macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2006-04-26
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

There are lots of reasons. Mr. DELAHUNT. some of the ones you outlined. but many more reasons why the American people are losing confidence in our ability to make sure that we respond to their concerns. Here are some key facts that I pulled together that just might explain why people are so frustrated. aside from the major issues that we have been outlining here tonight. Just for example. median income. median family income has dropped every year of the Bush administration. Median wages have dropped 6 percent from 2000 to 2004 according to the Federal Reserve Board. A typical middleclass family. and this is the 30something Working Group. and we just want to provide some highlights of the things that this generation is struggling to deal with. the typical middleclass family is working longer than in 2001 just to pay the bills. Health care costs have skyrocketed. with a typical family paying $632 more for health insurance. compared with 2000. The number of Americans without health insurance has increased by 6 million. while the number living. in poverty has increased by 4.5 million since 2000. Gas prices are 62 percent higher than in 2001. Housing is the least affordable it has been in 14 years. I In my community alone. and I know your community is expensive as well. the average price of a house in south Florida is more than $300.000. Now how is a young couple. just starting out. who wants to reach the ability to buy their first home. going to afford that? Come on. I am not that far from having bought my first home with my husband. Trust me. if the prices were like that in south Florida when we first started out. there is no way. We would be living in a shack. which many people in America are continuing to struggle to even. be able to afford. College tuition. Let us continue down the path of what young people are struggling with. College tuition has gone up about 40 percent. even if you take inflation into account. according to the college board in 2005. The number of employees in an employersponsored retirement plan dropped by more than 2.7 million from 2000 to 2004. That is Congressional Research Service. our objective Congressional Research Service that cited that statistic. About 3.7 million employees have lost employerprovided health insurance since 2000. The median household debt has climbed 34 percent. to $55.300. from 2000 to 2004. The typical student graduates from college with about $17.500 in debt. While wages and salaries are at a record low as a share of national income. corporate profits are at a 60year high. Finally. the last statistic that I was able to pull together. just to outline what the average working family is struggling through. Mr. DELAHUNT. is that the number of U.S. billionaires reached a record of 793. which is up 15 percent from last year. It is no wonder that the American people are fed up with us and fed up with the lack of outrage. with the lack of leadership. and that the polling numbers. when you rate the Congress. are just hitting rock bottom.
Date: 2006-04-26
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. DELAHUNT. and say you all are doing a good job. keep doing what you are doing. Because if you all are not pointing out what this Republican majority is doing. these are Republicans. then they will continue to do it. Mr. RYAN. and that isthe word that they use.
Date: 2006-04-27
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. if House Republicans really want to help Americas seniors. tlfey would join us in reversing a proposal in theRepublican prescription drug plan that would penalize any senior who chooses a private drug plan after May As this calendar shows. we have 18 days left. If House Republicans do not support our efforts to extend the deadline until the end of the year. millions of seniors will face a prescription drug tax that they must pay every month for the rest of their lives. Over 14 million seniors still have not chosen a plan. Some are frustrated. confused by dozens of plans they have to choose from. Others have heard the horror stories of seniors not having access to drugs they were promised or .seniors being overcharged for some of their medication. Some of these seniors will eventually want to choose a plan. but they should not be forced into making that tough decision by May 15. It is time House Republicans stand up and support Americas seniors. Reject the Presidents prescription drug tax. And as we mark off another day on the calendar. Republicans only have 18 days to make the right decision:
Date: 2006-05-02
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. under rule XXII. clause 7(c). I hereby announce my intention to offer a motion to instruct on H.R. 2830. the pension conference report. The form of the motion is as follows: I move that the managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the Senate amendment -to the bill H.R. 2830 be instructed to recede to the provisions contained in the Senate amendment regarding restrictions on funding of nQnqualified deferred compensation plans. except that(1) to the maximum extent possible .within the scope of the conference. the managers on the part of the House shall insist that the restrictions under the bill as reported from conference regarding executive compensation. including under nonqualified plans. be the same as restrictions under the bill regarding benefits for workers and retirees under qualified pension plans. (2) the managers on the part of the House shall insist that the definition of "covered employee" for purposes of such provisions contained in the Senate amendment include the chief executive officer of the plan sponsor. any other employee of the plan sponsor who is a "covered employee" within the meaning of such term specified in the provisions contained in the Senate amendment (applied by disregarding the chief executive officer). and any other individual who is. with respect to the plan sponsor. an officer or employee within the meaning of section 16.(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. and (3) in lieu of the effective date specified in such provisions contained in the Senate amendment. the managers on the part of the House shall insist on the effective date specified in the provisions of the bill as passed the House reldting to treatment of nonqualified deferred compensation plans when the employers defined benefit plan is in atrisk status.
