the men and women of the United States military. we talk about their health. And yesterday. in the Rules Committee I raised this point and I raise it again. Im going to support this bill because I think itll make a leap of faith and commitment to finding the cause of triple negative breast cancer. I mentioned yesterday in the Rules Committee that triple negative breast cancer cells are usually of a higher grade and size. onset at a younger age. more aggressive and more likely to metastasize. In fact. the survival rate for breast cancer. but on triple negative. people are diagnosed and they die in months. maybe a year. such as my constituent. Yvonne Williams. a wonderful health professional who left a husband and two children. Or maybe the young lady who stopped me when I was walking in the Race for the Cure and said. my mother. a Hispanic woman. got triple negative breast cancer. We did everything we could. and she died within months. Apart from surgery. the only relief is cytotoxic chemotherapy. its only available treatment. Targeted molecular treatments. while being investigated. are not accepted treatment for this disease. As I speak today. there are women who may be listening. or others who realize that either their loved one or they may be diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer. and they understand the impact. Whether they are Caucasian or Asian or Hispanic or African American. this disease has not been able to be treated like breast cancers in the other stages. So I offered an amendment that the House accepted. I think it is an important amendment because what it spoke to is that we need to pinpoint and focus in on what is the cause of this disease. And it called for the triple negative breast cancer patients to be identified earlier in the progression of their disease and to develop targets on molecular and biomolecular issues. But through that amendment. I must say. although I wanted the specific language. the House was able to hold its position.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

I thank the gentlelady. the ranking member from the Rules Committee. and I thank the chairman of the Rules Committee. Mr. Speaker. when I mention the words Hurricane Sandy and the tragedy in Newtown. Connecticut. many would wonder what do they have in common? The enormous gun tragedy. a loss of 26 lives. and Americans suffering from a devastating storm. Certainly our hearts go out for those babies who were lost. But it really speaks to Americans in need. And I guess thats why Im so troubled to be on the floor today. because the framework that we have says to America that when youre in need. we will not. as this Congress and as this government. be prepared to help you. I think what is disappointingand I know for the Speaker it is probably the same case as Im speaking. because just about 3 days ago we thought there was a deal between the White House and the framework that was offered and the leadership of this House. Its disappointing that. in the course of a couple of days. weve come to a situation where this plan. Plan B. raises only about $300 billion from highincome households. and the Center on Budget Priorities suggests that millionaires will get $108.500 per million. over $1 million in tax cuts. But what will the middle class get? Plan B allows the old preBushor Bush tax cuts to continue the itemized deductions for the rich. giving them more opportunity to keep their money. In fact. we will lose $400 billion. under this plan. in highincome revenues. Disappointing. But at the same time. there is a thought that we should cut Social Security by changing the way Social Security is calculated. so that if a senior buys cheap food. that means they need cheap Social Security. and we cut their Social Security benefits because we thought there was a deal. I cant agree with that at all. cutting Social Security. and I cant agree with recalculating how a senior gets their check. But I will tell you that this plan raises taxes rather than reduces it. as the President wants to do. as this House of Democrats wants to do. as the Senate bill. where 180plus Democrats have signed. This raises taxes $1.000 on 25 million working families. And then there is a mysterious bill that. I guess. suggests that we are in the business of making cuts. But you know what that will do? And by the way. theres no sequester plan in this plan that is here. It cuts education. research. and national security. but it also cuts the hardworking Americans who are yet employed. and it cuts off 2 million of them. unemployment insurance. It cuts out doctors.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

I thank the gentleman for his inquiry. When we started out with the Plan B. there was no sequester plan. Obviously. there was a mysterious offering last evening.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Reclaiming my time. I thank the gentleman. In the original Plan B that I assume the Rules Committee was to address last evening through the distinguished chairperson. there was no sequester plan. We were in a posture of cutting education and research. Yes. you are right. In the creative work of your staff. as you said right here on the floor of the House. late into the night you found the reconciliation that had been addressed in the summer. I believe. and all of us. a lot of us. voted against it. All of us voted against it. and we understand that that plan will have no traction in the United States Senate. I thank the gentleman for his work. but what Im suggesting is there is no sequester plan. There was no sequester plan with the Plan B. And as I was saying. if I can quickly go back. Madam Ranking Member. without this plan. what we leave in place with Plan B. which really troubles me. coming from the Texas Medical Center and meeting with the hospital before I left Houston. it cuts reimbursements for doctors seeing Medicare patients by 27 percent. Fifty million Americans will then have their health care in jeopardy. It cuts nutrition plans. food stamps. There is no plan. My quiet comment. Mr. Speaker. as I close. it is in disappointment. It is not in shrill debate. It is simply in disappointment. Because we have Americans who are looking to us to work with the President. to work with the Speaker. to go forward on the plan that was offered on Mondayat least for us to debateand to find a way to be able to respond when people like those victims of Hurricane Sandy and Newtown. Connecticut. call on us. Thats all Im asking my colleagues. is that you work with us.