macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2005-04-21
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

That is why we spend an hour on this every week. because there is plenty of information to disseminate. I sit on the Committee on Financial Services.. and I have an opportunity to interact with people on the New York Stock Exchange and Chairman Greenspan. who testified before our committee. and representatives of the Mercantile Exchange and the Board of Trade and all of the exchanges. One of the things that I got out of those meetings that was clear and that has been written about in the last few days is. let us remember what the foundation of this whole privatization is built on. It is built on the stock market. It is built on stocks and bonds. Now. last week. we had one of the most significant drops in the market in over 2 years. The Dow Jones Industrial Average has fallen more than 9 percent in the last 6 weeks. including a drop of 115 points. or 1.1 percent. on Wednesday. Now. I do not know if most Americans are going to want to throw their retirement security to the whims of the stock market. There are two words in the name of this program: social and security. This proposal removes and decimates the concept of "security" in Social Security. It would be social insecurity. because there would be no ability to ensure that future retirees would have that investment there for them when they retired. because we have fluctuations in the market.
Date: 2005-04-21
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. that is an important point. and I appreciate the gentleman making that point. But the point is that from one day to the next. we had a 200point swing. Now. is that what people are going to be comfortable with in terms of their retirement security. in terms of ensuring that they have at least a minimum amount of money available for them when they retire? Because. for example. 20 percent of single retired women. most of whom are widows. the only source of their income is their Social Security. Now. if we invest it in the stock market and privatize Social Security. what are we going to do for those women when their nest egg that they banked on is not there because of fluctuations like the one that the gentleman from California just referred to? I just wonder.
Date: 2005-04-21
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. the gentleman is absolutely right. We have to right the ship of state. I mean. it is keeling over right now. It is going to fall from the weight of the debt. I mean. why the Republican majority here will not listen to Chairman Greenspan when he expresses again and again. as recently as this week. again and again he has warned us about the danger of the increasing deficits.April 21.. 2005 The leadership here is just ignoring it. It is like they hope that if they ignore the problem long enough. maybe it will go away. Maybe they will wake up. just like my kids hope that the next day something that happened that they did not like the day before will not be true when they wake up. like so many of us do. But the worst nightmare is that when something bad happens. when you wake up the next day. you cannot make it go away just by a nights sleep or ignoring it. It does not work that way. We have to be responsible. That is the whole way we need to deal with this Social Security problem. Problem. not crisis. � We have a problem. but we need to be responsible and take the time that we need to address the problem and do it right. We did not create this problem overnight. and there is no miracle solution. there isno instantaneous solution to this problem. The President has already acknowledged that privatization does not even solve the problem. We need to make sure that we get privatization off the table so we can all sit down together. just like -they did in 1983. and find a bipartisan solution that we can all be comfortable with. or at .least that the majority can be comfortable with. because we will probably not get everybody. But the majority is willing to come to the table. it is just that the President needs to let go of an untenable proposal that the vast majority of the people do not support. It is time to let itgo. Mr. President.
Date: 2005-04-21
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

I agree with you. I am ready to stand and fight and make sure that the security remains in Social Security. And. you know. just to close my portion of this out. the illustrative thing that I want to leave people with is we are both under 40. that is why we are here. Our generation. my friends. your friends. most of them when we chat with them when we are out .to dinner. and we ask them whether they think Social Security is likely to be there for them when they retire. it is almost universal that the answer is no. In 37 years. 36 years. let us say 2041. we are going to be 74 years old. You and I -are 3 weeks apart. And I am 3 weeks younger. I might add. We are going to be 74 years old. Now. when I learned that. I was amazed because I really was one of those people. Social Security will be there. even if we do nothing. which is not what we are advocating. We are advocating take a little slower approach. Let us make sure that we keep the security in Social Security. In 46 years. the outlying date for which insolvency is less likely to occur. we. will be. 84 years old. Now. that is well within the number of years. 20 years after retirement. that we can ensure that Social Security will be there for us. What we have to do is we have to stand with our feet firmly planted on the ground and say you have taken this country this far. no further.
