macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2000-09-12
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of H.R. 755the Guam War Claims Review Commission Act. I thank Mr. UNDERWOOD for his work on this substitute version of H.R. 755 which addresses concerns that have been raised in previous Congresses. This legislation has been. in one form or another. offered by every delegate from Guam to Congress since the people of Guam began electing delegates to Congress in the 1970s. In my years of service on the Resources Committee. I have had the privilege of meeting many from Guam who traveled a great distance to share their wartime memories of Japanese occupation. Their stories are compelling and regrettable. Their experiences often sounded unbelievable but they were very real. I recall an elder woman who came to testify before our CommitteeMrs. Beatrice Elmsley. She bore a scar along her neck. A permanent reminder of her attempted beheading at the hands of Japanese soldiers. To the American public. Guams story is not widely wellknown. The islands loyalty to the United States before. during. and after World War II has never been questioned. Our fellow citizens are proud and patriotic Americans and if they were not fully made whole from the atrocities they faced from Japanese occupation. then we should make a good faith effort to correct those errors. That we have been able to overcome concerns raised in the past over this legislation. while still recognizing the validity of reexamining war claim awards made to the people of Guam in the wake of World War II. is truly a milestone. We would not have reached this point if it werent for the patience. diligence. and tenacity of Mr. UNDERWOOD. I congratulate him for his persistence and ask my colleagues to give this measure their full support.
Date: 2000-09-13
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. Californias 7th congressional district includes portions of Contra Costa and Solano Counties and is situated astride San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento River. Its economic. demographic and political history is deeply linked to its geography. Industry ranging from oil refining to shipping. an extensive Navy presence. and deep concerns about water quality and the environment--especially the protection of the Bay and the SacramentoSan Joaquin Deltahave long been central features of the region. It is no accident that it was in Martinez. the Contra Costa County seat. Sierra Club founder John Muir resided and wrote his tracts that transformed our view of natural resource protection. The 7th district is also the site of significant national historical events from the era of World War II. At the site of the former Port Chicago Naval Weapons Magazine (currently the Concord Naval Weapons Station). the largest domestic loss of life during World War II occurred on July 17. 1944 when over 320 men. most of whom were black. were killed in a cataclysmic explosion. The subsequent refusal of black sailors. who were the subject of discrimination. to resume the loading of munitions led to the largest court martial in Navy history and a landmark civil rights case that helped facilitate President Trumans decision to integrate the armed forces later in the decade. Congress designated the site of the explosion as the Port Chicago National Memorial in 1992. In December of 1999. after a long effort I led with other lawmakers. activists. and veterans. President Clinton issued a Presidential pardon to Mr. Freddie Meeks of Los Angeles. one of the last remaining men who was courtmartialed more than half a century ago. Richmond. California. on the 7th districts west side. was a small city when World War II began and the Kaiser Shipyards were created to build the Liberty and Victory ships that supported the war effort. Tens of thousands of new workersincluding many minorities and womenballooned the local population and created the legendary "Rosie the Riveter" image. Together with providing women previously unavailable jobs in industrial plants. Richmond served as the epicenter of dramatic changes in American life that were to affect generations including racial and gender integration of the workplace. group health services and expansive child care. Congress is now completing action on my legislation to create a National Historic Site to commemorate the rich history of Richmonds contributions to ending WWII and changing our society forever. Those historic changes continue today with the conversion of the formercenturyold Mare Island Naval Shipyard in Vallejo to civilian uses including environmental protection and local economic development. The 7th district has an historic past and today is a critical part of the San Francisco Bay Areas economic. environmental. cultural and communications life.
