macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

I want to follow up on what you are saying and emphasize and demonstrate what we are doing to our best. and I do mean doing to our best and brightest once they have come back. You have been an eloquent champion of our veterans. I think it is important to recall a private conversation that you and I had on the floor during the runup to the adoption of the supplemental. It happens that I am a member of the whip team. and you were my assignment that- day. I had an opportunity to talk to you about whether we could count on your support for the supplemental and how important it was. Your answer. which was the appropriate answer. was. well. Debbie. the answer is no. unless you can assure me that there was an increase for veterans health care. Because at that moment. I could not assure you because I did not have the information at my fingertips. I had to get back to you and was proud to be able to report that we. did provide a significant increase that we were able to bump up beyond the continuing resolution significantly the health care we are providing to our veterans. But it is to your constituents credit and the veterans that you represent that you do that. But let us just go through some facts that we know. The percentage of Army servicemembers receiving medical retirement and permanent disability benefits back in 2001 was 10 percent. The percentage of the same Army servicemembers receiving medical retirement and permanent disability benefits in 2005 down to 3 percent. Army Reservists receiving medical retirement and permanent disability in 2001. 16 percent. same group in 2005. 5 percent. Let us go to the case backlog at the Veterans Administration on new benefit claims in fiscal year 2006. 400.000case backup. This is from the Army Times. third party validator. Average length of time veterans wait before receiving monthly benefits. 6 months to 2 years. That was in the Los Angeles Times. The number of soldiers at Walter Reed navigating the medical and physical evaluation process since 2001 has doubled. The average length of time it takes for Army soldiers to convalesce and go through the military medical and physical evaluations. nine to 15/2 months. The increase in the Armys physical disability caseload since 2001. 80 percent. The number of veterans from the global war on terror expected to enter the military and veterans health care systems in the coming years. 700.000. And I will just read the quote again from Candidate Bush: "So lets get something straight right now. To point out that our military has been overextended. taken for granted. and neglected. thats no criticism of the military. that is the criticism of a President and a Vice President and their record of neglect." Well. it sure is. And these statistics from the time that this President has been in the office are evidence of that. I would be happy to yield to one of the three gentlemen here.
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

If the gentleman would yield for a question. It is somewhat rhetorical. but if youknow the answer. feel free to tell me what it is. Do you know what percentage of the troops that are over in Iraq that we will have as a Nation once Great Britain pulls out?
Date: 2007-02-27
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Thank you. Just to quickly help close us out. the bottom line is that our veterans come home and face devastating treatment from their government. We have outlined that tonight. We send them over there with equipment that in many cases is faulty. We are not- adequately preparing them and giving them enough time to be well trained to do their best over there. And they are doing their level best given the assignment that we give them. We are not providing them with the resources. and we are not providing them with the equipment. And. fortunately. we have a Democratic Congress now that is not going to give this President a blank check any longer. not going to let him run roughshod over our duty to be a check and balance on the administration. And that is what the 30something Working Group is designed to outline. We are going to make sure that we get the message out and that we help our colleagues and anyone who might also hear this conversation between us understand what is really going on.
Date: 2007-02-28
Speaker: AL GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. this is the very last day of the* month of February. which is Black History Month. and today I rise to thank the many Members who have supported H. Res. 198. which recognizes the significance of Black History Month. This piece of legislation is supported by conservatives. moderates and liberals. It is a piece of legislation that I received not one negative comment on. Every person that we requested agreed to support the legislation. So I thank those who supported it. But I also. Mr. Speaker. want to apologize to the many that I did not approach and ask for support because my belief -is that this kind of legislation will receive the support of all persons of goodwill. African Americans in the diaspora in America merit this kind of support. The Members of this House have given it to African Americans and to persons of goodwill. and I thank them all.
Date: 2007-02-28
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. Members of the House. finally. but 4 years too late. the Bush administration. with Vice President CHENEYS trip to Afghanistan. has recognized that the real war on terror is not Iraq. that Iraq has been a diversion against that war on terror. that. in fact. the real war on terror is in Pakistan and Afghanistan and in the border area. They are starting to discover that the Government of Pakistan has not been our friend as we have tried to stabilize Afghanistan and the Karzai government. as we have tried to build democracy in Afghanistan. as we have tried to root out the Taliban and al Qaeda. that. in fact. because of the diversion and our early leaving of Afghanistan for Iraq. that we have now allowed the al Qaeda to come back in command and control and to build their membership. to recruit around the world. We have seen the Taliban come back into Afghanistan and start to threaten and overturn village leaders and democratically elected leaders in villages in various parts of Afghanistan. Only now. 4 years too late. does the Bush administration recognize that this is the real war on terror. and they have failed to fight it. failed to deal with it and failed to prepare for it.
