macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2006-07-12
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. DELAHUNT. lets play a game. Lets see which caucus is really for border security and which conference is playing "lets pretend." And we will deal just with facts here. just with factual information. unlike what they do. which is either. A. make it up as they go along. or. B. say something that is not true enough times so that people believe it. or. C. just pick and choose the numbers that work best for them and represent that they are doing something when they are really not. So any of those three things is what happens on the other side. Here is the reality on border security. Democrats versus Republicans: From 1993 to 2000. under the Clinton administration. on average. 642 new Border Patrol agents were added every year. Despite the fact that 9/11 highlighted the need for more border security. in its first 5 years the Bush administration added. on average. only 411 new Border Patrol agents. Under the Clinton administration. 642 new Border Patrol agents were added every year. Under this administration. since 2001. since 9/11. only 411. It gets better. Between 1999 and 2004. we are talking about enforcement. you know what. the Republicans talk a good game about it. we have got to increase enforcement. we have got to make sure that we crack down on illegal immigration. we have got to make sure that employers are not harboring illegal immigrants and breaking the law in hiring them. Well. lets see if they really mean that. Between 1999 and 2004. work site immigration enforcement operations against companies were scaled back 99 percent by INS. Subsequently. INS was merged into the Department of Homeland Security and now it is called CIS. But in 1999. the United States. this is the year before President Bush took office. the United States of America initiated fines for hiring illegal immigrants against 417 companies. Mr. DELAHUNT. in 2004. it issued fine notices to three companies. Three. 1999. the year before President Bush took office. the United States initiated fines against 417 companies for hiring illegal immigrants. In 2004 they initiated three.
Date: 2006-07-12
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

I have another one. The Bush administration also has a worse record than the Clinton administration on pursuing immigration fraud cases. In. 1995. during the Clinton administration. 6.455 immigration fraud cases were completed. In 2003. guess how many? One thousand three hundred eightynine. 78 percent fewer immigration fraud cases completed. And then if you take the statistics that they brag about. the Bush administration brags that in its first 5 years it caught and returned 6 million undocumented individuals. That is actually a drop from any 5year period that you can demonstrate during the Clinton administration. So that is what I mean when I say they just put up the statistics that make them look good and leave out all the other relevant information.
Date: 2006-07-12
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

That makes me want to pull out another thirdparty validator. because this week we got to experience the exciting midyear opportunity to hear the President with his Republican leadership surrounding him to cheerlead the supposed success they have on the economy. Now. it would be one thing if we were standing up here as DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ and TIM RYAI and KENDRICK MEEK and BILL DELAHUNT and saying. well. that is a lot of baloney. Anyone in America looking at this economy and looking at this deficit would say. what is there to celebrate about? But it is not just us. This morning editorial page in USA Today had this to say about the midyear review of the economy that the administration just trotted out. They say. "Forgive us if we dont break out the party hats. It is hard to get excited about an abysmally large deficit in the range of $300 billion that is somewhat less gargantuan than earlier predicted. Even accepting the administrations assurances that it does not purposefully overestimate the numbers in a Wall Streetlike .game of beating expectations. this habitual midyear crowing masks the seriousness of the Nations bleak fiscal outlook." Well. if that doesnt say it. all right there in a nutshell. I dont know what does.
Date: 2006-07-12
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

And what they were doing this week is saying. Wow. the deficit wasnt $423 billion. it was only $300 billion. Now. what is clear. and what USA Today is not letting the President get away with. is that they began by inflating the number that they said the deficit would be at. so that when what happened occurred. when they knew it would be much lower than that. it would look like an accomplishment. Well. if they are excited about a $300 billion deficit. then I really want to know what their definition of fiscal responsibility is. because that apparently for years- has been the cornerstone of the Republican Partys platform. that they are fiscally responsible. A $300 billion deficit is fiscally responsible. And then on top of that they are passing tax cuts for the wealthiest among us? And this is how those tax cuts break out for folks? I mean. we just passed a tax reconciliation bill just a few weeks ago that. if you look at how it benefits people by their income. this is what it really boils down to: That tax cut bill. which virtually all the Republicans voted for. if you make between $10.000 and $20.000 a year. which is around minimum wage. the one that they havent raised since 1997. you get about enough back to buy a Slurpee. If you make between $40.000 and $50.000 a year. somewhat more than minimum wage. you get enough back in that tax cut bill offered by the Republicans to buy a gallon of gas.