Date: 2005-04-26
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise to reiterate my emphatic opposition to the privatization of Social Security. This program would not only hurt millions of elderly Americans but. ultimately. the whole country. For women and working families especially. Social Security is a lifeline. and they need to know that they can rely on a guaranteed benefit. Social Security was never intended to be a rollthedice stock market gambit. Social Security was never meant to be an elaborate investment scheme geared to maximizing returns. Social Security was designed as a simble. straightforward social insurance program that ensures all of us to spend our golden years in a basic level of dignity. independence. and security. Mr. Speaker. privatization is also not good for young workers. A 30yearold worker making $40.000 a year will lose 27 percent of their benefits under this plan. That is almost $6.000 a year. I urge all of my colleagues. let us work together and solve a manageable problem.
Date: 2005-04-26
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Chairman BOEHLERT) and the gentleman from Tennessee for their bipartisan support of this resolution and in our Committee on Science markup last month during Womens Month. I also want to commend the gentlewoman from Illinois
Date: 2005-04-26
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Madam Speaker. I would like to read a part of a letter from the National Governors Association to both the Speaker and the Democratic leader and Senator FRIST and Senator REID. It says. "Reform. however. should not be part of a 2006 fiscal year budget reduction and reconciliation process. especially if it does nothing more than shift additional costs to the States." We have a problem with health care costs in our country. Medicaid is one part of it. Medicare costs and private insurance and private health care is actually rising higher faster than Medicaid- Yet what we are doing with this budget resolution is actually penalizing senior citizens. and particularly children. because so much of our childrens hospitals. so much of their funding comes from Medicaid because they deal with children totally. I know in Houston. the Texas Medical Center. we have the Texas Childrens Hospital. over 50 percent of their funding comes from Medicaid because they take care of children. We have to deal with health care costs. but let us not balance it on the backs of our children and our senior citizens. Hon. BILL FRIST. Majority Leader. U.S. Senate. Washington. DC. Hon. HARRY REID. Minority Leaderelect. U.S. Senate. Washington. DC.
Date: 2005-04-26
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Absolutely. this was a unique day. Apparently. we reached the 60th day that the President has been out in America trying to sell the American people on his vague outlines of his proposal to privatize Social Security. and quite honestly. at the conclusion of the 60 days. apparently he has said that he wants to go out for another 120 days. We had a rally today with more than 1.000 people in the crowd and over a hundred Members of Congress from both the House and the Senate Democratic caucuses. standing completely united in opposition to pulling the safety net out from under our retirees retirement security. and we stood strong. We stood together. We stood together when people did not think that that was possible. that there was definitely. over the last few months. a lack of confidence that the Democrats would stand together united opposing privatization. We have all the way up until today and we will continue to be standing in opposition to privatizing Social Security. Actually. at the conclusion of todays rally. we stood together and said. Mr. President. please do go out for another 120 days and tell the American people that you want to pull the safety net out from under their retirement security because apparently the more he talks about it. the less the American people like it. So we encourage the President to continue to go out and talk about it. continue to restrict the crowds and limit the access to his town hall meetings where he checks tickets at the door. checks peoples philosophies at the door. as opposed to our effort where we are being as inclusive as possible. We do not screen our crowds. We had more than 400 town hall meetings across the country in our districts as House and Senate Democrats. and we take all comers. Some of us have had maybe a couple of people here and there who have come to our meetings and said why do you not give the Presidents proposal a try. but almost universally our Members have experienced the communication from our constituents that. above all else. they expect us to be up here in Washington and protect their retirement security.
