macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2007-12-13
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Madam Speaker. first. I would like to thank my friend. the distinguished chairwoman. Ms. SLAUGHTER. for the time. and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker. here we are 74 days into the new fiscal year. and the new majority is requesting their third continuing resolution to fund the government because they failed to pass the necessary appropriations bills. As of today. only one appropriations bill funding the Department of Defense has been signed into law. What is the status of the rest? Well. another one has made it to a conference committee. and the rest of the appropriations bills wait for the majority to decide what to do. They control both Houses of Congress. and yet they still have to decide what to do. They had a chance to bring their record to two appropriations bills signed into law. But instead. the majority decided to play politics with a bill that had extraordinary bipartisan support. the Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act. because the majority thought they could use it as a campaign ploy. The new majority promised that they would finish their appropriations work. About a year ago. my friend. the distinguished chairwoman. Ms. SLAUGHTER. came to the floor and said things would be different under the leadership of the new majority. She said. and I quote. "The House will no longer avoid asking tough questions or fail to live up to its most basic duties." Well. today we see that that has not been possible. Next week. the majority is expected to propose an omnibus appropriations bill for all the appropriations bills that havent been finished. That bill will probably run into the thousands of pages and spend nearly half a trillion dollars. Members may not have enough time to read and digest that legislation before they are asked to vote on it. And unless the majority decides to move the omnibus appropriations bill through a conference committee. that bill will fall squarely within one of the loopholes to the majoritys earmark rule. and the rules of the House then would not require any disclosure of earmarks that will be contained in that massive omnibus appropriations bill. The majority should not be asking Members to vote on a bill that may include numerous earmarks that no one is going to be able to vet and that most wont even be able to see. Because of this loophole in the earmark rule. I. along with Mr. DREIER.
Date: 2007-12-13
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Again. I thank my friend. 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 the conference report on the bipartisan Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act that I made reference to a few minutes ago. The House passed the veterans and military funding bill on June 15 of this year by a vote of 4092. The Senate followed suit and named conferees on September 6 of this year. Unfortunately. the majority leadership in the House has refused to move the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act. They have even refused to name conferees. Instead. the majority plans to include the veterans funding in the massive omnibus appropriations legislation. But the status of the omnibus is still in doubt. Negotiations apparently are ongoing. but we all know there is one bill that has extraordinarily wide bipartisan support and that the President will quickly sign it into law. the Veterans Affairs appropriations bill. We already know that we are going to be here next week. We should pass the Veterans Affairs appropriation bill and provide the veterans the funding they deserve. I urge my colleagues to help move this important legislation and oppose the previous question. Our veterans deserve better than partisan gamesmanship holding back their funding. 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: 2007-12-17
Speaker: GINNY BROWN-WAITE (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Flor

