macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 1987-12-10
Speaker: DONALD E. LUKENS (republican)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. this amendment would withhold aid from any country which is overwhelmingly influenced by the Soviet Union until such time as it reduces its military cooperation with the U.S.S.R. and its satellites. Unless America sets a standard by which we give aid to Soviet influenced countries. we will continue to be used by the Soviets to feed countries they are subjugating and controlling. This amendment sets a simple threshold after which we say. "Thats too much. no more aid." The standard set in this legislation is fair. If a country receives more than threequarters of its military assistance from the Smiet bloc. we simply say. "Thats enough." or if there are more than 55 Soviet bloc troops. the amount of our selfimposed quota on American advisers in El Salvador. occupying that country. we say again. you can support them to that extent. you do not need our help. Many Communist countries cannot support themselves. The only thing that keeps them from collapsing is American aid. Americans should not be put in the position of keeping afloat weak Sovietdominated allies. especially when most of their aid comes in the form of military assistance. The nations most affected would be the Peoples Republic of Angola and the Peoples Republic of Mozambique. This amendment will end the spectacle. as happened earlier this year. of a country like the Peoples Republic of Angola. which is a wholesale violator of human rights and is a dictatorship with tens of thousands of Cuban mercenaries to maintain power and is waging fullscale war on its political opponents. Then it demands that the United States give aid. This amendment. second. will give incentives to nations to reduce the Soviet military presence in order to remain eligible for American economic aid. Americans believe that this is the way we spend our foreign aid money. anyway. If most Americans were aware that we give large sums of money in economic assistance to nations which receive their total military aid from the Soviet Union. they would think we are crazy. and yet we do exactly that. In effect. our development aid is used to grow food to feed large numbers of foreign soldiers which are camped out in this sector. Vote for the Lukens amendment on aid to any country which is overwhelmingly affected by Soviet military presence assistance.
Date: 1987-12-19
Speaker: VANDER JAGT (republican)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. today I rise to pay tribute to a very special man. Emert "Buck" Trimble. who will be retiring on December 31 after 19 years of outstanding service to Spring Lake Township. Mi. Buck has been the townships supervisor for 17 years and he can proudly look back upon a history of important accomplishments and achievements. It is my privilege to have this opportunity to honor Buck by bringing some of these accomplishments to the attention of my colleagues in the U.S. Congress. . Buck and his wife. Bennie. moved to Michigan. in 1948. He worked as a cabinet finisher for the Story & Clark Piano Factory in Grand Haven until 1970. He was elected to the Spring Lake Township government as a trustee 19 years ago and 2 years later was appointed supervisor. Under his astute. leadership. the townships assessed valuation has grown dramatically from $28 million. 17 years ago. to its current $133.081 million. To ensure the economic growth of his community. Buck has worked hard to attract new businesses through township industrial parks. He was also instrumental in extending water lines in the township and putting together a water program for 80 percent of the townships residents. Buck has also served on many civic boards in the last 17 years including the Ottawa County Economic Development Corporation. Ottawa County Assessors Association. Grand HavenSpring Lake Sewer Authority. and Regional Housing Committee. To put it simply. Buck Trimble is one of those special people who. through commitment and dedication. have made our country stronger. His determination to better his community has been constant and his perseverance steady. Buck epitomizes the qualities we all strive to achieve. His helping hands have touched the lives of many in his community and his outstanding work will continue to enhance their quality of life for many years to come. I am proud to call Buck Trimble a friend. Over the years we have had an especially fine relationship. It has been very rewarding for me. as a Congressman. to work with Buck Trimble on projects and issues of mutual interest and concern for the people of Spring Lake Township. In his elective role as supervisor. Buck serves closest to the peoplethats what really makes him so Very. very special. I know you will join with me in saluting his accomplishments and wishing him success in all his future endeavors. of Remarks E 4929
