macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2007-02-13
Speaker: PATRICK J. MURPHY (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Penn

sylvania. Mr. Speaker. I now yield 6 minutes to the -gentleman from Tennessee. my fellow Blue Dog. Colonel TANNER. a Vietnam Navy veteran. retired colonel of the Tennessee Army National Guard.
Date: 2007-02-13
Speaker: PATRICK J. MURPHY (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Penn

sylvania. Mr. Speaker. I now yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Washington . a veteran of the U.S. Navy. .
Date: 2007-02-14
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I thank my colleague from Georgia. I rise in support of the resolution and to pay tribute to my friend and fellow member of the Energy and Commerce Committee. Dr. CHARLIE NORWOOD. CHARLIE came to Congress after my first term as part of the class of 1994. and it seems a year did not go by that we did not serve on a committee together. I honorably served with him at first on the Education and Workforce Committee and then later on the Energy and Commerce Committee. CHARLIE and I shared a passion for health care issues. and I particularly enjoyed our work together on the Health Subcommittee. A dentist by training. CHARLIE was devoted to improving the health care system. not only for providers like himself but also for the patients that rely on our health care system to keep them well. The phrase Patients Bill of Rights would not have been coined if CHARLIE and our chairman. JOHN DINGELL. had not teamed up to give patients an ability to fight back against the HMOs that too dften make health care decisions based on the bottom line. rather than a physicians recommendation. I note CHARLIES last legislative act before leaving Washington and returning to Georgia was to reintroduce the Patients Bill of Rights in this Congress as H.R. 979. There is no doubt in my mind thatthis legislation will be CHARLIES legacy and will honor him and his work in this esteemed Chamber by finally making his vision of patients rights a reality. Last July 4 recess. CHARLIE and I joined two other members of the Health Subcommittee as we visited the impressive trauma facilities utilized by our brave military doctors to treat our wounded service personnel in Balad and Baghdad. Iraq and Kabul. Afghanistan. I knew there was a good reason CHARLIE and I got along. despite being different parties. but I also realized that trip that CHARLIE and I shared a lot of interests. and one of them in firearms. I met few people with more enthusiasm for firearms than CHARLIE NORWOOD. In fact. I will mention that how he cared about people. and Chairman DEAL understands that. he presented a book to those of us who went. It has a picture of CHARLIE NORWOOD with a .50caliber machine gun in a helicopter we were flying in. but CHARLIE was not really happy because he was not sitting behind that .50caliber machine gun. CHARLIE was a good doctor and honorable Member of Congress and a great friend. He always thought of others. and I will always remember him for his friendship for these- years. Our thoughts are with his family. and his wife Gloria has become a good friend of my wife Helen through the Congressional Spouses. and I will miss CHARLIE. and we all will. We honor his memory and his contributions to our country.
Date: 2007-02-15
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Does the gentleman not understand that when words are used. that they dont actually have to be exact words to suggest a particular opinion on the part of the Member? And do you really think that it is beyond question that any of the Members on your side of the aisle as they engaged in this discussion and debate did not question the patriotism of our Members? I mean. me thinks thou dost protest too much. as the gentleman stated earlier. I yield to the gentleman.
Date: 2007-02-16
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. on rollcalls No. 100. Previous Question the Rule on H.R. 976. No. 101. the Rule on H.R. 976. and No. 102. Final passage of H.R. 976. had I been present. I would have voted "yea."