Date: 2006-07-12
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Maybe. Because depending on how high the price goes. you actually might not get all that back. But then let us look at the folks who make more than $1 million. you get enough money to buy a Hummer. Now. I dont know about you. but I really think. if we are going to pass tax cut legislation at all. if we are going to give tax dollars back to the people. first and foremost. lets eliminate the deficit. Do you keep passingI mean. tax cuts are spending. Mr. MEEK. It is not free. We dont just print more money. I just took my 7yearold son to the Mint yesterday. and I watched them print the money. But the tour guide didnt tell us. "You know. when we run out. we just print more." It doesnt work that way. They obviously didnt go to Econ 101. otherwise. they wouldnt think it was responsible to do what they have been doing.
Date: 2006-07-12
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. RYAN. you have people in America who. the agony and the angst in the pit of their stomach that they have over their credit card debt and the things that they actually need. like the ability to fill up their gas tank. I mean. the churning that we know is going on inside of mothers and fathers across this country over how much debt they have versus what they have coming in. I guess that churning isnt going on on the Republican side. There doesnt appear to be any angst. there is no handwringing. there is no worrying about it. Where is the outrage? It is nonexistent. They just keep spending and spending and spending. The deficit keeps ballooning. and then they say. Yeah. the deficit isnt $423 billion. it is $300 billion. I Well. it is just. it is too shocking for words. And then they have the nerve.
Date: 2006-07-12
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Just because they say it. "they." going back to what Mr. Gingrich has called the Republican majority. he who used to be Speaker of the House but now calls his former colleagues "they" because it is foreign to him now. "Just because you say it doesnt necessarily mean that it is true." Now. Mr. DELAHUNT. this is true. What is true is the fact that we have borrowed $53.8 billion from Canada because we cant afford to pay our bills. so they bought our debt. Korea. $66.5 billion. Germany. $65.7 billion. OPEC nations. Who are these OPEC nations? We hear about them on the news. but we dont know who they are. They are Iran. they are Iraq. they are Libya. they are Saudi Arabia. they are Venezuela. Nicaragua. Kuwait. United Arab Emirates. Ecuador. and on and on and on. Qatar. on and on and on. They have said. since America and the United States majority House of Representatives and the President wants to overspend and give away the money and they cant afford to do what they are doing. we will buy tleir debt. Taiwan. $71.3 billion. The Caribbean. $115.3 billion. The U.K. is at $223.2 billion. And you have China that is at $249.8 billion and Japan which is at $682.8 billion. And folks wonder. why are we in the situation where we are now? It pains me to silhouette the country. silhouette of the continental United States and put those countries over it. but we have to break this down and let the American people know this is not about party. this is not about what you may feel about a man or a woman representing you. This is about representation for you. Forget about what convention you went to last time. Forget about if you have an R or an I or an Independent. It is about America. And what the Republican majority has done effectively. they have borrowed themselves into a situation so that when parents are going to schools. let us just look at this. here is the education budget and what we invest in education and this is in the billions as relates to this chart. This is what we invest in homeland security. This is in the billions. Our veterans allowing us to salute one flag.
Date: 2006-07-13
Speaker: CORRINE BROWN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. I rise in strong support of a clean voting rights bill. Let me say that those people that question whether we need a voting rights bill or not. I hax~e to remind you of Florida 2000. wherp in my district 27.000 votes in my precinct were thrown out. 27.000. And you know they say the President won by 535. But we have a long list of voting rights violations. and it goes on and on. But there is one that stands out in my mind. Florida Governor Jeb Bush spent $4 million of taxpayer money to purge a list of 40.000 suspect felons from the rolls across the State. with zero consideration of accuracy. Later we found out that these people were eligible to vote. but when they went to vote. they were turned away. Another reason. as my colleague said. I was one of the first African Americans elected to Congress in 129 years. Let us pass the Voting Rights Act and not have another Supreme Court coup detat in America.
