macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2007-11-08
Speaker: GINNY BROWN-WAITE (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Flor

ida. Mr. Chairman. for too long. Congress has taken a reserved and reactionary approach to helping victims of disasters. For too long. Members have fallen back on a naive notion that a national plan would only put taxpayers at risk. We have refused to admit that in the event of a natural disaster. we either pay now or we pay later. and paying later is a whole lot more expensive. Please consider this: in 2005 the insurance industry. not the taxpayers. paid out $61.2 billion for the 24 disasters that occurred that year. $40 billion of that went to the insured losses of Hurricane Katrina. That same year. Congress. using taxpayer dollars. awarded over $89 billion in postdisaster assistance. $89 billion that will never be recouped. that came from hardworking constituents from Illinois. for example. from my colleague who offered the amendment before. .from West Virginia. from the State of the lady who is handling the bill on this side. Unless these constituents were directly affected by these events. they will never see a return of those dollars that the Federal Government provided. What is the lesson here? When Congress pays later. its with taxpayer money thats never paid back. For the first time. this bill and the managers amendment provide a national plan to protect against losses. H.R. 3355 provides incentives to States to join a national consortium to issue catastrophic bonds. These bonds act as an alternative to costly reinsurance. It also provides some loans to. the States that take the time to plan for their insured needs. The amendment that we have at the desk today also relates to when a natural disaster strikes. How many natural disasters have we heard about. whether its a tremendous snowstorm in the Northeast. whether its a hurricane. whether its an earthquake in California. where price gouging takes effect? My amendment says. in order to qualify for the loans and Federal catastrophe fund under the bill. the various States would have to establish antiprice gouging laws for postevent materials. thats goods and materials that people need after a catastrophe. The amendment defines pricegouging as a supplier charging a price he knows is greater postevent than he charged preevent. notwithstanding any reasonable business increases. Certainly. this kind of an amendment would help stem the doublewhammy of a natural disaster. You might. for example. have your home damaged. and then when someone comes in to put a blue tarp on the roof. the price is outrageous. or even the delivery of goods and services after such a disaster. We need to protect homeowners from people who would rip them off. people who are simply trying to rebuild their lives after such an event. I urge the Members to support the antiprice gouging amendment that is before us today. Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2007-11-08
Speaker: GINNY BROWN-WAITE (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Flor

ida. The gentleman from Florida. with whom I have worked so closely on this issue. and I obviously disagree. We disagree because I would like to have this as absolutely a mandatory part of participation. and he would prefer to have it as a suggestion. I still believe that we need to make this mandatory. Its like. you know. somebody once said. the Ten Commandments are now a suggestion. theyre not commaidments. I dont want to just suggest it. I want to make sure that the pricegouging language is strong so that we do protect people at that time of a natural disaster. Most States do have good pricegouging laws already on the books. Im not very happy with the term "encourage." I think we need to mandate this as part of the process. Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2007-11-08
Speaker: GINNY BROWN-WAITE (republican)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I am very fond of the gentleman from Connecticut. and I know his heart is in the right place. He has been very supportive of many of the things that are proposed in this Chamber. and on many. many issues we agree. however. this is an issue that we do not agree on. Study. study. study. Lets just study it again. That is what Congress has done for so many issues for so many years. Another colleague of ours. JO ANN EMERSON. came to Congress a little over 10 years ago taking her husbands place in Congress. He had passed away. The reason I mention this is her husband chaired a study group on this very subject in 1995 or 1996. How much longer do people have to believe that Congress is going to do nothing other than create another bound study that is going to sit on somebodys bookshelf someplace and not accomplish one darn thing? This isnt just about Florida. It is about every State that faces natural catastrophes. It is about finally having a solution. The gentleman from Connecticut was elected to serve in -the House. Quite honestly. there are many times when. on this very floor. we all say. I dont care what the Senate is going to do. Well. it just so happens that a bill recently was introduced. very similar to this bill. by Senator NELSON and a neighbor of the gentleman from Connecticut. Mrs. CLINTON. Senator CLINTON. so there is a companion bill over in the other House. While that. companion bill is not bipartisan. it is some movement. It is acknowledgement to the. people out there who are paying outrageous insurance rates that Congress is finally stepping up and doing something and not just creating another study killing who knows how many trees. I know the gentleman from Connecticut is an environmentalist. I would think he. would want to save a few trees. Mr. Chairman. I disagree with the gentlemans amendment. and I encourage my colleagues to vote against it.
Date: 2007-11-09
Speaker: SAM JOHNSON (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise today to oppose the permanent tax hike to pay for a 1year extension of current law. The alternative minimum tax is a taxing machine. put into law 40 years ago by a Democrat Congress to tax 155 of the wealthiest families in America. The AMT patch before the House today will prevent a tax increase on families who make just over $66.000 a year. These arent the superwealthy. In fact. in my congressional district. a family of four making $66.000 a year is considered a moderate income. Apparently. the Democrats in the House consider the rest of my constituents superwealthy. Even this paltry relief will be offset with permanent tax increases. The tax increase on real estate partnerships is among the most destructive taxes that could be devised. At a time when most of us in the Congress are concerned about the real estate market. our colleagues who vote for this bill today are waging an attack on free enterprise. We must vote "no" on this huge tax increase.
Date: 2007-11-13
Speaker: SAXBY CHAMBLISS (republican)
Chamber: S