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise today in support of H. Res. 42. recognizing Ann. Richards extraordinary contributions to Texas and American public life. Ann Richards and I worked together when I served in Texas State Senate in 1991 and 1992 before I was elected to the House of Reprepentatives in 1993. At that time. she was serving as the Governor of Texas. During our tenure in the state house we worked together to support stronger environmental laws for our district and Texas. Goo rnor Richards was a teacher who started ouf in politics as a volunteer on the campaigns of Sarah Weddington. Henry B. Gonzalez. and Ralph Yarborough. She began her own political career in 1976 when she was elected to serve as a County Commissioner in Travis County. Six years later in 1982. she was elected Texas State Treasurer and served two terms. Ann made history by becoming the first woman elected to statewide office in Texas in fifty years.. In 1990. Ann ran for governor and promised to increase the role of minorities and wvomen in state government as part of her plan for a "New Texas." When Governor Richards was elected she made it a priority as governor to appoint more women and minorities to state boards and commissions and followed through on her promise. During her tenure. Governor Richards had many accomplishments including revitalizing the Texas economy. reforming the prison system. and instituting the state lottery. Once she left public office. Ann continued to be an inspiration to us all when she bravely battled osteoporosis and esophageal cancer. Ann wasnt only the governor of one of the greatest states in America. but she was one of Americas greatest governors in terms of her personality. sense of humor. and trailblazing accomplishments. Governor Richards was the First Lady of Texas politics and her. extraordinary accomplishments make her not only a Texas hero. but also an American hero.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill to provide all lowincome students with the same opportunity to.. receive a Pell Grant by eliminating te tuition sensitivity provision in the Pell Grant program. as amended.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Today. Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of H.R. 990. the Pell Grant Equity Act of This is a bill that is designed to adjust an inequity in the currefit law that works against the interest of many college students in those States that have low tuition. At a time when we have seen tuition and fees of public colleges and universities increase significantly. there is a notable exception to that trend. and that is that California community colleges recently decreased their tuition and fees from $26 a credit to $20 a credit. For a student taking 13 credits for two semesters. they save $520 in tuition for the year. This is almost unheard of in a day of skyrocketing college costs. Unfortunately. a provision in the Higher Education Act penalizes students attending lowcost institutions. such as Californias community colleges. The provision known as "tuition sensitivity" reduces the Pell Grant for the neediest of students attending higher education institutions with the lowest tuition. The result is that thousands of lowincome students receive a lesser Pell Grant. The Pell Grant Equity Act eliminates this discriminating provision in the law. ensuring that students receive the full amount of the Pell Grants they are entitled to receive. This is a very important bill for these students and for their families. This is legislation that my colleague.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. earlier in the first few hours of this session. this Congress took a bipartisan vote to cut interest rates for the neediest students who are borrowing money. Those same group of students. many of them are still eligible for the Pell Grant. This action we take today. again on a bipartisan basis. I think will be very helpful to these students and to their families as. again. they try to put together the resources necessary so that they can begin their advanced education in the higher -education system in this case. Hopefully in community colleges. they will continue to try to figure out. along with the State legislatures. how to lower the cost of that college. And this would provide an additional incentive. since they know now that those students will not be punished in a sense because they are going to a lower cost college at that time. I would like to thank the staff of both committees for all of the work they did .on this. for the senior Republican. Mr. KELLER. on the subcommittee. and Mr. MCKEON on the full committee. and to Mr. HINOJOSA. the chairman of the subcommittee. for all of their work. We look forward to a quick passage here and hopefully a speedy passage in the Senate.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I rise today in support of H.R. 990The Pell Grant Equity Act of 2007. This legislation is a simple measure to reduce the real and perceived barriers to a higher education for many lowincome families across the United States. Community colleges and other lowcost institutions offer lifechanging educational opportunities for motivated students. Pell grant recipients are by definition motivated. . The Pell grant program works as a contract between the Federal Government and the individual. The Government says. "we will provide you with the means to get a higher education if you desire to invest in yourself." Removing the tuition sensitivity. provision of the Higher Education Act will help students cover the full cost of attending college. which is significantly higher than tuition alone. For over 30 years. Congress has consistently increased funding available to the Pell grant program and increased the maximum grant that each student can receive. Why? Because the program works. Pell grant recipients regularly go on to succeed in jobs with career potential and upward mobility. Increased access to higher education is an important goal for the Congress because having an educated workforce is essential to ourcountrys future. As former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan once said to me. "if our people are educated there isnt a problem we cant solve. If they arent. there isnt one that we can." Eliminating tuition sensitivity from the Pell grant program is a positive step towards making college education available to everyone who wants one. and there isnt a higher goal than that.