macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2002-03-07
Speaker: M ATSUI (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I yield the balance of my time to the distinguished gentlewoman from the State of California . the Democratic whip.
Date: 2002-03-13
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I urge members of this body who care about the health and safety of the public to support the Amendment I offer today with my colleagues Mr. DELAHUNI and Mr. NADLER. This amendment will require a judge to look at the facts and determine whether the plaintiffs interest in privacy outweigh the publics need and right to know. Often plaintiffs who find themselves in difficult circumstances will agree to seal documents in order to obtain a settlement. These plaintiffs and their attorneys are looking out for their own interests. This is understandable. When faced with the prospect of not obtaininga settlement or going along with the defendants demands to seal the documents and forever keep them secret. few people will jeopardize their own recovery. And that is why the interests of justice demand that a judge review these agreements. The parties involved in the suit are consumed with pursuing their own interests. Only a judge is required to keep the public interests in mind and to look down the road and determine what effect secrecy will have on future litigants. Florida. Texas and Washington all have rules prohibiting secrecy in cases involving defective products. And several states. including Califomia and Illinois. through their court rules require that a judge review any secrecy deal. Mr. Speaker. the public needs this protection and this body should not refuse to provide ordinary people with the means to pursue justice in the courts of this land. Let me just outline a few instances in which these secret agreements have endangered the public health and safety: My colleagues have discussed the Firestone Tire case in which plaintiffs in over 50 cases all over the country were required to agree to secret settlements before the problems with these tires finally came to light. We have all heard of the injuries that resulted from people unwittingly continuing to drive on these defective tires. In 1999 alone. about 300 asbestos lawsuits were settled for $200 million in Cook County Illinois. That deal kept secret not only the dangers uncovered but also the exact number of plaintiffs. their injuries and the amount received by each. In 2000. BP Amoco reached an out of court deal with one former employee and the estates of four others. settling lawsuits that claimed the five developed brain tumors as a result of working at Amocos Naperville research center. The company insisted that the amount it paid be kept secret. But two of the settlements were revealed when aJudge insisted that wrongful death benefits be made public. Mr. Chairman. we must follow the lead of Texas and several other states. We must assure that the secrecy which has become so fashionable lately not overtake our judicialsystem and deny justice to ordinary people who have been harmed by the negligence of others or defectively made products. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Date: 2002-03-19
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of the bill which directs the Federal Government to extend unemployment benefits to workers in New York and Virginia who would otherwise fail to qualify for unemployihent benefits under State law. It is a fine idea. and it is a good bill. as far as it goes. but it does not go nearly far enough to address the real economic pain of millions of American families in other States who are being unfairly denied unemployment benefits. These workers in many of these instances lost their jobs just as directly by the attack on 911 as the people in New York or Virginia. The people in San Francisco and Las Vegas andNew Orleans. or Orlando. L.A.. Dallas or Miami. they lost their jobs almost immediately. matter of hours. matter of days in the hotel and restaurants. resorts. convention centers. and rental car agencies. but most of these people are not eligible for unemployment. So even though they lost their jobs. through no fault of their own. even though they lost their jobs as a result of the terrorist activity. they are not getting unemployment. Historically. unemployment benefits have covered more than half of all unemployed workers. Coverage rates during past recessions have approached 70 percent. but that is not the. casein the current situation. Over the last decade. the changes in State laws. and many of those States that I read. significantly reduced the percentage of workers who receive unemployment benefits. Only 43 percent of the unemployed workers in 2001 and only 40 percent of the unemployed women workers received unemployment benefits. In 15 States. less than 35 percent of unemployed workers received unemployment benefits. In 10 States. less than 30 percent of unemployed workers received unemployment benefits. Why does the leadership continue to refuse to bring this kind of legislation to the floor to make sure that all of these workers who suffered as a result of 911. all of the workers who lost their jobs directly because of that activity would get the unemployment benefits. if they are necessary to hold their families together while they are waiting for the economy to recover. while they are waiting for their jobs to return in many of the areas of our country. especially those areas impacted by tourists and convention business? We have employees that are working one shift a week trying to hold on to their jobs for when that recovery comes because they are not eligible for unemployment benefits. Mr. Speaker. this legislation is a fine piece of legislation for those people in New York. New Jersey. and in the Virginia area. but it does not address the needs of hundreds of thousands of America workers who were devastated every bit as much as those workers on 911. Today. we find that almost 98 percent of all workers in America pay into unemployment insurance. but less than 40 percent of them are covered. It is just an unacceptable fact that these people will be denied the benefit of the money they pay into. The Federal Government ought to step in and have a uniform unemployment system for all Americans.