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. I thank the ranking member. Mr. Speaker. As the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces. Im pleased with many of the provisions here in this conference report. In the fiscal year 2013 NDAA. we successfully included strong support for the national security space programs. our nuclear deterrent. and our nuclear nonproliferation efforts. including an increase for the global threat reduction initiative and steps for a renewed ban on exports of highly enriched uranium. Im also pleased that the bill authorized funding for nuclear cleanup. and homeland and regional missile defense. including strong support for our U.S.Israeli cooperation. That section of the bill also contains important provisions to ensure our capabilities are tailored to our national security requirements. and that theyre costeffective. How do we do that? As a first step. were going to have detailed studies and independent reviews of maintaining our nuclear weapons and analyses on plutonium pit reuse and on current requirements for plutonium pit production. The bill also does not contain some very controversial issues we had in the House version. in particular. that would have weakened our health. safety. and security across the nuclear weapons complex and really undermined what I believe is our Federal oversight role. These steps will help us to sustain the deterrent force we need to meet 21st century challenges without overspending or compromising the safety of our workers or the public. There is some concern still: a $6 billion plutonium facility remains part of our immediate plans even though the Department of Defense. the U.S. Strategic Command. the National Nuclear Security Administration. and the National Laboratories. they all agree we dont need this facility for at least another 5 years. and they prefer more costeffective ways of doing this. But. unfortunately. this was continued in this bill. and many other provisions. Thank you again. Lastly. I want to thank all of the staff for having helped us. To Mr. MCKEON. and also to my ranking member. thank you so much.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to the Conference Report on the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 but will use this statement to speak of the silver lining in this otherwise flawed legislation. The silver lining of which I speak is Title 7. Section 737. which includes language for a breast cancer study. Last night before the Rules Committee I spoke of an amendment I offered to H.R. 4310 "National Defense Authorization Act." which directed the Department of Defense Office of Health to work in collaboration with the National Institutes of Health to identify specific genetic and molecular targets and biomarkers for Triple Negative Breast Cancer (TNBC). In addition. the amended language was designed to result in the generation of information that could then be useful in biomarker selection. drug discovery. and clinical trials design. This will enable medical professionals to identify TNBC patients earlier in the progression of their disease and would help advance the development of multiple targeted therapies for the disease. My amendment which passed the House was designed to highlight the importance of studying and eventually finding effective treatments for triple negative breast cancer. I was pleased to note that. although it was not included in the bill we vote on tonight. my amendment helped generate the language included today in Title 7. Section 737 which highlights the importance of breast cancer among members of the armed services. I wish to emphasis the importance of addressing trople negative breast cancer and that this aspect must be included in the National Defense Reauthorize. Triple negative breast cancer is a specific strain of breast cancer for which no targeted treatment is available. The American Cancer Society calls this particular strain of breast cancer "an aggressive subtype associated with lower survival rates." I believe that through a coordinated effort between the DOD and NIH that they can develop a targeted treatment for the triple negative breast cancer strain. Breast cancers with specific. targeted treatment methods. such as hormone and gene based strains. have higher survival rates than the triple negative subtype. highlighting the need for a targeted treatment. Today. Breast cancer accounts for 1 in 4 cancer diagnoses among women in this country. It is also the most commonly diagnosed cancer among African American women. The American Cancer Society estimates that in 2011. more than 26.000 African American women will be diagnosed with breast cancer. and another 6.000 will die from the disease. Between 2002 and 2007. African American women suffered a 39% higher death rate from breast cancer than other groups. African American women are also 12% less likely to survive five years after a breast cancer diagnosis. One reason for this disparity is that African American women are disproportionally affected by triple negative breast cancer. More than 30% of all breast cancer diagnoses in African American are of the triple negative variety. Black women are far more susceptible to this dangerous subtype than white or Hispanic women.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. as a conferee and senior member of the House Armed Forces Committee. due to unforeseen health complications. I was unable to sign the Conference Report to H.R. 4310. the National Defense Authorization Act of FY2013 on December 18. 2012. If I had the opportunity to sign the Conference Report to H.R. 4310. 1 would have signed it.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I wish the outgoing chairman of Financial Services would check his facts.