ida. I thank the gentleman from South Carolina. Mr. Speaker. I rise today in support of House Resolution 542. which expresses the unconditional support of the House of Representatives for the members of the National Guard. I certainly want to thank the chairman and ranking member of the Armed Services Committee. As we all know. December 13 was the 371st birthday of the National Guard. I could not think of a better way to celebrate this tremendous milestone than to honor the men and women who serve in the National Guard with the resolution before us today. The National Guard certainly serves a unique purpose. Its main duty. of course. is to secure and defend our homeland. However. the National Guard also plays a vital role in aiding States when natural disasters strike. Whether it is helping to harness the wildfires that recently raged throughout California. or aiding in the aftermath of hurricanes or tornadoes in Florida and across the Southeast. the National Guard has been there lending a helping hand. While helping out in times of need across the United States leaves a lasting impact. it is the work that the National Guard does on beyond our borders that truly sets it apart. When National Guard units are called up. the men and women who answer the call leave their careers. families. and loved ones behind. These men and women put their lives on hold to protect this great country. and for that we must be eternally grateful. In fact. over 329.000 members of the National Guard have been mobilized in support of numerous military operations since September 11. 2001. The National Guard units from my district have played a. critical role in many of these operations. and I want to take this opportunity to thank them for everything they do in defense of all of our freedoms. Their contributions have been a tremendous asset. and without the National Guard. the United States Armed Forces would not be able to operate at the high level it currently does. As many of you know. an issue that is extremely important to me and the people of my district. and most likely your district too. is illegal immigration and the need for greater border security. Thats why it is also important to. note that the National Guard is playing a vital role in protecting our borders. There are currently 6.000 National Guardsmen serving along our borders. doing their best to stem the tide of illegal immigration that threatens this country. The National Guard is playing an everyincreasing role in the defense of our great country. and I encourage my colleagues to show their support for the sacrifices these men and women make by supporting this resolution.
Date: 2007-12-17
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of H. Res. 843. mourning the passage. of Congressman Henry Hyde and celebrating his leadership and service to the people of Illinois and the United States of America. And at this time I would like to recognize for 5 minutes the gentleman from Illinois . who is the prime sponsor of this legislation. and the successor to Henry Hyde in that seat from the great State of Illinois.
Date: 2007-12-17
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Madam Speaker. at this time I yield as much time as he may consume to the distinguished ranking member of the Rules Committee.
Date: 2007-12-17
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Madam Speaker.- the gentleman from Massachusetts spoke earlier about the fact that my previous comments were focused upon process. and that is correct. they were. because process is a fundamental aspect of a representative democracy. The legislation that the majority made available early this morning. this bill. Madam Speaker. I was in the district today and I had the opportunity and privilege of having various meetings with constituents. and I have arrived here this evening. and I must admit. Madam Speaker. that I have not had the time to absorb this bill. Now. process is important because it is our responsibility. Madam Speaker. to represent the Arrferican people in a responsible way. Now. the rules of the House call for. and it is true. and the former chairman mentioned it. and I admit. I have made mistakes. as well. the rules of the House call for 3 days for Members to be able to review bills.
Date: 2007-12-17
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

I may have been able to lift it up. but I have not had the opportunity to absorb the legislation. as I think as important a bit of legislation needs to be reviewed. Now. as I was saying. Madam Speaker. that rule. the requirement of 3 days for Members of this House to review legislation. is often waived by the Rules Committee. That is why the new majority made a promise during the campaign to at least provide 24 hours so that Members could review. study. attempt to absorb legislation at least with 24 hours. So that is why it is most sad. most unfortunate that the new majority is not living up to its own promises. Because I think there is a legitimate. it is a legitimate point of concern when the 3day rule is waived. And that is why the promise was made. So I think it is most unfortunate that the promise of the new majority to at least allow the House 24 hours to review legislation. especially as important a piece of legislation as this omnibus appropriations legislation is. that promise is not kept. Madam Speaker. I will be asking for a "no" vote on the previous question so that we can amend this rule and allow the House to consider a change to the rules of the House to restore accountability and enforceability to the earmark rule while closing loopholes that we have found over the last few months. that under the current rule. so long as the chairman of a committee of jurisdiction includes either a list of earmarks contained in the bill or report or a statement that there are no earmarks. no point of order lies against the bill. This is the same as the rule in the last Congress. However. under the rule as is it functioned under the Republican majority in the 109th Congress. even if the point of order was not available on the bill. it was always available on the rule as a question of consideration. But because the Democratic Rules Committee specifically exempts earmarks from the waiver of all points of order. they deprive Members of the ability to raise the question of earmarks on the rule or on the bill. The earmark rule is also not applicable when the majority uses a procedure to accept amendments between Houses. such as they plan to do with this omnibus appropriations bill. Because the omnibus appropriations bill is not a conference report. it will fall squarely within one of the loopholes to the earmark rule. and the rules of the House will not require any disclosure of earmarks that are contained in this legislation. I would like to direct all Members to a letter that - House Parliamentarian John Sullivan recently sent to Rules Chairwoman SLAUGHTER which confirms what we have been saying since January that the Democratic earmark rule contains loopholes. In his letter to Chairwoman SLAUGHTER. the Parliamentarian states that the Democratic earmark rule "does not comprehensively apply to all legislative propositions at all stages of the legislative process."
Date: 2007-12-17
Speaker: SAM JOHNSON (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Madam Speaker. on rolicall Nos. 1163 and 1164. I was unable to vote. Had I been present. I would have voted "yea."
Date: 2007-12-17
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. its my privilege to yield 6 minutes to the distinguished former member of the Rules Committee. my friend from Georgia. Dr. GIN REY.
Date: 2007-12-17
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: sible

of funding levels for competing Florida. Mr. Speaker. at this time I re- programs. The interior and environserve the balance of my time. ment portion of this bill is the product
Date: 2007-12-17
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H