and all the others on the committee. It was a hard fight but we got the money in there. But it is not quite enough when you look at all the other things in the farm bill. We moved the ball forward. but I think with the demands on our farmers now. what we see happening around this country. we need an even greater commitment. We need to do a lot more in conservation than we have ever done before or pretty soon the scales will tip so far that the kind of money it is going to take it to do it will be prohibitive. That is why I take the time of the Senate tonight to talk about conservation. We need a better conservation ethic in this country. As we consider the farm bill. we need to be talking about soil and water conservation. helping farmers be better stewards of the soil and water. I am hopeful as we move into more debate we can make a few changes that will add some money to conservation before we go to conference. We have done a lot in the farm bill. but we have a lot more we can do. So I ask any Senator out there who has an amendment. if you have not filed it. you better file it because pretty soon we may cut it off. I am not encouraging amendments. you understand. I am just saying. if you have one. you better get it in in a hurry. and we will take a look at it. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
Date: 2007-11-14
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Madam Speaker. it is my pleasure to yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished ranking member of the Rules Committee. Mr. DREIER.
Date: 2007-11-14
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Madam Speaker. the record brought out today by the Roll Call editorial. that I am very pleased. by the way. that our ranking member brought forth and read into the RECORD. I think is important for a number of reasons. Again. I was also here when the distinguished Speaker was elected in January. I recall the promises at that time and during the campaign. the electoral campaign that preceded that ceremony in January. The promises were. and I am sure they will be recalled. to have a more open process. a more transparent House. So- the reason why I think it is most appropriate now to bring out the record that Roll Call in an editorial has outlined is that instead of seeing. during this year. this first year of this Congress. a more open process. a more transparent process. a more democratic process. what we have seen is a more than doubling of the closed rules. of the gag rules. if you will. the gag rules that dont permit any amendments on legislation. Since we are discussing the rule. by the way. on legislation that is an example of bipartisanship. the Head Start program is one that has been supported from its inception in a bipartisan manner. but we are discussing the rule. the means to debate this legislation. the procedure. if you will. to debate the legislation. I think its appropriate to bring out the more than doubling by a majority that promised more transparency and more democracy in the running of the House. a more than doubling of gag rules that prohibit debate. that prohibit any amendments for debate. So I think that is appropriate to bring forth. And I commend Roll Call that. yes. was very critical when we were in the majority of many of the things that happened at that time. But a doubling. more than doubling of the impropriety. of the gag rules by a majority that promised more transparency is not only important to bring out but I think it is most unfortunate. At this time. Madam Speaker. I would like to yield 3 minutes to a distinguished colleague who has worked so much on this legislation in an admirable way. as he has on many issues of great importance to the American people. Mr. CASTLE of Delaware.
Date: 2007-11-14
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Madam Speaker. it is my privilege at this time to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished ranking member of the Education Committee. Mr. McKEON of California.
Date: 2007-11-14