Date: 1988-01-27
Speaker: VANDER JAGT (republican)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. on January 25. I introduced the bill. H.R. 3859. with my colleague. Congressman SANDER LEVIN. This measure is designed to ensure equitable Federal income tax treatment of group selfinsured workers compensation funds. I first attempted to legislatively address this issue last year when I introduced a bill. H.R. 1709. that was designed to clarify the lax exempt status of these funds. The sudden reversal by the Internal Revenue Service of its longstanding position that these funds were tax exempt entities severely impacted the viability of the workers compensation funds both retroactively and prospectively. A legislative response was clearly indicated to address the dispute that had arisen because of the change in IRS policy. The text of that bill was modified by the House Committee on Ways and Means and included in section 10428 of the Housepassed version of the 1987 budget reconciliation bill. Unfortunately. these provisions were deleted In conference committee action on the final reconciliation bill for reasons entirely unrelated to the merits of the measure. This problem which affects workers and employers throughout the country. therefore. persists and legislative action is still needed. These funds are utilized In some 28 States and in my home State of Michigan. we have some 38 funds in which over 7.000 employers participate and some 2 million employees are provided workers compensation coverage. Furthermore. these funds have not only been Instrumental In reducing skyrocketing insurance costs but have helped employers to avoid the nonavailability problem which many of them have encountered. Recognizing that we are in a revenueconscious Congress. It is important to note that neither last years bill. H.R. 1709. nor this years measure H.R. 3859. which is more modest and basically the same as the Housepassed budget reconciliation bill language. will have a significant revenue effect. This is the case because In prior years these entities were considered to be tax exempted and hence. nonrevenue producing. What. in effect. our new bill does is to provide tax relief for those funds for years prior to 1987 to the extent the IRS revised position would create tax deficiencies attributable to the timing of policyholder dividend deductions. For 1987 and 1988 these funds would be subject to a transition rule and treated as property and casualty Insurance companies were treated prior to amendments contained in the 1986 Tax Reform Act. Starting In 1909. the funds would be treated the same as any other property and casualty Insurance company. Mr. Speaker. there is an urgant need for this legislation which would alloN these funds to continue as viable business entities. We would certainly welcome the cosponsorship of our colleagues. E 16
Date: 1988-02-03
Speaker: DONALD E. LUKENS (republican)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman. it is a very difficult decision for everybody in the House today. I want it known that although I really do hate communism. I do not hate Communists. I am saddened by the fact that we in this body probably were split vhilosophically to begin with. but. after nine trips in 14 months to Central America. I am more convinced than ever that the regime in Nicaragua is a Communist dictatorship. and they intend to stay Communist and will never give up their power over the army. It is the only country in the world. that I know of. where a political party has an army. The army does not belong to the people of Nicaragua. it does not belong to the Government of Nicaragua. it belongs to the Sandinista political party. That is rather unusual that a party would want an army. but that is the power that Ortega says. graphically. he will not give up. We met three times now with the Permanent Commission on Human Rights in Nicaragua and all the executive committee of that permanent commission now says that they have documentary evidence of 12.400 prisoners. some of whom have not been allowed to see anybody for 7 years. I think a country whose government has such a sad record In human rights. on that basis alone. should be subject to some kind of pressure. Thousands of people that eight of us marched with in Leon 6 weeks agoand I revisited Just this last weekend. 3 days agoliterally hundreds of them. came to me on their own and said that we would be not marching today if it were not for the Contras. we would not have any freedom to assemble. there would be no freedom of religion. certainly no freedom of press or speech if it were not for the military pressure in addition to the economic and political pressure. I would hope that this House today would see fit. in its wisdom and vision for America. to vote for peace and freedom.
Date: 1988-02-17
Speaker: FRED WERTHEIMER (republican)
Chamber: S