$39 million is provided for our naFlorida. Mr. Speaker. I reserve the bal- tional refuge system to begin refurance of my time. bishing our refuges and replacing the
Date: 2007-12-17
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. a prior colleague who spoke said that this 34pound bill was that size and weight because of our photocopying. I just want to make clear for the RECORD that it was handed to us by the majority like that. I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Arizona .
Date: 2007-12-17
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 allow the House to consider a change to the rules of the House to restore accountability and enforceability to the earmark rule while closing the loopholes we have found over the last few months. Under the current rule. so long as the chairman of a committee of jurisdiction includes either a list of earmarks contained in the bill or report. or a statement that there are no earmarks. no point of order lies against the bill. This is the same as the rule in the last Congress. However. under the rule as it functioned under the Republican majority in the 109th Congress. even if the point of order was not available on the bill. it was always available on the rule as a "question of consideration." But because the Democratic Rules Committee specifically exempts earmarks from the waiver of all points of order. they deprive Members of the ability to raise the question of earmarks on the rule or on the bill. The earmark rule is also not applicable when the majority uses a procedure to accept "amendments between the Houses." such as with this legislation. the omnibus appropriations bill. Because the omnibus is not a conference report. the bill falls squarely within one of the loopholes- to the earmark rule and the rules of the House will not require any disclosure of earmarks contained in the legislation. Any action as announced previously by the chairman of the Appropriations Committee is at his discretion. I would like to direct all Members to a letter that House Parliamentarian. John Sullivan. recently sent to Rules Chairwoman SLAUGHTER. which confirms what we have been saying since January. that the Democratic earmark rule contains loopholes. In his letter to Chairwoman SLAUGHTER. the Parliamentarian states that the Democratic earmark rule "does not comprehensively apply to all legislative propositions at all stages of the legislative process."
Date: 2007-12-18
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. I will be asking for a "no" vote on the previous question so we can amend this rule and allow the House to consider a change to the rules of the House to restore accountability .and enforceability to the earmark rule. while closing the loopholes we have found over the last few months. Under the current rule. so long as the chairman of a committee of jurisdiction includes either a list of earmarks contained in the bill or a report or a statement there are no earmarks. no point of order lies against the bill. This is the same as the rule in the last Congress. However. under the rule as it functioned under the Republican majority in the 109th Congress. even if the point of order was not available on the bill. it was always available on the rule as a question of consideration. But because the Democratic Rules Committee specifically exempts earmarks from the waiver of all points of order. they deprive Members of the ability to raise the question of earmarks on the rule or on the bill. The earmark rule is also not applicable when the majority uses a procedure to accept "amendments between the Houses" such as they plan to do with the underlying legislation. Because the energy bill is not a conference report. the bill will fall squarely within one of the loopholes to the earmark rule and the rules of the House will not require any disclosure of earmarks that will be contained in the legislation. I would like to direct all Members to a letter that House Parliamentarian. John Sullivan. recently sent to House Rules Committee Chairwoman SLAUGHTER which confirms what we have been saying since January that the Democratic earmark rule contains loopholes. In his letter to Chairwoman SLAUGHTER. the Parliamentarian states that the Democratic earmark rule "does not comprehensively apply to all legislative propositions at all stages of the legislative process.:
Date: 2007-12-18
Speaker: SAM JOHNSON (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise in strong support of the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act. Ive said it before and Im saying it again. the current problems with the mortgage and real estate markets are considerable. but theyre not permanent. This bill finally gets it right and provides a 3year window so that lenders can restructure and write down loans. allowing people to move on with their lives without being taxed on phantom income. I have confidence in the American economy and in the fact that real estate markets will rebound. Our economy is sound. The Federal Reserve is now addressing mortgage lending practices that were out of control. And its appropriate to restructure loans without taxing phantom income from the - forgiveness of these inappropriate loans. I am also glad to see this bill does not impose a luxury tax on one in 20 American families who own a second home. That tax on second homes also would have been an economic disaster for communities that rely upon tourism and recreation as their development strategy. This bill before us is an appropriate response to a painful but temporary problem. We should all vote "yes" on this issue.
Date: 2007-12-18
Speaker: DAVID DAVIS (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Tennessee