Date: 2000-09-14
Speaker: W AXMAN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to the Bilbray amendment. For decades the tobacco companies have acted more recklessly and caused more harm than any other industry in America. They lied to the American public. They manipulated nicotine in order to addict. And they deliberately targeted our children. Yet this Congress has failed to act. Earlier this year. when the Supreme Court ruled that the Congress has not given the Food and Drug Administration explicit authority to regulate tobacco. the Court recognized that tobacco use "poses perhaps the single most significant threat to public health in the United States." The Court decision placed responsibility to deal with this crisis squarely in Congress lap. But since that decision in March. this Congress has done nothing. The Republican leadership has not held a single hearing on the problem nor brought any tobacco reform legislation to the floor. In fact. the only tobacco legislation we considered was a rider to block the tobacco lawsuit and deny veterans their day in court. This Congress should pass meaningful tobacco legislation. We should grant the FDA explicit authority to regulate tobacco. We should -pass performance standards to give the industry meaningful economic incentives to reduce the number of children that smoke. We should pass a national policy on environmental tobacco smoke and put in place a nationwide public education campaign. Together these measures will succeed in reducing the number of children who smoke and will save million of lives for generations to come. The amendment before us today may not do any harmbut there is little evidence it will do any significant good. Public health organizations oppose it. The Campaign for TobaccoFree Kids says that this amendment will "do little to end tobaccos grip on the children of D.C." The American Lung Association states that penalizing children "may adversely effect existing programs that are proven to work." This Congress has abandoned any meaningful national effortto regulate tobacco and to reduce tobacco use among our children. Instead. it is now proposing to legislate questionable policy for just one city. The Mayor and the City Council of D.C. should be given the opportunity to decide what comprehensive tobacco control policies work best for the children of this city. Just this past May. the City Council held. a public hearing on the Bilbray amendment and other measures to prohibit youth consuniption of tobacco products. They expect to take up the issue when they meet again this fall. We should allow D.C. to continue with its process and decide what tobacco control policies work best for the city--just like thousands of other city councils in the rest of the country. In considering this amendment. dont delude yourself and believe that this approach will reduce tobacco use among our children. The reality is that we need to pass comprehensive tobacco control legislation. We bear the responsibility to protect our children and to hold the tobacco companies accountable for their actions.
Date: 2000-09-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. here we are again passing legislation to implement the settlement agreement to stop 18 years of litigation and provide the desperately poor TorresMartinez Desert Cahuilla Indians with some usable land. Currently. the Tribe has over 11.000 acres of land sitting at the bottom of the Salton Sea with no hope of ever using that land for needed economic development or sustainable housing for their members. A court found in favor of the tribe in a 1984 trespassing suit brought against the Imperial Irrigation District (ID) and the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) and awarded damages to the tribe. To stave off a second suit filed on behalf of the tribe. the U.S. stepped in and worked out a settlement agreement agreeable to all parties. The House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed this settlement legislation in the 104th Congress when our former colleague Sonny Bono pushed for its enactment. Congressman Bono tried to do the right thing by this tribe then and now Congresswoman BONO is continuing to fight for the tribe. I have been a proud sponsor of both bills and want to commend Mrs. BONO for all her hard work on behalf of this needy tribe. She has had to overcome a small but very well funded campaign of misinformation to bring the bill to this point. This settlement will provide for payments to the tribe for the two water districts and provides to them permanent drainage flowage easements. Further. the tribe agrees to drop all claims against the United States with regard to their worthless land and is permitted to purchase some 11.000 acres out of two boxes drawn within ancestral lands to use for the benefit of the tribe. It is important to note that this tribe has been unable. through no fault of their own. to use most of their land since This legislation has a wide range of support including the Imperial Irrigation and Coachella Valley Water Districts. the Department of Interior. the Department of Justice. numerous surrounding non Indian communities. several Members of Congress. and all local Indian tribes. I have letters from some of these supporters which Id like entered into the record along with my statement. The bill before us today includes numerous concessions agreed to by the TorresMartinez Tribe. Some I personally do not agree with. however I support the sovereign right of the tribe to make its own decisions and they have maintained legal representation througout the process. The path this bill has taken has been a painful and difficult one due to the earlier opposition of a lone. small. wealthy tribe. Garnering non Indian support to fairly assist needy Indian Tribes has always been a hard task and one Ive gladly taken on throughout my 25 years serving in the House. However. tribe against tribe situations are the most difficult we deal with and when one side is vastly out spent in its efforts. it makes the situation all the more sad. I hope this is the last of such battles we will have to address. With that I urge my colleagues to support this bill and finally end this sad chapter in our history.