Date: 2006-05-02
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Madam Speaker. if the gentleman would yield. the other problem is that as soon as we focus. and we must focus. on beginning to figure out how we pay this down. we need to do that. We have explained why. But the reality is that when we are doing that. that is less money in our pockets. if you will. to be able to educate our children. toeducate ourselves. to invest in roads and water systems and sanitation systems and what makes America productive visavis the rest of the countries of the world. I can guarantee you that this debt is held to a large extent by countries around the world. Japan and China. the European countries. They are who we owe. And they are looking at ways of how do they increase their quality of life. And they are investing in education. They are investing in water systems. When we have to pay this down. we will not be able to make that investment.
Date: 2006-05-02
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. If the gentleman would yield for a monient. but part of the reason of why no subpoenas have been issued is that this House is controlled by the same party that controls the White House. And the Democrats. my party. we are not allowed to issue a subpoena. A subpoena can only be issued by the consent of the chairman of a committee. and that chairman would be a Republican. And. believe me. I have had a lot of questions and a lot of things I have wanted to ask the administration and its Departments with respect to some of their spending. I am not allowed to do that. NANCY PELOSI is not allowed to do that. It must be done by a Republican. and they have refused to subpoena. This is one of the reasons why there have been no subpoenas basically issued out of the House.
Date: 2006-05-03
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. we are now just about 3 weeks away from the Memorial Day holiday. and a gallon of gas in my district costs $3.38. Look at this photo from home. $3.38 for unleaded. the cheap stuff. It is now cheaper to buy a fastfood lunch than it is for people in Riverside to drive to Anaheim. Before the Memorial Day holiday. let us give America a fuel tax holiday: 60 days with no gas tax. I will be the first to admit this is a shortterm solution to a longterm problem. But the American people should not need to suffer the pain at the pump simply because this Republicanled Congress has forsaken its obligation to address our countrys energy crisis. Last week. ExxonMobil announced it had made $8.4 billion in a quarter. the first quarter of this year. Now why should the Federal Government give handouts to a company that made $8 billion in 3 months? -I urge my colleagues to support this revenueneutral bill. It gives money back to the taxpayers. it stops the needless oil company giveaways. and it gives consumers relief when they need it the most. I] 1030
Date: 2006-05-03
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. this legislation gives the FTC explicit authority to define and prosecute price gouging by gasoline retailers and wholesale distributors. Given the amount of anger that Americans are feeling at the gasoline pumps. we should have enacted similar legislation in law long ago. There are certainly some price gougers out there. especially in situations with tight supplies during emergencies. but the American people should know that this legislation will not bring relief at the pump this year. First. the FTC will take six months to define price gouging before they can enforce the new. law. Second. when the price of oil is $75 like it is this week. the price of gasoline is goingto be high. without any price gouging by anybody. The price of oil used to be controlled by OPEC. but most energy experts believe that stable OPEC nations are producing at near full capacity. The two major reasons why prices are going up is because of high global demand. particularly the booming economies of China and India. and instability in producing nations. Iraqs oil production has never recovered to prewar levels due to the insurgency. and many believe that Irans oil production could soon be reduced due to our tensions with that nation. In addition to being a large oil pr6ducer. Iran sits on the Straits of Hormuz between the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean. If conflict were to occur in that global oil shipping choke point. the price of oil will increase even further. Unfortunately instability in oil producing countries is not limited to the Middle East. Nigeria. Angola. and other areas of Africa are experiencing civil wars which are limiting oil exports. Our Administration has been engaged in a war of words with the President of Venezuela. which is one of our major oil suppliers. Bolivia just sent the army in to occupy its oil and gas fields. some of which had been jointly explored with Spanish and U.S. oil companies under contracts approved by previous governments. With all of these developments in oil producing nations and the surging global economy. the price of oil has gone up dramatically and the price of gasoline tracks the price of oil. If a gas station or a gasoline distributor wants to use the background of a rising market price to engage in pricegouging. they should be stopped and punished. The legislation by my friend BART STUPAK may be superior to this legislation in some ways. and if the House was under Democratic control we would have a more democratic process. But this is a decent piece of legislation that gives the FTC authority to investigate price gouging. so for that reason alone we should approve it.