Date: 2002-04-10
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

I announce that the Senator from California is necessarily absent. I further announce that the Senator from Washington is absent on official business. I also announce that the Senator from Mississippi is absent because of illness. I further announce that. if present and voting. the Senator from Washington would vote "nay. The yeas and nays resultedyeas 49. nays 48. as follows: Biden Baker Bartlett Beall Bellmon Bennett Bentsen Bible Brock Brooke Byrd. Harry F.. Jr. Byrd. Robert C. Cannon (No. 295 Leg.] YEAS--49 Cotton Curtis Domenici Dominick Eastland Ervin Fannin Fong Goldwater Gravel Griffin Hansen Hartke Helms Hollings Hruska Huddleston Inouye Johnston Long McClellan McGee Nunn Randolph Saxbe Schweiker Scott. Pa. Scott. Va. Sparkman Talmadge Weicker Stevens Thurmond Young Taft Tower NAYS48 Abourezk Haskell Moss Aiken Hatfield Muskie Bayh Hathaway Nelson Biden Hughes Packwood Buckley Humphrey Pastore Burdick Jackson Pearson Case Javits Pell Chiles Kennedy Percy Church Mansfield Proxmire Clark Mathias Ribicoff Cook McClure Roth Dole McGovern Stafford Eagleton McIntyre Stevenson Fulbright Metcalf Symington Gurney Mondale Tunney Hart Montoya Williams
Date: 2002-04-10
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

I announce that the Senator from Washington is absent on official business. I also announce that the Senator from Mississippi is absent because of illness. I further announce that. if present and voting. the Senator from Washington would vote "nay." The yeas and nays resultedyeas 49. nays 49. as follows: Allen Baker Bartlett Beall Bellmon [No. 296 Leg.] YEAS49 Bennett Bentsen Bible Brock Brooke Byrd. Harry F.. Jr. Byrd. Robert C. Cannon Cotton Curtis Domenici Dominick Eastland Ervin Fannin Fong Goldwater Gravel Griffin Hansen Hartke Abourezk Aiken Bayh Biden Buckley Burdick Case Chiles Church Clark Cook Cranston Dole Eagleton Fulbright Gurney Hart Helms Hollings Hruska Huddleston Inouye Johnston Long McClellan McGee Nunn Randolph Saxbe NAYS49 Haskell Hatfield Hathaway Hughes Humphrey Jackson Javits Kennedy Mansfield Mathias McClure McGovern McIntyre Metcalf Mondale Montoya Moss Schweiker Scott. Pa. Scott. Va. Sparkman Stevens Taft Talmadge Thurmond Tower Weicker Young Muskie Nelson Packwood Pastore Pearson Pell Percy Proxmire Ribicoff Roth Stafford Stevenson Symington Tunney Williams
Date: 2002-04-11
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. ScoTw) for the purposes of his remarks and entering into a colloquy with the chairman of the committee.