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Madam Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker. I will be asking for a "no" vote on the previous question so that we can amend this rule and move toward passing a conference report on the bipartisan Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations act. The House passed this veterans affairs and military funding bill on June 15 by a vote of 4092. with the Senate following suit and naming conferees. on September 6. Unfortunately. the majority leadership in the House has refused to move the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill. They have even refused. to name conferees. Why has the majority decided to hold off on moving this bill that has such bipartisan support? Well. according to several publications. including Roll Call. the majority intends to hold off sending appropriations bills to President Bush so that they can use an upcoming anticipated veto. actually. the veto of the LaborHHS appropriations bill. to serve as "an extension of their successful public relations campaign on the SCHIP program." Fortunately. that purely political move failed last week when the Senate removed the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill from the LaborHHS bill. Recently the Republican leader. Mr. BOEHNER. took a step toward naming House Republican conferees. Now the Speaker must follow suit and take the steps necessary to ensure that work can begin on writing the final veterans funding bill that can be enacted into law. Madam Speaker. every day that the majority chooses not to act on this bill. our Nations veterans lose $18.5 million. Our veterans deserve better than that. they deserve better than partisan gamesmanship holding back their funding. I urge my colleagues to help move this important legislation and oppose the previous question. Madam Speaker. I ask unanimous consent -to insert the text of the amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
Date: 2007-11-14
Speaker: MARIO DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. on Wednesday. November 14. 2007. I was unavoidably detained and thus I missed rollcall votes No. 1090 through 1093. Had I been present. I would have voted in the following manner: On rollcall vote NO. 1090. on Adoption of the Conference Report on H.R. 1429. the Head Start for School Readiness Act. I would have voted "aye." On rollcall vote No.-1091. on H.R. 3845. the PROTECT Our Children Act of 2007. I would have voted "aye." On rollcall vote No. 1092. on H.R. 719. the KIDS Act of 2007. I would have voted "aye." On rollcall vote No. 1093. on H. Res. 817. Providing for consideration of the conference report on H.R. 3074. Departments of Transportation. and Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies Appropriations for FY 2008. I would have voted "nay."
Date: 2007-11-14
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. I will be asking for a "no" vote on the previous question so that we can amend this rule and move toward passing a conference report on the bipartisan Military ConstructionVeterans Affairs Appropriations Act. The House passed the veterans and military funding bill on June 15 by a vote of 4092. with the Senate following suit and naming conferees on September 6. Unfortunately. the majority leadership in the House has refused to move the Military ConstructionVeterans Affairs Appropriations Act. They have even refused to name conferees. Now. the question that is begged. Mr. Speaker. is why has the majority decided to hold off on moving this bill that obviously has such bipartisan support. Well. according to several publications. including this one. Roll Call. the majority intends to hold off sending appropriations bills to President Bush so that they can use the veto of the LaborHHS appropriations bill to serve as "an extension of their successful public relations campaign on the SCHIP program."
Date: 2007-11-14
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Reclaiming my time. fortunately that purely political move. Mr. Speaker. failed last week when the Senate removed the Military ConstructionVeterans Affairs bill from the LaborHHS bill. Recently. Mr. Speaker. the Republican leader. Mr. BOEHNER. took a step toward naming House Republican conferees. Now the distinguished Speaker must follow suit and take the steps necessary to ensure that work can begin on writing the final veterans funding bill that can be enacted into law. Mr. Speaker. every day that the majority chooses not to act on this bill. veterans lose $18.5 million. Our veterans deserve better than partisan gamesmanship holding back their funding. I urge my colleagues to help move this important legislation and oppose the previous question.
Date: 2007-11-14
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