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. What is unbalanced is the Republican package that we see on the floor today. We already talked about the numbers of the Republican Plan B tax proposal which compared to going over the fiscal cliff and the Senate alternative would actually provide millionaires with a $50.000 tax cut on average while 25 million American families will actually see a tax increase of $1.000 on average. including. Mr. Speaker. some of our soldiers on the front line in Afghanistan today. The majority leader talked about doing the math. Then do the math on the tax plan. because thats exactly what it shows. What the President has called for is a balanced plan that asks for the wealthiest to share the burden of our deficit challenge and make sure that we get our economy in full gear. With that. I yield 11/2 minutes to the distinguished ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee. Mr. LEVIN.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. a couple of points here. First. the chairman of the Budget Committee said that the President hadnt put any specific spending cuts on the table. Thats just not true. His proposal has been available to the public for well over a year now. As to just one specific proposal. the President has said we should get rid of excessive agriculture subsidies. He has called for $30 billion on that item alone.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

In reclaiming my time. that also is not true. and on that. we will have a longer discussion. The reality is ag subsidies are one very concrete example. Interestingly. this bill that our Republican colleagues have brought to the floor. again. while cutting deeply into the food and nutrition programs. doesnt take one penny from ag subsidies for agrabusinesses. Now. Mr. Speaker. its also important to correct another statement that has been made by both the chairman of the Budget Committee and the chairman of the Ag Committee with respect to the food program. I think the chairman knows that the SNAP statute provides in statute two routes for people to be eligible for food and nutrition assistanceone is the specific income and asset test. or they can become eligible under the SNAP statute based on participation in other programs in which they have to show incomebased need. Nobody wants fraud. We should find every dollar of wasted money and get rid of it. but dont pretend that people who qualify under the statute are engaged in fraud. What youre proposing to do in this Republican bill is to deny millions of those people on nutrition programs their legal support. and we do not think we should be doing that. At the same time. we are giving millionaires a $50.000 average tax cut. With that. Mr. Speaker. I yield 11/2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey .
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I now yield 11/2 minutes to the gentlelady from California . and I congratulate her on becoming the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I will just say a few words again about the priorities reflected in this Republican package. If you look at Plan B. the tax part. youre giving people who earn over $1 million a year on average a $50.000 tax cut compared to what it would be under the Senate proposal. At the same time. under this proposal that were talking about here on the floor of the House. youre talking about eliminating important support in food and nutrition programs for millions of Americans. including for 300.000 kids who would no longer be on school lunch programs. What this boils down to once again. Mr. Speaker. is a question of priorities. Weve got to reduce our deficit. and weve got to get the economy moving again. But we have to deal with the deficit in a balanced way. not in a way that provides additional tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the rest of the country. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. its true that our Republican colleagues are not going to have a partner for a totally lopsided. unbalanced approach. that. once again. minimizes the responsibility of the wealthiest of the country at the expense of everybody else. I yield 11/2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts . the ranking member on the Financial Services Committee.
Date: 2012-12-20
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Messrs. LEVIN and POLIS changed their vote from "nay" to "yea." So the motion to recommit was rejected. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Date: 2012-12-30
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Thank you for these words. I share a desire to serve the Nation in this pivotal time. Mr. Speaker. I think it is enormously important that. as Starbucks said. we "come together." And we can do so. We can do it in a rationality that takes a simple analysis. A simple analysis says that if I like a bag of potato chips. thats a luxury item. I can run in and get it. I dont have to think about it. Its cost is manageable. If I want to go in and get a highend Cadillac. Ill think about it for a couple of days. That should be the thought process for this fiscal cliff. Pass the $250.000 that will give 99 percent of Americans a tax break. Protect those who are unemployed who have worked and provide for their unemployment insurance. Protect those with the AMT30 million taxpayers will fall over the cliff if we dont fix that. 222.000 Texans. And then if we have to deal with looking at how we address the question of reforming those benefits of Americans who work like Medicare and Social Security. we can do so. But I join the AARP. I join senior citizens: Leave Social Security alone. The changed CPI will not work. and that is not a time to deal with it in these waning hours. We. Republicans. created this quagmire with the sequestration. We need to go and be able to address the immediacy. Get your bag of potato chips. cut the taxes for 99 percent of the American people and protect the unemployed. We can do this. We dont have to go over the fiscal cliff. A shared concern for America. thats what we need today.