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise today in support for H.R. 990. the Pell Grant Equity Act. This important piece of legislation would amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to provide all lowincome students with the same opportunity to receive a Pell grant by eliminating the tuition sensitivity provision in the Pell grant program. Current law prohibits maximum Pell grant awards to students attending lowtuition higher education institutions even if their income is low enough to otherwise qualify for the maximum award. As the husband of a retired highschool teacher. I have always been a. strong advocate for education. Unfortunately. the high costs of a college education prohibit many lowincome students from receiving a higher degree. Pell grants provide lowincome students with their best opportunity to attend college. and we must support financial aid programs like this. in order to help as many students as possible succeed and receive a college degree. Higher education is the best way to ensure our children and grandchildren have a promising future regardless of socioeconomic status. I thank my colleagues for supporting this bill.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I rise today to express my support for H. Con. Res. 74 sponsored by Congressman MIKE THOMPSON. Passage of this bill will express federal supportfor Hydrocephalus research. Hydrocephalus. a chronic neurological condition that causes cerebrospinal fluid to build up in the brain cavity instead of being reabsorbed into the body. is a disease that affects over one million Americans. This disease can cause head enlargement and blurred vision. learning disabilities and impaired physical development and is fatal if untreated. Like many other diseases that affect a relatively small portion of our population. Hydrocephalus research lacks proper funding. It is deplorable that the current standard treatment. which requires the insertion of a shunt into the brain to drain out the fluid. was designed in 1952. Shunts are extremely prone to infections and frequently require repair through major surgery. Modem medicine can do better. I am certain that with federal support for additional research we can develop a better treatment. if not a cure. for those suffering from Hydrocephalus and help them live healthier. fuller lives.. February 27..V2.07 I applaud my colleague. Mr. THOMPSON. for his efforts in this area and I encourage my colleagues to support this resolution.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: LINCOLN DAVIS (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Tennessee

I thank my friend from Georgia. I think. what my hope is. all of us become a little bit more civil in this debate that we are having and realize that this is about America. We want security and we want peace. We want the Iraqis to win. What we have done is destroyed an Army in Iraq and I agree with that. we have destroyed an Army in Iraq that was able to defend. or at least to resist the Iranian Army with three times the population they have for a period of over 10 years. We now have to be the Army for the Iraqis. It is our responsibility to defend Iraq. In essence. I think we have to put our troops along the Syrian and Iranian border to be surethat no one interferes with Iraq and let the Iraqis settle their own differences. Twelve million Iraqis voted in December of 2005. They established their government. it is there. Departments elected. It is time we let them govern themselves. but we must protect them. You have been very kind to allow me to be here participating in this Blue Dog conversation. Before I leave. one thing I want to say. one of the reasons we have been in the Middle - East since shortly after World War H. quite frankly. we were there to keep Germany from getting all the oil that could have helped them delay the war much longer in World War II. maybe even have won some territories. Europe may have looked totally different if Hitler and his Nazis had been able to get control of the oil fields in the Middle East. We have beeh there and have been invited by governments in the Middle East for some time. Folks may or may not have agreed with us. but the leaders who were there invited us to help them. Quite frankly. there was fear in the Cold War that that might go to the Communist Nations of Russia and perhaps even China. So we have been there for a reason. We now are there we say to protect ourselves from terrorists. My opinion is that we have to stay there to protect the Iraqis from other aggressor Nations and let them solve their problems and then we can bring our troops home. We will be there for a long time.. The American public understands that. Thank you for allowing me to speak.