President. Common Cause. 2030 M Street. NW. Washington. DC DaR MR. WERTHEIMEn: Thank you for the opportunity to express my views on campaign finance reform. My responses to the Common Cause questionnaire are indicated below. 1. Do you support or oppose legislation establishing an overall limit on the total amount of PAC contributions an Individual candidate for the U.S. House or Senate could accept? Support: X Oppose: 2. Do you support or oppose legislation to establish a campaign finance system for Congressional elections that would provide an overall campaign spending limit and a limit on the use of a candidates personal wealth. along with partial public funding? Support: X Oppose: Again. thank you fo t.ie opportunity to comment on the issue of campaign financIng. Sincerely.
Date: 1988-03-03
Speaker: DONALD E. LUKENS (republican)
Chamber: H

I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman. I have been five times to Nicaragua in the last 10 months at my own expense. I just came back 3 days ago from speaking to people in the street. a farmer who hosted a reception of some 700 people who were merely entertaining children having a pinta party. So we distributed toys and clothing that I had brought down. I was astounded by the reception. They said simply. "Why is it you Americans are willing to help the Russians bring in their Communist tanks and their Communist guns but you are going to cut off the freedom fighters? It is very dangerous to be a friend of the United States throughout the world. The Communists alulays manage to support their friends. tvhy dont you support yours? We uould have no hope for democracy in Nicaragua if it were not for the Contras. the freedom fighters. But you are willing to turn off the American assistance for a group of freedom fighters and not even mention the Russian Communist support." One lady told me that they had not seen tanks inside a year in Managua. The day that this group in the left wing control area of this group voted to cut off the assistance for the freedom fighers. 36 tanks rolled out that night under her window and they have been going back and forth ever since. The only country in Central America with any tanks at all is the Communist government of Nicaragua. Why do we insist on a onesided deal? Why do the left wing jump off the cliff to protect the Russian Communists? They are allowed to send tanks. they send guns. You would think that someone somewhere would be embarrassed by the onesidedness of this deal. the unfairness of people willing to die. who die every day for a little bit of the freedom of which we have so much. This country has grown selfish and selfcentered. We have forgotten the price of freedom: Nicaraguans have not.
Date: 1988-03-16
Speaker: DONALD E. LUKENS (republican)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I would like to address myself to the comments made by the majority whip who Just said the Republicans abandoned the Contras. I do not know any war can be won by throwing food against tanks. I do not know of a war when you can throw vegetables and radio parts against guns and gunships. The leftwingers. the leftwing leadership of this Congress had their will. They abandoned the Contras. they abandoned the Contras to the tender mercy of the Sandinistas In Nicaragua. You may have your kind of peace in Nicaragua today but you have got war In Honduras and you caused It. You people always want to helpthe leftwing seems to take the word of every Communist that comes along. but you will not accept the word of your own Government. You people would not vote for military means to sustain the Contras against the Sandinistas and are going to regret it for the rest of your lives. History Is In the making. Yes. you may have peace in Nicaragua. but you have got war In Honduras. Today they overran the Contra front camps. a medical hospital where I brought 500.000 dollars worth of equipment to save lives. Now the Contras have had that equipment destroyed by tle Communists. Before this day is done. before this year is out you will have to face a very tough question. whether or not. now that you have injected the American military. you are going to follow it with military force because you effectively disarmed the Contras and the freedom fighters. The Arias peace plan dug the grave. the Wright plan placed flowers on that grave. You have peace in Nicaragua. but now you have got war in ltonduras and your votes caused it.
Date: 1988-03-28
Speaker: LARRY VINSONHALER (republican)
Chamber: S

Regional Planning Officer. Bureau of Reclamation. Boise. ID. DEAR MR. VINSONHALER: The following comments deal with ODFW concerns regarding fisheries. The Wildlife Division will comment on wildlife concerns in a separate letter. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife strongly supports implementation of the "Recommended" Columbia River Pumping Plan as the most cost effective means of achieving fishery and tribal goals In the basin. We have the following major concerns which we would like you to address in the Final Environmental Statement. 1. The Draft Environmental Statement (DES) significantly understates project or Umatilla River benefits and National Economic Development (NED) or Columbia Basin benefits. Project benefits should be revised using updated fishery benefits listed In the 1986 tribes and fish and wildlife agencies "Comprehensive Plan for Rehabilitation or Anadromous Fish Stocks in the Umatilla Basin" (Comprehensive Plan). These updated fishery benefits of the Comprehensive Plan are the most current and accurate estimates available of project benefits to naturally and hatchery produced salmonlds in the Umatilla Basin due to increased flows and all other improvements which wil be implemented under the Power Planning Councils Program. The large difference In project benefits between the DES and Comprehensive Plan is primarily in hatchery fishery benefits:
Date: 1988-04-19
Speaker: JUSTICE STEVENS (republican)
Chamber: S

Is correct that tie Commissions order prohibits more than mere proposals to engage In certain kinds of commercial transactions. and therefore I agree with his conclusion that the ban surely violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments. But even on tile assumption that the Court is correct that the Commissions order reaches only commercial speech. I agree with Mr. JUSTICE BLACKMUN that "nlo differences between commercial speech and other protected speech Justify suppression of commercial speech In order to Influence public conduct through manipulation of the availability of information." Post. at 578. Accordingly. with the qualificatlions Implicit in the preceding paragraph. I Join the opinions of Mr. JUSTICE BLACKMUN and Mr. STile Commission also might consider a system of previewing advertising campaigns to Insure that they will not defeat conservation policy. It has InStrituted such a progrun for approving "informational" advertising under the Policy Statement challenged in this care. See supra. at 5i0. We have observed that commercial speech ts such a sturdy brand of expression that traditional prior restraint doctrine may not apply to it. Virginia Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council. 425 U.S.. at 711772. n. 24. And In other areas of speech regulation. such as obscenity. we have recognized tiint a pres.reening arrangement can pass consthlutlonal muster If It Includes adequate procedural safeguards. Freedman v. Maryland. 380 U.S. 51 (1965). "In view of our conclusion that the Commissions advert ising policy violates the First and Fourteenti Amendments. we do not reacl appellants claims that tire agencys order also violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendmerit. and that it Is both overbroad and vague. Trhe Commlission order at Issue here was not promulgated In response to an emergency situation. Although the advertising ban initially was prompted by critical fuel shortage In 1973. the Commission makes no claim than an emergency now exists. We do not consider the powers that the State might have over utility advertising In emergency circum. stances. See State v. Oklahoma Gas & Elceirfc Co.. 536 P. 2d 887. 895896 (Okla. 1955). JUSTICE STEVENS concurring In tie judgment.
Date: 1988-04-28
Speaker: VIRGINIA ALLEN (republican)
Chamber: S