Date: 2006-05-03
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. the Refinery Permit Process Schedule Act sends the right messagemore refinery capacity in this country is a good thing. Unfortunately this legislation did not follow the Committee process. since the House leadership is struggling to appear like they are doing something about gas prices. which they know are beyond their control. As a result. this legislation probably could be improved with hearings. amendment. and more careful consideration. However. I will support the legislation because it does not alter or repeal any environmental rule. regulation. or law. The bill would just ensure that permits do not sit on any federal bureaucrats desk for too long. That is a worthy goal. and I believe that if Chairman BARTON could do this bill his preferred way. then he would have brought this legislation to the CommitteeL for a hearing. But the American people are very angry with energy prices right now. and during these politicallycharged times the House often operates differently than it should. Many Americans and Members of the House are upset that we have not built a new refinery in this country in 25 years. That is true but that is also irrelevant. because it is much cheaper. and more efficient to expand existing refineries than to build brand new refineries. Since 1994. U.S. refiners added 2.1 million barrels of capacity. which is the equivalent of adding a larger than average refinery each year. Over the next several years. capacity will increase another 1.2 million barrels per day. For example. here are some refinery expansions that have already been announced: Chevron80.000 barrels per day at its Pascagoula. MS. refinery. CITGO in Lake Charles. LA105.000 barrels per day. Coffeyville Resources in Kansas1 5.000 barrels per day. Flint Hills Resources in Minnesota50.000 barrels per day. Holly Corp. inArtesia. NM10.000 barrels per day. Marathon Petroleum180.000 barrels per day in Garyville. LA. and 26.000 barrels per day in Detroit. MI. ConocoPhillips will spend $3 billion over four years on refinery expansion. which means tens of thousands of extra barrels per day. Motiva Enterprises is considering doubling the capacity of its large refinery in Port Arthur. TX. Sunoco recently announced plans to commit $1.8 billion over the next 3 years. leading to thousands more barrels per day. Tesoro Petroleum Company will devote $670 million in the next year alone to refining facility expansions. And the Nations largest refiner. Valero plans to spend $5 billion to add over 400.000 barrels per day of new capacity nationwide. So the debate about a lack of new refineries is a red herring. We should really focus on expansion projects. since that is where the action is. If this legislation fails to gain the required / support by the full House. I hope we could revisit this legislation in Committee.
Date: 2006-05-03
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this resolution supporting the goals and ideals of National Nurses Week. and I am indebted to my colleague from California for her scholarly presentation. I started my career as a nurse and worked for more than 15 years as a psychiatric nurse. and it helps me- here. I was the chief psychiatric nurse at the VA Hospital. Day Treatment Center. as well as the Day Hospital in Dallas. Texas. Next week. May 612. is National Nurses Week. and it is fitting for this body to honor the millions of nurses in America. Nurses are usually very. very dedicated individuals. In my personal experience. nurses tend to be intelligent. detail oriented. They tend to be ready to act at the spur of the moment. and with knowledge. Their work touches all aspects of patient care. whether it is in the emergency room. in the operating room. in the doctors office. at the neighborhood clinic. in the schools. and battlefields. Nurses stand at the forefront of -many lines of our health care system. and they must make life and death decisions. often with little advance notice. and they have frequent handson contact with the patient. For these reasons. a caring attitude and compassionate heart are required for the hard work nurses do. In my years as a nurse. I have seen iniracles and I have seen tragedies. At the VA. I worked with soldiers fresh from battle. as well as men and women who fought bravely years before. It was an honor to serve Americas veterans. each one on his or her individual path to recovery of good health. Nurses Week is really appropriate. because there hardly is anyone alive who will be born and finish life without contact with a nurse. We have a severe shortage right now. and I would hope that we would be more open to attempting to get more nurses. Americaneducated nurses. so that we will not lose the care that the nurses give. They work very hard for their patients. The American public needs to know that Congress recognizes nurses for the great work they do. I thank the leadership for its support of this bill. I would like to especially thank the two other Members of Congress who also are nurses for their collaboration and united stance in support of issues important to nurses. Both of them have been more active since than I have in nursing. But it is an old saying. once a nurse. always a nurse. I commend this legislation to my colleagues and urge their support.