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Absolutely. So I started in this Congress 11 years ago. and we spent 18 cents of every dollar just on paying interest on interest payments. Then we tightened our belts. we did PAYGO. President Clinton and others. we worked together. we brought it down. In the year 2000 when President Bush took over. we were paying 11 cents of every dollar on interest. So we had brought it down. Then. of course. the President decided to give tax breaks to some of the wealthiest Americans. I know. because I got a tax break. but not everybody got a tax break. The real people who really needed the tax breaks. I think. did not receive them. That is why I didnt vote for it. I received it because the majority. the Republicans at that time voted it in. but I didnt vote for it because I know what fair is fair. If you get opportunity in this country and you work hard. and you get a few breaks and a little bit of luck along the way. that can happen in America for almost anybody. And some of it is luck. and you happen to make money. I think you should understand that to keep America full of opportunities. we need to pay our taxes. So I am willing to do that. but not this President. because he cut the taxes on the people who had lots of money and who were making lots of money. His own comptroller told us several years ago that 70 percent of the deficit every year in this country is due to the tax breaks that the President gave. In other words. we kept spending even though we didnt take in revenue. In fact. we returned back revenue. Then. of course. we have the $3 billion a week of money we spend in Iraq. I will not tell you the way I feel. This President went into Iraq on the cheap. He didnt think that Americans would really want to spend the kind of money it took to put in 200.000 or 300.000 troops to do the job the day we went in. So he told his Secretary of Defense. despite what the generals told �him. Shinseki. who said we need at least 200.000 or more troops in there. they did it at the level of 110. and now we are paying for it. Now we have been in a war much longer than we ever anticipated. much longer than the President ever anticipated.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. So we find ourselves there longer than we are supposed to be. and we ask ourselves. how much longer. $3 billion a week on the credit card? Wait till America really figures out that they have not paid for this war. I think they are going to be very angry at that point. I see I have taken most of your time.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Thank you. That is a very important and valid point. I want to read a quote. and that quote is this: "So lets get something straight right now. To point out that our military has been overextended. taken for granted and neglected. that is no criticism of the military. that is a criticism of the President and Vice President and their record of neglect." Who do you think said that? I will tell you who said that. George W. Bush. as a candidate. said that on November 3. 2000. in an interview on CNN. I think it is pretty clear that he was right almost 7 years ago. and it is just sad that he didnt mean it. It is sad that he didnt actually do anything more than say those words instead of taking to heart what hesupposedly believed at the time and making sure that it didnt happen when he became President. Clearly Walter Reed. the lack of body armor and preparation and training that we are sending. that we have been sending and he was willing to send our troops over to Iraq and Afghanistan without. is clearly still something that he is willing to do. Unfortunately. all the President has been is a candidate who spews words with really not too much meaning behind them. It looks like Mr. ALTMIRE would like to say something.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

On that point. just to focus on the National Guard and how correct you are about how they are being treated versus what they signed up for. there are now 14.000 National Guard troops being deployed earlier than they were originally scheduled to meet the demands of the Presidents proposed plans to escalate the war. National Guard and Army units are being called up sooner than previously scheduled. and that is even though some of these units do not have the equipment that they need. They do not have the training. and -some of them are having to go over there foregoing the training. Mr. MEEK and I are going to be meeting with our general. who is in charge of our National Guard in Florida very soon. I just saw the request today. and I am looking forward to meeting with him. I met with him in my district in Florida as well last year. and the conversations that I have had with him and with others about the condition of the equipment. not just the condition of the equipment that is going over Fettruary 27. 2007 there. but what happens to the equipment once it comes back because we are not replacing the equipment and sending them new equipment after it has been through 5. 6 years of an Iraq War. So thie equipment that they are working on and that they are utilizing has been through war literally. I mean. we are not making sure that they have the equipment that they need. We are sending them over there two. three and four times now. When I went to Walter Reed a couple of weeks ago. every single guy I met had been through three tours. three. One of the guys I met. his little boy was there. and literally his dad had been on three tours. His little boy was six. which means that this dad missed half of his childs life already. half. I mean. that is just inexcusable. That is not what our volunteers sign up for. I mean. even if you signed up for the regular standing Army. it is unreasonable to expect that they would have to have that kind of pressure. physical. mental. emotional pressure put on them as well as their families. especially in the middle of the situation in a war that we are involved in under dubious circumstances to begin with. I do not know if Mr. MEEK wants to jump in here now. but he is still sitting so I imagine not. So I will go back to