Date: 2000-09-19
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. at the time that Wen Ho Lee was first arrested. I met with the ChineseAmerican Political Association of the greater San Francisco Bay area. Many in that community raised their concerns that he was the target of selective prosecution. of racial profiling. and prosecutorial abuse. As we now see. as that case has started to come to a conclusion with the plea bargain. in fact many of the concerns raised by the Chinese community turned out to be true. All Americans should be deeply disturbed by the prosecutorial abuse that was raised in this case and used against Wen Ho Lee. This does not suggest that Wen Ho Lee did not have some serious transgressions of the current law and policy. but what his government did to him should cause concern by all Americans. All Americans are entitled to an impartial review of the actions by all parties to that prosecution. Unfortunately. the congressional committees. the FBI. the intelligence agencies. and all the rest participated in the feeding frenzy at the time of the arrest. I think maybe we ought to have a national. impartial blue ribbon commission to look at the Wen Ho Lee case and see how we can better safeguard the rights and liberties of all American citizens.
Date: 2000-09-19
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker. the gentleman from Washington I think has properly explained the legislation and the purposes of the legislation and the intent with which it is offered before the House. I do not disagree with that. I. however. will ask Members to vote against this legislation. especially Members of our caucus. I do so not because of the content of the bill but because of the manner in which Democratic Members of the committee and of our caucus have been treated in this committee in terms of the scheduling of legislation that has been offered by Democratic Members of the House. Much of that legislation is essentially noncontroversial but important in those particular districts. and we continue to have a gross disparity both in the treatment in the committee and on the floor of the House. As I have noticed and the leadership has agreed to. we would ask Members to vote against this legislation until such time as we can get a fairer treatment of pending legislation as we come to the closing days of this session. We have asked continuously. we have sent numerous letters tothe chairman asking for hearings on various pieces of legislation. Those hearings have not been granted. Again many of those bills are noncontroversial. Then we are told because they do not have hearings. they cannot come to the floor. Yet we constantly are considering bills from the other side. without hearings on the floor. many of which have not even been heard in the committee. Last week. 18 Republican bills were scheduled and no House bills. one Senate Democratic bill was scheduled and dealt with. Tomorrow there are scheduled to be 15 Republican bills and six Democratic bills. It is very clear that if we continue this. there will be many members of the Democratic Caucus who have matters pending before the committee and the House that simply will not be considered before the clock runs out. I think we can do better. We have done better in past sessions of the Congress. I would encourage at least the members of our caucus to vote against the consideration of this and the next bill on the suspension calendar later today when we have a recorded vote on this matter. Mr. Speaker. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2000-09-19
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Just in quick response. I would say that obviously the number of suspension bills is greater because this committee really only does business by suspension and that is obviously their prerogative. I would also say that I appreciate yesterdays schedule. That was negotiated. That was negotiated with notice. However. amendments were offered without notice. Last week it was 16zip. Obviously we continue to fall further and further behind. I appreciate it is a third of the bills and the gentleman is contending that is fair. We represent half of the Congress. half of the people in the Nation. and we are put in the position now as this session comes to a close as I said before that many members of this caucus had bills that were important to them and their district. not of great controversy. not of great ideological battle and to date we have not been able to get those matters put before the House. I would again urge the members of our caucus to oppose the two bills offered by the Committee on Resources. This does not go to other matters on the suspension calendar. because that is the purview of those committees. But with respect to these two matters from the Committee on Resources. I would urge a no vote so that we can get consideration of the members of the caucuss bills that are still pending.
Date: 2000-09-19
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

If the gentleman will yield. I said that that bill had been dealt with. a Senate bill. a Democratic bill. That does not solve the problem for Members of the House.