Date: 2007-02-28
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Madam Speaker. I had not intended to speak this afternoon either. Actually. I am late going to a military personnel subcommittee hearing where we are going to take a look at the changes that are going to happen to the Reserve Montgomery GI bill. It is running a little late because we had votes. but we are working here. I dont know where the other side is. They are in the minority now. and maybe they are going home. but we have a lot of things to get done for the American people. When I finish with the military subcommittee. I will be going to the full Homeland Security Committee where we are going to receive a briefing on the SpyNet program. On this immigration issue that everybody in America thinks is so important. this is how we protect the borders and how we are using assets there. and we are going to get a briefing on that. That should include Republicans. I dont know if they will show up for that meeting. but they should. After that. Madam Speaker. I have a subcommittee on oversight and investigations with respect to the House Committee on Armed Services where I also serve. And then I will meet with constituents. credit unions. and people who are in town. So we on this side of the aisle are working very hard to keep the work going on here in Washington. D.C.
Date: 2007-03-01
Speaker: LINDA T. SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Madam Chair. I rise in strong support of the Employee Free Choice Act. The ability to form a union and bargain has been instrumental in helping families reach the middle class. Workers who belong to unions earn more and have better benefits than workers who dont. The Employee Free Choice Act is about ensuring that workers can join a union. More than half of U.S. wotkers would join a union if they could. But to prevent workers from forming a union. 92 percent of employers will force employees to attend antiunion propaganda sessions. and 25 percent will illegally fire at least one employee for prounion activity. I learned from -an early age how difficult it can be to organize a workplace and also how important unions can be to families. At the factory where she worked. my mother helped lead an effort to organize shop workers and get health benefits and pensions. Later. I tried my own hand at organizing janitors and home health care workers. and. like my mother. faced staunch opposition from employers. It took the pleas of the religious community to get many- workers reinstated. Current law is simply not strong enough. Managementcontrolled campaigns. firings. and intimidation are not the hallmarks of the democratic processbut they are the hallmarks of the current system in which employers hold all the power. I urge a "yes" vote on the Employee Free Choice Act.
Date: 2007-03-01
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Madam Chairman. I rise today in strong support of H.R. 800. the Employee Free Choice Act. Madam Speaker. this legislation is long overdue. Under the previous majority. Congress was quick to provide tax cuts for large corporations. but legislation to improve the lives of working families was kept off the floor of this chamber. Labor unions are responsible for almost every benefit to wage earners in this country: Unions created the 40 hour work week. overtime pay. maternity leave. and workers compensation. Unions represent the people that make our country workThe grape harvesters. the home builders. telecommunications workers. ice cream scoopers at the SavOn Drug store in Anaheim. When I had that job. I was represented by Local 324 of the United Food and Commercial Workers. and proud of it.. In every sector of the economy. laborers have always looked to their unions to make sure that their interests were put ahead of the interest in the bottom line. And its about time Congress do the same. Opponents of this legislation will claim that this bill is undemocratic. But how democratic is it for an employer to intimidate or fire workers before they even get a chance to vote? Lets look at the numbers: 75 percent of employers will hire unionbusters to stop organizing drives. 92 percent will mandate employees to attend antiunion meetings. and one quarter of companies illegally fire prounion employees during organizing drives. How can you have a "free and fair vote" with this kind of intimidation going on? All this bill does is level the playing field. It removes institutional barriers and gives workers a chance to organize if they want to. You know. government is actually behind the private sector on this issue. Many employers already allow for this type of organization. They recognize that it is good for workers. and its good for management too. These leading companies have seen growing job satisfaction. better retention of qualified professionals and increased productivity. Madam Chairman. I urge Congress to do the right thing. Lets pass this legislation and give employees a real opportunity to organize.