Date: 2005-04-26
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. if the gentleman would yield. I think it is important to highlight. again. this is the 60th day of the Presidents nationwide. crosscountry tour. and one would have expected with the bully pulpit that he has the momentum that he believed that he was going to be able to build behind his vague proposal that by the 60th day. by today. that he would have Americans swinging from the chandeliers in the Capitol. insisting that we take up his proposal and that somebody file a bill. We have yet to see a bill offered in this Chamber or in the Chamber across the rotunda. and I think it is interesting to note that these are some of the comments and analyses that have been made at the conclusion of his 60day tour: "The Presidents campaign has frightened people. raising concerns that guaranteed benefits could be cut." said William Schneider. who is a public opinion scholar and CNN analyst. "Theres very little evidence in polls that Bushs campaign has been effective." "As he nears the end of a 60day crosscountry campaign. President Bush appears to be further from achieving his signature goal of transforming Social Security than when he began." That was from USA Today just yesterday. and that was the tip of the iceberg in terms of the commentary and analysis. I just wonder when the President and the leadership of this body are going to get it. When are they going to tell us. when are they going to come to the gentlewoman from California and to the gentleman from Maryland and say. okay. we are taking privatization off the table. clearly we do not have any support for that. Americans do not want us to compromise their retirement security. and we are ready to come to the table and compromise. like they did in 1983 when Tip ONeill and Ronald Reagan came together and preserved Social Security for generations to come. It is just mindboggling. It really is.
Date: 2005-04-26
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. my colleague and I from Florida are parents. and I know the gentleman from Ohio probably plans one day to be a parent. This is the 30something Working Group.
Date: 2005-04-26
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I thank both of these gentlemen. I am losing the prop board here. but I wanted to close by quoting the President. He said. "Leadership means not passing problems on to future generations and future Presidents." This plan passes trillions of dollars of debt on to our children and our grandchildren. and it is time that we all exercise some leadership. come together and think about the direction that this country is going in. bring it back to the center. restore some balance. come to the table and compromise. and take privatizing Social Security off the table and not yank the safety net from under our constituents.
Date: 2005-04-27
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise today to state my opposition to House Resolution 22 and the rule expressing the sense of the House that American small businesses are entitled to a small business bill of rights. I want to especially thank my good friend. the gentlewoman from New York and applaud her for her hard work on behalf of small businesses. If the only rights small businesses are entitled to are listed in House Resolution 22. I feel sorry for all small businesses. because for all small businesses give to this country. this bill gives them nothing in return. Small businesses. including minority- and womenowned businesses. are the backbone of this country. and most especially to my State of Texas. Where are the small businesses rights to. one. participation in the Federal marketplace. two. assistance from the governments lending programs which account for 40 percent of all longterm small business financing. three. targeted tax relief similar to that provided to the big corporations. and. four. strong technical assistance from the Federal Government that deals with issues faced by small businesses. and. five. protection from contract bundling. combining two and three contracts together to eliminate small businesses competition? These are challenges and there are nany challenges facing small businesses as they attempt to gain a foothold in this Federal marketplace. We should be about the business of Insuring full and fair access for small irms. We should be about helping them vercome the obstacles in their way intead of coming up with the blank .hecks under the guise of giving them ights that large companies are aforded. Vote against this rule. Vote against his bill. because it does nothing to llow for rights that small business eed or the opportunities. Amendments to correct all this were attempted in the Committee on Rules but denied. So I would say go and fix it or defeat it.
Date: 2005-04-27
Speaker: LINDA T. SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. I thank the gentlewoman from New York for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to H. Res. 22. the socalled Small Business Bill of Rights. There is nothing that is right about this resolution since it does not recognize the right of small businesses to have access to capital that meets their needs. Last night I offered an amendment to the Committee on Rules that recognized the right of small businesses to have access to capital. and I am extremely disappointed that. despite valiant efforts on the part of Democrats. this amendment was not made in order. Small businesses need the 7(a) loan program. the microloan program. and other SBA access to capital programs that help them maintain and expand their businesses. My amendment would have also recognized the importance of the microloan program. which provides small loans to startups that are not served by traditional lenders. I know for a fact that access to capital programs are vitally important to small businesses in my district because when I held a small business roundtable meeting. access to capital was the number one issue each business brought forward as being an obstacle. and I know that this is the number one .ssue across the country. Why are we not helping small businesses? They produce twothirds to threequarters of all the new jobs in his country. and they are the backbone of our economy. Unfortunately. nany small businesses continue to face )arriers to accessing the capital they xeed. And I believe that Congress needs to ake a stand today and strengthen hese programs. It is time for Congress o go on the record in support of access o capital programs. like the microloan rogram. like the 7(a) loan program. mall businesses need more than just hetoric and good intentions. They .eed action by this Congress. So I urge my colleagues to oppos( this resolution because it leaves oul this critical priority.