Date: 2006-07-13
Speaker: LINDA T. SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Chairman. I rise today to urge my colleagues to oppose all four of todays amendments and pass a clean Voting Rights Act reauthorization. The four amendments that have been made in order are poison pills. If the two irrational section 5 amendments pass. the VRAs coverage formula would be repealed. and the Department of Justice will spend its time conducting studies in jurisdictions with no discrimination. instead of actively fighting discrimination in jurisdictions with ongoing voting rights violations. If the meanspirited section 203 amendment passes. eligible votingage citizens will be deprived of language assistance and lose the chance to cast an informed. accurate vote for the candidate of their choice. If the Gohmert amendment passes. jurisdictions will wait out their obligations to end discrimination under the VRA rather than comply with the VRA. which will result in the- same kind of widespread noncompliance with the VRA that we sought in the late 1970s. All of these amendments are inconsistent with the spirit and the intent of the Voting Rights Act. The Voting Rights Act protects the most fundamental right in a democracy. the right to vote. and it is our most powerful tool to help ensure that no American citizen is subject to discrimination at the polls. The Voting Rights Act plays a critical role in fulfilling the promise of American democracy. It has given voice to minority communities. and without it. many black. Hispanic. and Asian American leaders would not be holding elected office today. Passing this bill will also honor the sacrifices of the men and women who died and suffered injuries fighting for equality during the civil rights movement. That is why reauthorization of H.R. 9 has the support of Republicans and Democrats. Senators and House Representatives. businesses. civil rights groups. editorial boards. and grassroots organizations around the country. Let us pass H.R. 9 clean by opposing all four amendments offered today and voting "yes" on final passage.
Date: 2006-07-13
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I thank my colleague. Mr. WATT. for yielding. I urge my colleagues to support the renewal of the historic Voting Rights Act today and vote for the bill that came out of the Judiciary Committee without amendment. I am very proud of the. work we did on that committee on. a bipartisan basis and want to commend the bipartisan leadership of tht full committee. the subcommittee. and Mr. WATT foi his leadership. On March 15. 1965. after years o struggle culminating in Bloody Sun day. where our colleague JOHN LEWIS s( bravely marched. President Lyndox Johnson came to this very place and from the podium behind me. callet upon the Congress and the Nation an( said to us all we shall overcome. we a. a Nation shall overcome years of dis crimination and efforts to throw obsta ales in the way of African American. and other minorities from exercising their constitutional right to vote an( exercising their right to fully partici pate in this great democracy of ours. We have come a long way as a Na tion. but we have a long way to go tc really overcome. as President Johnsoi called upon us to do. The evidence before the Judiciar3 Committee was absolutely clear thal serious problems in discrimination re main. The testimony made it cleai that section 5 preclearance has beer used more between 1982 and 2005 thar between the years 1965 and 1982. Th( evidence showed that since 1982 the Department of Justice has objected tc more than 700 discriminatory voting changes that have been enacted by th covered jurisdictions. The evidence showed that the covered jurisdiction withdrew an additional 200 proposec changes from section 5 review and ar additional 600 voting changes were revised to ensure nondiscriminatory im. pact. Anyone who says that we do not con. tinue to need the Voting Rights Act it dead wrong. 0I 1245 In addition. there were many othei findings. We have a long way to go. Mr. Chair. man. to achieve a more perfect Union I urge my colleagues to adopt the bill that came out of the Judiciary Com mittee. withodt amendment.
Date: 2006-07-13
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I rise today in strong support of H.R. 9. the reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act. without amendment. Our values. our freedom. and our democracy are based on the idea that every eligible American Citizen has the right to vote. and they also have the right to expect that their votes will be counted. It was only 40 years ago that minorities lived under the oppression of Jim Crow. and we still do. I have spent most of my time in the last 2 weeks working on redistricting. where the Supreme Court just ruled. or a little over 2 weeks ago. that it violated the Voting Rights Act. So. 2 weeks ago. not only the Attorney General. but the attorney general of Texas as well. had to move in for Prairie View A&M students to be able to vote. because the DA did not want them .to vote for fear they would not elect the right persons. We do still have a problem and we do need this Voting Rights Act. It was only 40 years ago that minorities lived under the oppression of Jim Crow. As a result. millions of Americans were unable to fairly participate in our democracy. The Voting Rights Act changed the face of this Nation. In this battle for the most basic of rights. many heroic Americans were imprisoned. beaten. or even killed in the name of freedom and justice. The Voting Rights Act was not and never will be about special rights--it is about equal rights. We have made amazing progress over the past 40 years. However. progress does not mean that we stop trying. We cannot and must not give up until every American citizen has the access and opportunity to voteregardless of their skin color. ethnicity. or language ability. There are still thousands of cases of voter intimidation and discrimination reported at every election. Minorities continue to face an uphill battle of misinformation over polling locations. the purging of voter rolls. scare tactics. and inaccessible voting locations. Prior to the 2004 elections. students at Prairie View A&M were told they could no longer register to vote in Waller County. TX. The fear was that the 8.000 students at this historically black college may elect someone the local district attorney didnt want. This change in voter registration was not precleared by the Department of Justice. and was ultimately overturned by the Texas attorney general and the Department of Justice. This is just one example of why we still need the Voting Rights Act. Now is the time to reauthorize this historic cornerstone of civil rights. It is imperative to our rights. our freedom and our democracy.