If you look at the 9.000 earmarks that are in there. special projects. the one that leaps out to me and leaps out to the people of northeast Tennessee is over a milliondollar hippie museum in New York. That is not the way the people of east Tennessee want to spend their hardearned money. There are better ways to spend money in Tennessee and across this great land. As I said earlier. moms and dads are really trying to. figure out how they are going to take care of their kids. They dont need Members of Congress or bureaucrats in Washington trying to spend their money on hippie museums in New York. They need to know they can fill up their tank with gas and be able to afford it. Or be able to take the kids out for a meal and be able to afford it. Or be able to afford a months worth of energy to keep their kids warm. Or be able to buy health care and be able to afford it. Or know that they have a Congress that is going to take care of illegal immigration because they are worried that a country that is not secure is not long to be a country. Those are the things that the American people are concerned about. They are not concerned about trying to have special pork barrel projects to help a Member of Congress get reelected. They are concerned about making sure that their family is taken care of. That is what we ought to be concerned about. That is what I think the freshmen Republicans came here to do. I started off tonight by saying I am blessed to be able to stand on the House floor of the United States Congress. [ 2115 Come from humble beginnings back in the mountains of east Tennessee and be able to come here and represent just some commonsense American values. and thats what the American people want.
Date: 2007-12-18
Speaker: LINDSEY GRAHAM (republican)
Chamber: S

and BEN CARDIN to introduce the Bail Bond Fairness Act of 2007. This bill will ensure that all defendants. not just rich defendants. have access to bail and pretrial release. The Bail Reform Act was meant to ensure the defendants appearance in court. Over the past 2 -decades. however. many judges have been forfeiting bonds for behavior outside the predictability or control of a bondsman. If bondsmen are forced to warrant behavior they cant predict or control.: they will raise their rates. rendering bonds unavailable to many indigent defendants. These defendants will the go to jail pending trial. swelling our prison population and draining our budget. This bill mandates that a bail bondmay be forfeited only if a defendant fails to appear in court as ordered. Professional bail agents would be able to return to the Federal court system to provide bail for defendants because bail would not be forfeited for violations of conditions that are completely out of their control such as failure to maintain employment. Let me be clear. this bill does not. change a judges authority to set or restrict bail. Were not talking about putting more criminals back into the community. A judge still has to determine a defendants flight risk and threat to the community and make a judgment regarding pretrial release in terms of bail amount and conditions. Violent criminals willand shouldbe held in custody. Please join us in ensuring that all defendants. regardless of wealth. have -access to pretrial release in the Federal system. By Mr. BINGAMAN:
Date: 2007-12-19
Speaker: SAM JOHNSON (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Madam Speaker. today were considering a bill that does some important things. One. it stops the 2008 physician cuts. Two. it extends the Childrens Health Insurance Program past the politics of the Presidential election. and three. it helps physicians who are called up for active duty to serve their country. But in reality. this isnt the best bill Congress could have put together. and yall need to know that. For the first time. physicians dont know what Medicare will pay them next year. In 6 short months. doctors will once again be facing more than a 10 percent cut in their reimbursements. That uncertainty is no help when youre trying to run a business. When it comes to physicians who are called up to serve their country and their community. this bill does deliver temporary relief. Earlier this year Congress moved in a bipartisan fashion to temporarily fix an oversight in Medicare. Previously. the law created a red tape nightmare for any Medicare physician who needed to leave his practice for more than 60 days at a time. The bill before us today continues this fix for just 6 months by allowing our Reservists to have one substitute doctor for their entire deployment. I look forward to working with my colleagues next year on a permanent fix for this problem. We need to support our troops and the docs that are called up.
Date: 2007-12-19
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

I would like. at this time. Madam Speaker. to yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished member of the Rules Committee. rgy friend. Mr. SESSIONS of Texas.