Date: 2005-04-27
Speaker: LINDA T. SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Chairman. I rise today in strong opposition to the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. This is simply another example of antiwoman and antichoice legislation that jeopardizes a young womans health and is at odds with the United States Constitution. This bill will leave young girls like Spring Adams completely unprotected. Spring was a 13yearold sixth grade student from Idaho who became pregnant as a result of her fathers shameful actions. When Springs father became aware that she planned to terminate the pregnancy. he shot and killed her. If H.R. 748 were law. girls in Springs tragic circumstances would be more vulnerable to harm since young women will be forced to notify the same parent that sexually abuses them of their plan to seek medical care. Is that the dangerous situation we want to put an abused girl in? What is worse is that H.R. 748 does not contain a health exception which is dangerous to a young womans health. Under this bill. doctors will be guilty of a crime if they do not wait 24 hours before performing an abortion. a medical procedure. on a young girl even if the girl is at risk for serious injury. This means that in some circumstances conscientious doctors must sit on their hands and wait for 24 hours as young female patients suffer from complications and risk permanent injury. Mr. Chairman. 24hour delays are not always an option when a young girl is pregnant and experiencing medical complications. And if these victimized girls ask a caring grandparent or aunt to drive them to another State for an abortion. even if the girl is at risk for serious injury or has been sexually abused by a parent. their family members will be guilty of a crime and may wind up in prison. That is a heavy price to pay for trying to help and protect a loved one. Doctors and grandparents should not have to make the unthinkable choice between protecting a patient or granddaughter from serious physical injury and going to jail. This bill forces them to make that impossible choice. For this reason. I urge every Member of this body to stand up for womens health. stand up for the U.S. Constitution. and vote "no" on this bill.
Date: 2005-04-28
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. I rise today in support of all the individuals who are taking.part in events in this Nations Capital. in Orange County. California. and all across our Nation to observe the fall of Saigon on April 30. April 30. 1975. marked the beginning of a journey for many who sought refuge in an unknown land and an uncer-. tain future. These individuals risked everything for a chance to live freely and provide better opportunities for their children and for their families.. In the 30 years since. most Vietnamese Americans have been able to rebuild their lives and to contribute to the diversity of this Nation. The world has changed since that fateful day.but one thing remains constant. Vietnamese Americans work tirelessly to promote freedom and democracy in Vietnam. As we reflect on the anniversary. please join me and Vietnamese American communities in honoring the memory of those who lost their lives in this conflict and in celebrating the contributions of Vietnamese Americans across our Nation.
Date: 2005-04-28
Speaker: CORRINE BROWN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. I was unavoidably detained and was unable to return to Washington to vote on April 26. 2005 through April 28. 2005. Had I been present. I would have voted as follows: Roll No. 133. "yes". Roll No. 134. "yes". Roll No. 135. "yes". Roll No. 136. "yes". Roll No. 137. "yes". Roll No. 138. "no". Roll No. 139. "no". Roll No. 140. "yes". Roll No. 141. "yes". Roll No. 142. "yes". Roll No. 143. "yes". Roll No. 144. "no". Roll No. 145. "yes". Roll No. 146. "no".
Date: 2005-05-03
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. almost a quarter of Texans do not have health insurance. and this is the highest rate of uninsured in the United States. In Dallas alone. the uninsured rate is 25 percent. We all know someone who is living without health insurance. There is a perception that if someone does not have health insurance. it is because they do not work or they are on public assistance. Over 80 percent of the uninsured workers are workers. and 50 percent of them are fulltime workers. Americans who work hard for a living should not have to live without health insurance. These uninsured often face the difficult decision of either ignoring their medical problems or being able to afford food and rent. Mr. Speaker. the sad truth is that no American family is more than one job change. one corporate cost cut. or one serious illness or an accident away from being uninsgred. It is time for this Congress to address this problem with innovative ideas and actions.