Date: 2002-04-11
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker. the gentleman who just preceded me in the well might be interested to know that this year. the man of the year of the American trial lawyers is going to be Ken Lay. He has developed more business than any single American in the history of the country. A lot has been talked about about investment advice. We all agree that investors need to know more about planning for their security. But it is interesting that when Jane Bryant Quinn. the financial writer for Newsweek Magazine. looked at the investment advice bill in light of the Enron scandal. she yelled. "Help. I am scared for my 401(k)." PostEnron. how could anyone even think of creating such a conflict of interest that is in the underlying bill? You might as well turn the system over to the ice skating judges. because that is the situation you have. We have the very same people who are making millions. hundreds of millions of dollars in Commissions and fees as investment bankers providing retail advice to people who are trying to plan for their retirement. the average worker. ] 1515 And they are being told on the level. this is a good investment. But. in fact. what we know is they are making that decision based upon the millions of dollars in fees. not the best interests of the investor. This is really about whether or not we are going to treat the corporate elite and the workers the same. It is a radical notion in the Republican Party that workers would have some say in their own retirement. that workers would be warned when the corporate elite are bailing out of the corporate towers. when the corporate elite are selling their stock. A radical notion that the workers at Enron and other corporations would be told of that. But we should expected that. we saw that in committee. The Wall Street Journal said it best: "The Republicanled panel rejected a dozen Democratic amendments which would have offered workers greater protections and improved stricter rules on employersponsored 401(k)s and other defined contributionplans." Yes. they had a chance to help out workers. to give them notice when the big shots are selling their stock. to give them a say in the control of retirement funds that belong to them. it is 100 percent of their assets. to make sure that they had the same rights as the corporate elite. But the Republicans have not seen fit to do that. You can support the Democratic substitute. and you can make sure that the workers after Enron have more protections than they had before.
Date: 2002-04-11
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that the motion to recommit be considered as read and printed in the RECORD.
Date: 2002-04-11
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. one of the things we learn from the Enron tragedy and one of the things that we have learned from Global Crossing and so many other companies that have started to fail or turned on bad times is that the corporate elite. the CEO and others. have 401(k) plans that are absolutely protected. Their ability to collect on their pension plans has nothing to do with the financial health of the company. how well the company does or how poorly the company does. Yet we see the employees with their 401(k) plans. they are absolutely tied to how the company does. And in many instances. they are locked into the stock of the company. What we are seeing here is what the President said when he went to North Carolina. if it is good for the captain. it is good for the crew. We cannot have the executives ensuring their pension plans so that they walk off with millions and tens of millions of dollars. lifetime pensions. and the employees have got to go to bankruptcy court and hope that there is something left over for them. If we insure one. we insure others. If preference is given to one. preference is given to the other. Mr. Speaker. it is a very important principle. The theory of executive compensation is that we are rewarding an executive. one. for how well their company does. Yet we see time and again executive compensation has nothing to do with the performance of the company. Their pension plans are guaranteed. and yet. the employee must be more productive. must do all that they can to make that company perform so that their stock is worth what it should be in their retirement plans. We think that they ought to be treated alike. and this is an opportunity to vote to make sure that there is parity among the elite executives of a corporation with respect to pension plans. and among the employees. that they not get left out. It is terribly important that as the executives walk off stage with tens of millions of dollars. that the employees not be left holding the bag. and that is the purpose of this amendment. Mr. Speaker. I yield to the gentleman from California . who offered this in the Committee on Ways and Means.
Date: 2002-04-11
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. all of us in the Committee on Financial Services. the Committee on Energy and Commerce. and the Committee on Education and the Workforce have listened to these workers who have had their retirement plans destroyed. workers who are 55. 59. 62 years old. their plans are destroyed. and they are now dependent on their children. The life they thought they were going to lead. they are not going to be able to. Yet Ken Lay. who looted this company and destroyed these peoples retirement nest egg walks off stage with $475.000 a year in guaranteed income and a multimillion dollar house in Texas that is protected under bankruptcy law. Somehow there has to be parity and fairness. This is our chance to repair what is lacking in the Republican bill and provide fairness and protection for the employee. the same as the CEO and the chief operating officers of this corporation get. to make sure that employees are not left holding the bag. Mr. Speaker. I would urge an "aye" vote on the motion to recommit.