Date: 2007-03-01
Speaker: PATRICK J. MURPHY (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Pennsylvania

Madam Chairman. I rise today as an original cosponsor and strong supporter of the Employee Free Choice Act. Abraham Lincoln once said. "If any man tells you he loves America yet hates labor. he is a liar." President Lincolns words are no less true now then they were when he spoke them over a century ago. Organized labor has played a critical role throughout our history. Without it we would never have witnessed the rise of the greatest middle class that the world has ever seen. But there is more to be done. Madam Chairman. over the last six years. our middle class families. including those in my district in Pennsylvania. have been squeezed by the antiworker policies of this administration. The late Senator Wellstone. a champion of organized labor used to tell this story about the great abolitionist Wendell Philips. One day Philips. in his usual fashion. gave a fiery speech. and said that slavery was unconscionable. an outrage and should be abolished. He finished speaking and a friend came up to him and said. "Wendell. why are .you so on fire?" He turned to his friend and said "Brother May. Im on fire because I have mountains of ice before me to melt." We too have mountains of ice to melt. Madam Chairman. there is much to be done to strengthen our middle class and to make sure that they. like their parents. can ensure that their children will have more than they did. For middle class families. the Employee Free Choice Act is a good start down the path to greater prosperity. Everywhere families turn they face ever increasing costs. Health care. education. gas. food. housing. Prices are up. wages are down and middle class families are struggling. People can sit around and argue all day about why the .middle class is getting squeezed. but when I think about my friends and neighbors back home in Pennsylvania. it is clear that arguments are no longer good enoughwe need to do something. Letting workers organize fairly is a good start. Madam Chairman. I would like to use my time here to set the record straight. For too many years now and for far too many Americans. joining a union has been a risk. rather than a right. I dont think that its too much to ask that if a majority of workers want to join a union. they should be free to do so. And they should be free to do so without coercion and without misinformation campaigns.
Date: 2007-03-01
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Madam Chairwoman. I think the gentleman from New Jersey has explained this .quite correctly. This allows you. because of your membership in a union. to be discriminated against in the employment. The actions that the gentleman says that he wouldnt like to have take place are actions that are already.illegal under the law. You dont get to disrupt the workplace. You dont get to engage in those kinds of activities. and thats the way the law is written. This is just simply a broad discriminatory practice against the employment. or it allows the nonemployMent of individuals who are members of the .union. At very best. under the best interpretation. what this employee would buy themselves if they go to seek a job is they would get themselves a lawsuit. They would have to sue for the right to be employed in a workplace. You know. a job today in America is not a luxury. it is a necessity. This is just part of the harassment of individuals who believe in the organization of the workplace. This is just one more of the harassment. and now they want to put this one into the statutes of the United States. We should vote against this amendment.
Date: 2007-03-01
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Madam Chairman. you look at this amendment and you realize this is just another piece of the continued effort by which the party on the other side is fully prepared to diminish the rights of workers to hav6 access to information about an organization that may help them in the workplace. But. you know what? If the employer wants to bring that worker in and sit him down on a onetoone meeting with the supervisor. with the owner of the company or the Board of Directors. if he wants to take them off of their job where they may be getting paid for productivity and explain to them why they shouldnt join the union and all that. there is nothing to protect that employee there. There he is sitting with the petson who can fire them. There he is sitting with the person who fired over 35.000 people or docked their pay or did some other ille.gal action against them because they said. well. I think I might still want a union. But if the union wants to go out. if other employees want to talk to their fellow workers about this. you have no opportunity to communicate. And then you are supposed to go into an election. But one side doesnt get any opportunity to communicate. That is an interesting theory. that those with all of the power in this arrangement. those with the authority to hire and fire. they get unlimited access. But here. you may get. on break time in the break room you may still have a little tiny bit of access for the union. but they cant talk to a person out there because they could take them off the list. What do you think the first thing is the employer might suggest to the employees when they hear that there is a union effort in the company? Put yourself on the Do Not Call List. Joe. did you put yourself on the Do Not Call List. yesterday? Because then the employer knows immediately that the union no longer has access. Just another form of intimidation. just another form of a kind of arbitrary power over the employees. just one of those little things that the antiunion consultants will tell the employer to check off. Make sure you told your employees to sign up for the Do Not Call List. Make sure you run down that list. find out who signed up and who didnt. get that list clean. because if we ever get that list. if we can get 100 percent. then the union has no access to them. It is a wonderful tool in the name of democracy you want to put into the hands of the antiunion campaigns. No. it is very unfortunate that they simply wont allow workers to make this decision. the decision that is accommodated and allowed and provided for in the law of whether or not they want an NLRB election. or they want a majority sign up. They are not going to do that. And so fearful of the decision that the employee might make. they have decided to insulate the employee from the campaign and put them off limits to anybody except the employer. No. this amendment should not be supported at all. and I urge its defeat.