Date: 2006-05-03
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I thank my colleague. Ms. SLAUGHTER. for exposing this bill for the sham it is. It is an insult to voters around this country. an attempt to create a perception that we are making changes when. in fact. we are not. And not only is the bill snake oil. but the process by which this bill is passed is snake oil. The previous speaker talked about those who are trying to criticize the process from the outside. Well. let me just tell you a little story. When this bill was before the Judiciary Committee. I offered an amendment. It was a simple amendment to require registered lobbyists to disclose contributions they solicit and transfer to Members of Congress in the course of doing their business. It was an attempt to shine a light on the paytoplay culture that we have seen in Washington. That amendment passed this Judiciary Committee on a bipartisan vote of 284. The Washington .Post then wrote an editorial about it. and I would like to cite from that editorial because what the editorial said very clearly was this was a provision that exposed. more than any other provision. the way Washington does business. And they said in very prescient manner. we are afraid to shine the light on this issue for fear that it will be shot down all the more quickly. But. in fact. no other disclosure requirement would be more useful in explaining the way Washington does business than this one. Well. what happened? A funny thing happened on the way to the Rules Committee from the Judiciary Committee. When people voted "yes" in the daylight. it was taken out in the middle of the night. and then the Rules Committee denied us an opportunity to vote on that very provision here on the floor of the House. a sham process for a sham bill. Now. this is a lot more than just about golf trips for Members of Congress paid for by lobbyists. The fundamental issue for the American people is what it is costing them every day because we dont have better rules to shine the light on 4obbyists. And we should look at the current gas prices right now. This institution and the President has signed now two bills in the last several years on en-. ergy. Both were said to be a big provision to reduce the price of gas. Well. we all know what a sham those bills were. What one of those bills did was create billions of dollars of subsidies to the oil and gas industry at a time that industry has experienced record profits and people are seeing high prices at the pump. We heard the other day this BandAid proposal from the Republican Senate. $100 rebate. What the American people are looking for is not chump change. They are looking for real change in the process in Washington so that we can change this country and take it in the right direction.
Date: 2006-05-03
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. on rollcall No. 114 I was unavoidably detained at an energy meeting. Had I.been present. I would have noted "yea."
Date: 2006-05-03
Speaker: ZOE LOFGREN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. This amendment would further weaken an already appallingly weak bill by striking the criminal penalties for corrupt lobbyists that knowingly violate disclosure requirements. The amendment would strike out provisions in the bill that were agreed to by the Judiciary Committee that would hold lobbyists criminally responsible for violating the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 by failing to disclose their contacts with Members of Congress with criminal intent and replace them with finds. The provision in the base text establishes criminal penalties for whoever knowingly and willfully or knowingly. willfully and corruptly fails to comply with any provision of the bill. I do not see why we should object to this. These new criminal penalties are to lobbyists who knowingly and willfully or knowingly. willfully and corruptly lie on their disclosure forms. Is the lobbyist who corruptly lies in his disclosure form not deserving of the criminal sanction? This amendment would strike .those tough criminal penalties and instead replace them with monetary fines. We know from reading in the newspaper that Mr. Jack Abramoff made $66 million defrauding Indian .tribal clients alone. Does anyone think that a $100.000 fine would deter Mr. Abramoff from making his $66 million corruptly? It is a drop in the bucket. In fact. this amendment is worsened by the fact that it adds a requirement to the intent element of the civil penalty of the Lobbyist Act. corruptly and with intent to evade the law. which is an almost impossible standard for the prosecutor to meet. The proponent of this amendment has argued that the language included in the current criminal provision is vague and undefined. we went through that in the committee. But I dont believe this argument is accurate. The term "corruptly" appears in title 18 at least 15 times. even appearing in the Federal Bribery Statute. Moreover. according to Blacks Law Dictionary. the term "corruptly" means "to act knowingly and dishonestly with the specific intent to subvert or undermine the integrity of something. I do not think the definition can get any clearer than that. This bill is already so weak and limited that it is virtually powerless to prevent future abuses. This amendment would remove one of the few tough deterrents in the bill. I would note that the provision for criminal penalties applies to lobbyists. not to Members of Congress. unless those lobbyists are former Members or acting in violation of the current rules on lobbying illegally. So we do think that this amendment. although I am sure the gentleman is offering it with all good faith. is misguided. and we do oppose and urge our colleagues to oppose. Mr. Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time.