Date: 2006-07-13
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. today. when walking through the Capitol. I saw President Roosevelts words inscribed on a wall. They stopped me in my tracks. He said. "We must remember that any oppression. any injustice. any hatred is a wedge designed to attack our civilization." These words should guide us in this debate. They were deemed so important that they are literally a -part of the structure of our Nations Capitol. The Voting Rights Act is the most important and successful civil rights law in our Nations history. From poll taxes to literacy tests. States historically. disenfranchised voters based on their race. their gender and educational background. While America exports democracy around the globe. we must not deny it here at home. Sadly. many Americans have lost faitl in our electoral system. From the 2000 election in my home State of Florida. or Ohio in 2004. many Americans feel like some in their government dont want their vote to count. We must renew the Voting Rights Act to restore that lost faith. Some say the preclearance provisions are no longer needed. and they are wrong. Since 1982. the Department of Justice has made more than 1.000 objections to discriminatory changes in State and local voting laws. If the gentleman from Georgias amendment is adopted. these 1.000 objections would never be considered. This amendment deserves to be defeated. All the amendments need to be defeated. and the Voting Rights Act should be adopted in full. Congress passed the Voting Rights Act because millions of Americans had been intentionally denied their equal right to vote. Some of my Republican friends also want to take away language assistance at the polls. and they speak the emotional. rhetoric of antiimmigrant jingoism. But this bill isnt about illegal immigrationit is about Americans participating in their democracy. The overwhelming majority of those who receive language assistance at the polls are nativeborn. taxpaying American citizens. In 2004. there were 15 initiatives on Floridas ballot. This issue is not only about distinguishing Candidate A from Candidate B. The VRA ensures that citizens also understand these confusing ballot initiatives. In my district voters receive assistance in Spanish. Creole. and Seminole dialects. Instead of erecting more barriers tovoting. we should identify ways to increase civic participation and make people more confident in their Government and their leaders. I urge my colleagues to pass this bill with no amendments.
Date: 2006-07-13
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of the reauthorization and against all amendments. Mr. Chairman. I rise to take part in an ongoing historic dialog that unfortunately. we must continue to address in the United States Congress. The issue before us today is whether we should reauthorize certain sections of the Voting Rights Act. I grew up in the fifties and sixties when we had segregated water fountains. schools. an restrictions on voting. We are here to decide if we should continue mandating preclearance for any changes in election policy in jurisdictions that are known to have a history of disenfranchising the rights of minority voters. My home state of Texas is included on that list. Over the last forty years. the renewal of this Act on this Floor has embodied what we hope this country will be: a Country where regardless of race. religion. or political party. we come together to ensure that the core of our democracy continues to thrive. The right to vote is the core of our democracy and we must protect this right for all Americans. Recently. the Department of Justice failed to preclear an election plan for a bond election in the area I represent. Polling places were few. and it was the .opinion of many that putting polling places only in select areas for this election was a violation of the Voting Rights Act. DOJ agreed and the election has been postponed until a better plan can be put in place. This is but one recent example of how the Voting Rights Act ensures people have access to the polls so their voice can be heard. As we support an emerging Democracy in Iraq and the success of the elections that were held there. we need to remember that this Country has also struggled to achieve Democracy and one that everyone can participate in. Let us be an example to Iraq in the world that a true Democracy includes ALL Americans and that we are committed to preventing the discrimination that millions of Americans had to endure in the past. I urge my colleagues to reauthorize these Sections of the Voting Rights Act and send a message that this Country is still the example of how representative government should work.
Date: 2006-07-13
Speaker: CORRINE BROWN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Chairman. let me just say that one of the issues that many of my constituents call and they are very concerned about is time. They are concerned whether or not they are going to lose their right to vote. No. they are not. But I want to read a brief statement from the administration. the Bush administration: "The administration is strongly committed to renewing the Voting Rights Act and therefore supports House bill H.R. 9. The Voting Rights Act is one of the most significant pieces of civil rights legislation in the Nations history. and the President has directed JAly 13. 2006 the full power and resources of the Justice Department to protect each citizens right to vote and to preserve the integrity of the Nations voting process. The administration is pleased the House is taking action to renew this important legislation. The administration supports the legislative intent of H.R. 9 to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court 2003 decision in Georgia v. Ashcroft." That says it all. Bipartisan support. Democrats. Republicans. and the administration. This is an American bill.