Director. Good Samaritan Project. Kansas City. MO. DEAR Ms. ALLEN: On behalf of the students. patrons. staff. and Board of Directors of the Kansas City. Missouri School District. we are deeply appreciative of the student assemblies you presented on Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Through your individual effort alone. 10.000 high school studcnts were educated about AIDS. its transmission and prevention. and were made aware of the seriousness of the disease. I understand. through our principals and school nurses. that your presentations were delivered with excellent taste and warm sensitivity. Your professionalism. as well as your ability to hold our adolescent audiences undivided attention for fifty (50) minutes. Is commended. Again. thank you for sharing your wealth of Information on AIDS with our students. Your generosity and concern is gratefully acknowledged. Cordially.
Date: 1988-05-17
Speaker: DONALD E. LUKENS (republican)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I firmly oppose religious persecution of Christians In the Soviet Union and would like to speak out in favor of House Current Resolution 223. This resolution is especially timely since 1988 marks the millennium of ChristianIzation of KiovanRus. House Current Resolution 223 urges the Soviet Union to proclaim a general amnesty for imprisoned Christians and to allow Christians to practice their faith within their churches and homes. Despite fAr. Gorbachevs policy of glasnost and the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom. Christians In the Soviet Union still suffer from severe repression. It Is still illegal to formally teach religion to persons under 18. Openly distributing Bibles could cause Imprisonment and harassment Thousands of churches have been closed and confiscated. And at present nearly 200 Christians are known to be serving prison sentences. are In exile. or are confined In pyschiatric Institutions. The Soviet Union has unjustly repressed Christians for decades. House Concurrent Resolution 223 applies the external pressure necessary to force the Soviet Union to change.
Date: 1988-05-24
Speaker: VANDER JAGT (republican)
Chamber: H

I thank the gentlewoman from Illinois for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker. my colleagues in this very excellent and educational special order have painted an accurate and a vivid picture of a U.S. House of Representatives in disarray. an arrogant majority running roughshod over longestablished rules to choke off debate and amendments. massive 1.000page continuing resolutions and megabills rammed through before Members even had a chance to see them. let alone read and understand them and know what is in them. and an appropriations process that Is designed to protect the dollars of the American taxpayer becoming almost meaningless. The wheels are off the buggy and the House has broken down. Now when a baseball team breaks dowm the owners put it under a new manager. when a business breaks down the shareholders put it under new management. Unfortunately. It has become almost impossible to put the House of Representatives under new management. because incumbents have developed a device that is designed to preserve and protect the power of the incumbents in virtual perpetuity. Two hundred years ago. when that first Congress was elected. as you will see from the chart there. only 45 percent of the Members of that First Congress were reelected to serve in the Second Congress. So the Second Congress was filled with new faces and new people. fresh ideas straight from the ranks of the people. But as the years went by and the power of incumbency became greater and greater. more and more incumbents were reelected. until the last election when 98.5 percent of all Incumbents running for reelection were In fact returned to office. One of the reasons that virtually 99 out of every 100 Incumbents who run are reelected is the awesome powers and resources that the taxpayer makes available to them. Each of us have staffs up to 18 members. we have offices throughout our districts. and we have virtually unlimited free mail to our constituency. Have staffs grown? Well. they have grown. In that First Congress that I talked about. they had three staff people. not three staff people per Member. but three staff people for the Congress of the United States of America. Today we are approaching 35.000. And the contributions of political action committees go in a ratio of about 10 to 1 favoring incumbents over challengers. It Is easy to see that they seem. many of them. to be interested in preserving and having access to the status quo rather than really trying to change things. Only the people can become agitated enough about this House in disarray to rise up and exercise their power to throw the rascals out. Unfortunately. in our system the only real way to put the House under new management is to elect more Republicans than Democrats. That is the only way management can change for the first time In a quarter of a century. But that is the only opportunity that the people will have to change this from the House of Lords. which it has become. to the Peoples House. which it was intended to be.
Date: 1988-05-24
Speaker: VANDER JAGT (republican)
Chamber: H

I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. It was a very excellent question asked by the gentleman from Minnesota. No. Mr. Speaker. the Founding Fathers certainly did not anticipate what is going on today where. as the gentleman indicated. each Member can mail out over one million pieces of mail each election cycle to postal patrons. not to speak of the tens of thousands of names arid addresses on the taxpayerpaidfor computers that can be mailed out in rifle shots. No. our Founding Fathers thought that maybe Members would get reelected by going back and having an exchange and a debate and dialog and a real competitive election and maybe that is why more than half of them would not make It back to the ConR 3581) gress after that First Congress which served.