Date: 2002-04-18
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. just yesterday we had a hearing in the Committee on Resources dealing with a parcel of land belonging to the Pechanga Band of Mission Indians in Riverside County. California. The Tribe is trying to protect the land because it contains several sites sacred to the tribe. including the largest living oak tree in the United States. This magnificent tree is over 1.500 years old and has been the site of tribal ceremonies for generations. Believe it or not. this tree is in danger of being felled by an order to construct transmission lines. We are often faced with the perception that Native American sacred sites are not worthy of protection somehow because they generally are a part of nature and not brick and mortar buildings with a large bell towers. One look at this tree. however. and the majesty of it comes across to even the most cynical. While I believe we will be able to preserve this particular Native American site through the hard work of the gentleman from California . Senator BOXER and Senator FEINSTEIN. dozens of other similar areas are threatened with desecration. The Glamis Mine in California and the Valley of the Chiefs in Montana are in danger of being lost forever by the presenceof gold mining and the sights and sounds of oil drilling. The time has come for us to stop running around trying to cherrypick certain Native American sacred sites to save. We need to act and have one strong policy and procedure. backed up by the laws of this country.
Date: 2002-04-23
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Speaker. I rise in strong support of this bill to reauthorize this relatively small. but very important. program. the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. This bill will help States do a better job of preventing and treating child abuse and neglect. I thank the gentleman from Michigan . the chairman of the subcommittee. and the ranking member. the gentleman from Indiana . and the gentleman from Ohio for their commitment to writing a bipartisan bill and all of their effort to make sure that this legislation got to the floor and passed the House of Representatives. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his expertise and commitment to the prevention of child abuse. Democrats were able to work with Republicans to make this a good bill for children. In 1999. there were more than 800.000 substantiated cases of child abuse and neglect. and over 1.137 children died as a result of abuse and neglect. Children who are abused and neglected are more likely to commit suicide. suffer from depression. commit crimes. fail in school. and have problems holding jobs. The Federal approach to addressing child abuse and neglect does not go far enough to help States prevent child abuse from happening and providing treatment services for children and families once it has occurred. Only 12 percent of the Federal monies for child abuse and neglect go toward prevention and treatment. This bill we are reauthorizing today is extremely important because it is the only Federal program specifically aimed at the prevention and treatment of child abuse. and yet this program is only appropriated half of the money of its authorized level. The legislation also makes important changes by increasing collaboration between child protective services and health agencies. Children with disabilities are almost four times more likely to be the victims of abuse and neglect. and children in child welfare systems have a higher risk of health problems. Any serious attempt to prevent and treat child abuse and neglect must include proce-" dures for linking abused children and children at risk for abuse to the appropriate health and mental health services. The bill requires States report on their efforts to improve casework training. supervision. and retention so children and families can be better served. Mr. Speaker. this bill is a major step forward in a heartwrenching. but critical. effort to stop child abuse and neglect and to better treat those children who have fallen victim to it. Again. I thank the gentleman from Michigan
Date: 2002-04-23
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. ScoTT). a member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Date: 2002-04-23
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker. this is a very important bill that we are debating here today. It is important that it pass the House later this evening. But we will be voting on another important matter this evening. and that is the motion to instruct by our colleague. the gentleman from California
Date: 2002-04-23
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank my colleague. Mr. Speaker. for the points that she made. because I think it is very important that people understand this. It has become very clear in the last few years. I think. to many Americans. even those who had doubts about immigration. of the important contribution that immigrants make to our economy. Certainly to the gentlewoman from California
Date: 2002-04-23
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I just want to say to the gentlewoman that I think she is quite correct in drawing the connection between the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act. and prevention of abuse there. and recognizing that in fact it is abusive to send children throughout their daily activities without proper nutrition. without sufficient food to support them. We know then that those are. in many instances. the very same children who act out in school. and then they act outin school and then they get in trouble at home. and all of a sudden a family that is already under stress because of income. because of a lack of food. perhaps maybe the child is mistreated in an improper way. and now we are dealing with a child back into the child abuse system. Again. we have studies of how children behave when they have enough to eat in school and when they do not have enough to eat in school. Very often. those children. when we examine their backgrounds. they are the children that become the targets of disciplinary actions because of their acting out in schools. And we can start to see how this snowballs. and all of a sudden. the child is .caught up in a situation where they are being characterized. where they are being labeled over something that they really have no control over and that is whether or not a family has sufficient nutritional resources to provide the child the food that they need.
Date: 2002-04-23
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I thank the gentlewoman for her contribution. Mr. Speaker. I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Texas .