Date: 2000-09-19
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself 2 minutes to continue this dialogue. Mr. Speaker. I would say that the speech that the gentleman just gave with respect to this bill and other bills about being considered on the merit is the reason we are asking Members to vote against these bills so that the Democratic Members can have their bills heard on the merits. marked up on the merits and voted up or down on the merits in the full House. that has not happened. The gentleman can go on and on about 23 percent of the bills. The fact of the matter is we are half of the Congress. and there is a good number of Democratic bills that are languishing for no other reason than I guess that they are Democratic bills. I do not know how that determination is made. but obviously they have not been allowed to be considered on the merits. Mr. Speaker. I would hope the Members would understand that there is very little else we can do other than to refuse to pass these bills until we get that kind of consideration to protect the rights of the minority Members of the House of Representatives. and I think it is important that we do that. I think those Members were elected by the same number of people that others were elected by and their bills ought to be considered on the merit. Again. these are not great controversial bills. These are bills that are important to local districts. just as the ones before us today are. but they have not been accorded the same rights and privileges and. therefore. I would ask the lhembers of the caucus and others. if they would like. to join us to vote against these two bills from the Committee on Resources. Mr. Speaker. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2000-09-20
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I rise in strong support of this motion to instruct. I want to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman from Wisconsin and the gentleman from Maryland on this matter. We know very well why the increased moneys in education have been put there. because of the insistence of the minority in Congress and the insistence of President Clinton in the negotiations. And each and every time they have made these terribly inadequate bills that have been reported out of this House better. But let us understand something. The Obey amendment is about whether or not we are going to meet our commitment to the children of this Nation. Yes. some of the money is targeted. but how do you think those school buildings got in the condition they are in today? Because of the neglect of the local school boards and others. What we are suggesting is that the Federal Government ought to. make an effort. because the children who are doing the poorest most likely are in the poorest condition schools. We ought to try to target some effort so that those local communities could fix up those schools and make them appropriate for the education of our young children. To sit here and suggest that somehow local school superintendents and others cannot move around Federal money. then you ought to get yourself a new superintendent because restraints are minimal. Most superintendents will tell you the problem is with the State Department of Education. not with the Federal Department of Education.
Date: 2000-09-21
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. time is running out for Americas seniors. Americas seniors are well aware now that many of them cannot afford the drugs that their doctors prescribe. If they in fact buy those drugs. we find that they are taking the medicine one every other day instead of one every day or three times a day instead of four times a day to try to extend the medicine at the peril of their own health. Time is running out for them because the Republican leadership refuses to bring forth a real prescription drug benefit. Rather than use the prescription drug benefit -to try to undermine the Medicare system as George W. Bush has or to undermine the Medicare system as the Republican leadership has-
Date: 2000-09-21
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

I stand corrected. Mr. Speaker. It is George W. Bushs Medicare prescription drug benefit plan that undermines Medicare. not George W. Bush but his Medicare plan. so everybody is corrected. He would undermine the system and put these seniors at the peril of the same HMOs that are canceling their coverage all over the country. put them at the peril of the insurance companies. put them at the peril of pharmaceutical companies. What we need is a prescription drug benefit as part of Medicare so that senior citizens can get the medicine they need.
Date: 2000-09-27
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Messrs. GEJDENSON. HASTINGS of Florida. LEWIS of Georgia. MEEKS of New York. GEORGE MILLER of California. and Ms. KILPATRICK changed their vote from "yea" to "nay." So the motion was agreed to. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Date: 2000-09-28
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Madam Speaker. today. once again. America awoke to the story of another senior citizen that finds the difficult choices in their life because of the cost of prescription drugs. Winifred Skinner. 79 years old. of Des Moines. Iowa. yesterday told the Vice President how on her $800amonth income. $250 will go to prescription drugs. which leaves her very little for her other costs of maintaining her household. Therefore. she spends 2 and 3 hours a day collecting aluminum cans to turn in to provide food for herself. She is reduced to walking the streets and the roads of Des Moines. Iowa. so that she can collect cans to provide food because of the high cost of prescription drugs. She has no prescription drug benefit. Madam Speaker. we have been trying now for almost 2 years to get the Republicans to agree to have a Medicare prescription drug benefit so people like Winifred Skinner will have a reliable benefit to help pay for the medicines that they need. not a plan that depends on whether or not their HMO is in business or out of business. not a plan that depends on whether or not an insurance company will write the benefit or not. but a guaranteed plan within the Medicare system so that seniors know that they can rely on it. The time has come so Winifred Skinner does not have to keep walking the roads.