I thank my friend. I think that it is critically important that we get this legislation passed as soon as possible and sent to the President. It is the 12th time that we have attempted in this House to get this bill sent to the President. Mr. Speaker. obviously this is critically important legislation. a critically important moment. And so I urge my colleagues to help move the important veterans legislation along by opposing the previous question. I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment and extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
Date: 2007-11-14
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

My parliamentary inquiry is as follows: When I asked the gentleman if he had any further speakers before yielding back the reminder of our time. I was informed that he did not. Is it correct for the gentleman to say that he has no further speakers. and then after. based on that statement. I yield back our time. he yields to someone else in contradiction to what he has told me? Is that appropriate. Mr. Speaker?
Date: 2007-11-14
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. I move to reconsider the vote on the previous question. THE SPEAKER pro tempore. Did the gentleman cast a vote on the prevailing side?
Date: 2007-11-15
Speaker: TIM MURPHY (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Pennsylvania

In Mount Lebanon. Pennsylvania. a town in my congressional district. Allegheny Police Detective Lawrence Carpico saved the life of 16yearold Sarah Deiuliis. a victim of a school acquaintance. on October 31. 2007. Sarah had been lured into the woods by someone she considered a friend. When the young man attacked her with a hammer. she fended off her attacker and ran luckily into the path of Detective Carpico who happened upon the couple while walking a dog. Detective Carpico. who was off duty at the time. acted decisively and ushered the girl to safety and called for the assistance of onduty officers and medics. For his actions. he will be presented with the Mount Lebanon Police Departments Chiefs Award. Likewise. lets recognize Sarah. who displayed extraordinary courage in the face of extreme danger. She fought back against her attacker using intelligence and quick thinking. For this. she will be recognized with the Survivor Award. It is a great honor to represent such courageous citizens and to present their story in this Chamber. and I commend both for their actions.
Date: 2007-11-15
Speaker: GARY G. MILLER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I rise in support. but I want to express some concerns I have with the bill. I have been a longtime advocate of antipredatory legislation that will eliminate abusive lending practices while preserving and promoting access to affordable mortgage credit. I want to thank Chairman FRANK for holding true to his commitment to work with me on ensuring that section 123 of the bill will continue to give consumers viable financing options that would not prevent mortgage originators from being compensated. Under the new language. consumers will continue to be able to obtain and enjoy the benefits derived from having the option to choose zero points or nocost loans by financing the fees and their costs into the rate of the loan amount. I am also pleased that the mechanism by which the mortgage originators are compensated in such cases has been unaffected. . According to the Mortgage Bankers Association. currently there are slightly more than 6 million nonprime loans. Of these loans. a little over 5 million. or 85 percent of these loans. are basically being paid on time. Yet. according to the MBA. under the legislation. perhaps 50 percent of the nonprime loans would not be made. This means that a significant number of consumers would not be receiving mortgage financing and millions of legitimate loans would not be obtained. While there is certainly no question that nonprime borrowers have been subjected to abusive lending practices over the years. there is also no question that the vast number of borrowers who were not victims of such practices can become victimized by poorly crafted protective legislation that restricts nonprime credit availability. Under this bill. it significantly expands the scope of loans that qualify as "highcost loans." or HOEPA loans. This section of the bill dramatically lowers the point fee calculations. thereby capturing a much larger number of loans than under the previous definition in current law. The expAnsion of HOEPA to cover the additional loans would provide access to credit to more nonprime borrowers. During the markup. I attempted to amend this section to ensure that lenders would still provide and borrowers could still obtain HOEPA loans under this bill. My amendment would not have revised the substantive protection provided by HOEPA as amended. Rather. it would have limited the increase in the number of types of loans that are subject to HOEPA. In addition. the provisions of title III were drafted at least a year before the drafting of titles I and II of this bill. and title I was written without the benefit of enhanced consumer protection. provided to nonprime borrowers under the other sections of the bill. I am concerned that the three titles have been joined into a single bill with-. out the respective provisions being synchronized. By expanding the scope of loans covered by HOEPA. we will further limit liquidity and drastically shrink the availability of mortgage credit. In fact. under current law. the liability and penalties extended to HOEPA loans have made creditors reluctant to make these loans.
Date: 2007-11-15
Speaker: GARY G. MILLER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: California

I thank the chairman. Mr. MILLER and I have discussed this in the last several days. and I know there was not time to deal with this issue effectively prior to it reaching the floor. I have had extended conversations with many Members on your side of the aisle who support the concept I am trying to move forward. I look forward to working with you before this bill comes back through conference.
Date: 2007-11-15
Speaker: GINNY BROWN-WAITE (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Flor

ida. Mr. Chairman. it is no secret that Americans -are facing a growing crisis in the subprime housing market. Subprime mortgage foreclosures have spiked and crashed for the last 6 years. Rates have ranged as high as 9.25 in 2002 for foreclosures and as low as roughly 3 percent in mid 2005. In the first quarter of this year. they crept back up again to 5 percent. However. foreclosure rates among loans the Federal Housing Administration insures have stayed somewhat consistent throughout that time. Since there has been less than 1 percent fluctuation in these foreclosure rates since 2001. I think it is very imperative that we have this amendment adopted. This amendment excludes loans insured by FHA from the provisions of this bill. The language is actually very similar to an amendment that I offered and that was accepted in the Financial Services Committee. one that. exempted VA loans. Mr. Chairman. the provisions in this bill will help Americans in the pursuit of owning their own home. many believe. but there are still millions of Americans who without FHA probably -would not have had this opportunity. But if VA and FHA are already writing loans that are clearly good for their customers. Congress should leave them alone and let them carry on with their business. Obviously. it is working. and as the old axiom goes. if its not broke. � dont fix it. Therefore. I urge Members to support my amendment that exempts FHAinsured loans from the provisions of this bill. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2007-11-15
Speaker: GINNY BROWN-WAITE (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Flor

ida. Mr. Chairman. I certainly appreciate the fact that the gentleman from Massachusetts . the chairman of the Financial Services Committee. has worked with me both on the VA and the FHA loan exemption. I think it is the right thing to do. and I would urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.