Date: 2007-03-01
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Madam Speaker and Members of the House. this is one of the more cynical amendments that could be offered at this time. You are going out to organize a workplace. and the people you are going out to organize are the employees of a company. Now. either that company has a large number or maybe a total workforce that is illegal. and they dont want you near them. or they are legal because they are employed there. because that eInployer is supposed to check to see whether or not they are legal and to certify that they are. That is the pool of people that you are seeking to employ. Now. this administration. you know. I think in 2004. maybe fined five companies. or you can put them on one hand. They now want to shift their failure to enforce in the workplace to the union organizers that they somehow have to do immigratioh checks because neither the employer apparently did them. nor the administration did them. This is simply outrageous that we would ask people to do this. The people who are working in thefacility. whether it is a plant or a job site. the employer has certified that they are legal. and they are legal workers. Why is it we would shift this to the unions? If this company is not properly certified. that is. why the Federal Government is supposed to be inspecting them. But they dont inspect them. because you havent done this in the past. because you havent taken this problem. as seriously as you should. But all of a sudden you decided on this. bill you are going to take it seriously. and you are going to shift it on to the union organizing effort to check this. It is an outrageous and cynical approach. If you take it seriously" if you take it seriously. then enforce the law. Enforce the law. You have been in power for 12 years. And apparently this is a problem that is so important that it only comes to light this evening. Enforce the law. 2004. three companies. Madam Speaker. I yield time to Mr. ANDREWS from New Jersey.
Date: 2007-03-01
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

You will have your opportunity to address immigration law. You will have that opportunity. You have tried to deny it over the last several years. but youre going to have it. All this amendment says is you really dislike the unions even more than you dislike the illegal workers. That is what this says.
Date: 2007-03-01
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Madam Speaker. all I can tell you is these people over here. when it was a question of the company. illegal immigration didnt bother them. All of a sudden. nonunion. these folks oyer here want to put it on the back of the unions in a most unfair fashion. Madam Speaker. I just want to say to the House. lets not vote for this cynical amendment. Lets vote "no" against this and not punish people who are out trying to organize for the benefits of their families and their communities and for their health care and for their wages and put this burden on them that this administration hasnt accepted and the employers havent accepted or the employers are doing it illegally. Lets enforce this law and not make this a substitute for that. I ask you to vote against this.
Date: 2007-03-05
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. last Friday. March 2. 2007. marked Texas Independence Day. 171 years ago that day the Texas Declaration of Independence was ratified by the tonvention of 1836 at WashingtonontheBrazos in Texas. The Texas Declaration of Independence was produced literally overnight. Its urgency was paramount because while it was being prepared. the Alamo in San Antonio was under siege by Santa Annas army of Mexico. Immediately upon the assemblage of the Convention of 1836 on March 1. a committee of five delegates were appointed to draft the document. The committee consisted -of George C. Childress. Edward Conrad. James Gaines. Bailey Hardeman. and Colin McKinney. It was briefly reviewed then adopted by the delegates the following day. It started off echoing the lines of the American counterpart with the words: "When a government has ceased to protect the lives and liberty and property of the people... " It spoke of numerous injustices inflicted upon the people of the State. then known as Coahuila y Tejas: the elimination of the States legislative body. the denial of religious freedom: the elimination of the civil justice system. and the confiscation of firearms. which was one particularly intolerable act among Texans. Finally. it stated that because of the injustice of Santa Annas tyrannical government. Texans were severing their connection with the Mexican nation and declaring themselves "a free. sovereign. and independent republic... fully invested with all the rights and attributes" that belong to independent nations. and a declaration that they "fearlessly and confidently" committed their decision to "the Supreme Arbiter of the destinies of nations." Mr. Speaker. I hope that Congress and this whole country join all Texans in honoring these brave men who stood up for liberty and freedom 171 years ago.